1. About loss.
Many attempt to transfer video with USB and post here about loss. I don't unpack the USB cable but head straight to firewire. I don't think I need to write more about that.
2. About still pictures.
Even today I find no camcorder that rivals my still digital camera. Why would I want to compromise?
Maybe this is about 2 things. One that loss can be minimal or same as everyone else (use firewire) and two, that the camera in a camcorder's feature is subject to the owner's view if it's good enough.
Bob
Hi
I'm halfway through a degree in multimedia, obviously researching good camcorders
-I've looked at a good lot of the 7,000 odd forum posts.
-I've also read most of the reviews extensively, and have noted that sony and canon are also sponsors of c-net (gasp) and I don't know how much I can trust the reviews as they do seem to favour canon and sony.
-I can only spend about $200-500 U.S
-I need a camcorder that takes reasonable stills and doesn't lose a lot of video quality after it has been transferred to PC and then opened in macromedia or adobe for editing and I have read the article already on dvd v. mini dv which is kind of confusing on this issue.
-it needs to have average or above average low light performance
-good video picture quality
-a memory stick or something similiar is good although I don't know if I need one or why but it seems convenient
-15x to 20x zoom
-I don't care if its bottom loading, or dvd or mini whathaveyou as long as it fits above criteria
-I might use it as a web cam but again not fussy
-don't care if its easy to use at all
-medium range battery life, not fussy
-i'd like a choice of brands
so for this sort of money, if you can recommend something, please reply, also if you have actually used it for this type of thing this would be good.

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic