DXG-569V HD camcorder available for $169

While DXG has few aspirations to taste or quality, they sure know how to price this stuff. The new DXG-569V HD cam can shoot 1280 x 720 video at 30 fps, captures 5 megapixel stills and sports a 3-inch foldout LCD, all for the bargain basement price of $169. Naturally, that video quality probably won't be putting RED ONE out of a job, and you'll need to supply your own SD card to make the magic happen, but if that doesn't dissuade you, you can swipe one from a Radio Shack shelf in silver or black as of today.

[helloUser @ Apr 28th 2008 1:20PM]

Looks like quite the bargain. I like handhelds, and generally dont care much for 'omg, the quality is like straight off a hollywood movie!'

Anyone know how many minutes this thing can record, on say a 8gb SD card?

[Low Ranked @ Apr 28th 2008 1:48PM]

Approximately 2 hours and 45 minutes depending on format, and compression thats used.

[Reader @ Apr 28th 2008 2:02PM]

Haha, just noticed you changed your name, lowest.

[telepheedian @ Apr 28th 2008 2:17PM]

Why don't they just do it like on digg, where the actual voting numbers are shown on comments?

[helloUser @ Apr 28th 2008 3:19PM]

low ranked: thanks!

thats nearly 3 hours....thats not horribly bad, considering itd be at max resolution? hmmm....not a bad toy for the money, and for its size, its a justifiable purchase. would like to see it instores though...

[Esat Dedezade @ Apr 28th 2008 4:59PM]

I thought Lowest Ranked refused to bend and change his name?

I guess even the strongest walls are crumbled by time....

[Kobutah @ May 1st 2008 12:03PM]

The camera registers just over 4 hours on an 8GB card. 4:21 if I remember right.

The only problem is that the recordings don't look that good. They are choppy. They look clear, but I haven't put it on DVD or to an HD format.

So far I am not pleased with this camera. I am greatly considering returning it if the DVDs or HD conversions don't look any better.

[shanoboy @ Apr 28th 2008 1:25PM]

I always have a hard time passing up these kinds of cameras but part of me has a hard time believing that such a compact camera that also shoots HD video at a price under $200 is going to worth buying.

[mingistech @ Apr 28th 2008 1:26PM]

wow... all this with a lens that belongs on the back of a phone....

no thanks.

[helloUser @ Apr 28th 2008 1:28PM]

LOL

[Stem $ell @ Apr 28th 2008 2:02PM]

Sounds about right. Me thinks 'HD' is some marketing guy's sly acronym for 'Hugely Dissapointing' or, perhaps 'Hiiiiiiiiiigh Definishun'!

[VampireHunter Z @ Apr 28th 2008 1:29PM]

There has to be a catch to this thing. Is there any optical zoom? Does it only record HD for 30 seconds?

[toxicpiano @ Apr 28th 2008 1:46PM]

The catch is that the lens probably sucks.

[Robert in Texas @ Apr 28th 2008 4:05PM]

No optical zoom. 2X digital zoom only.

[BattleAngel444 @ Apr 28th 2008 1:31PM]

The only thing holding me back from buying one s that is doesn't have any optical zoom. :(

[Anthony @ Apr 28th 2008 1:31PM]

Once I got my N95 I just stopped using my Panasonic handheld, but HD for less than $200 looks interesting.

[webon @ Apr 28th 2008 1:33PM]

Who in their right mind buys this shite?

[Matt @ Apr 28th 2008 2:06PM]

People who only occasionally shoot video a birthday parties or high schoolers looking to shoot their latest skatboarding video for friends.

Really for the price range and the size this is for the snapshot crowd, much as the Flip is. There is a market for it and it is appropriate for the right user. If I am shooting video twice a year for Christmas and birthday parties I am not going to want to drop $400+ on a camera. Obviously, if you are shotting video more often you are not going to want one of these.

Size is an important factor as well. Again like i said, stuff like this and the flip are great for whipping out at a moments notice for the fun little moments in life. You probably won't be shooting your next indie film on it though.

[Johan S @ Apr 28th 2008 2:06PM]

Umm, they are nice and compact .. and the quality isn't that bad. If you need an video camera for occasions and cant afford the expensive one .. these is great. I think it's good these exist so now even poorer people can afford 'em.

Sure, there is no optical zoom .. but the quality isn't as bad as you think.

[Neeko @ Apr 28th 2008 1:43PM]

At that price its worth a try. If the videos looks like crap, just return it.

[Owen Bird @ Apr 28th 2008 1:44PM]

what about the: A-HD+ - 1080P High Definition Camcorder by Aiptek?
granted it is $199.. but what you get is much better then this plus, it is also a MP3 player..
● 1440 x 1080 H.264 Video @30fps ● 1280 x 720 H.264 Video @60fps ● Personal Media Player & Recorder
● Up to 8 Mega Pixel Digital Camera ● .MOV Video Format ● 4x Digital Zoom w/ Fixed Focus
● Flash w/ Red Eye Reduction ● Night Shot ● 2.4" Swivel-Reversible LCD
● Easy Charging via AC or USB ● HDTV Component Output ● 32GB SDHC Card Slot Expansion
● Lens Cap Included

_____________________
They also have a few more "HD" video cameras even one for $139.. check it out:
http://www.aiptek.com/

[peestandingup @ Apr 28th 2008 4:27PM]

Thanks for the Aiptek advertisement.

[muddyhelmit @ Apr 28th 2008 6:24PM]

I wasn't interested until I saw that the Lens cap was included! Sold!

[Schfelzerberg @ Apr 29th 2008 8:40AM]

@ Owen Birn

Thanks for the info. My friend wants a replacement portable video cam for his N93, which apparently served him well but he was recently upset to see the quality of SD content on his new HDTV. 720p @ 60 FPS sounds nice. Haven't seen any of those Aiptek cameras here though so he'll probably just opt for an import.

To those saying the image quality will be really, really, really shitty -- well that's you. It's not like anyone's going to be squinting at the screen and saying 'OMFG man! It's so pixelated!'. This camera is for new compact video cam owners or those who need something small and decent enough to capture 'moments', not enthusiasts. At least it'll be surely way better than any of those cellphone cameras -- anything but that.

[Low Ranked @ Apr 28th 2008 1:49PM]

This looks like an ad from eBay.

[Jason @ Apr 28th 2008 1:49PM]

I just picked up an Aiptek A-HD+ at Best Buy - $169.99 on sale for $149.99 last week. I got mine Saturday and I've played with it this weekend a lot - I love it. It's got similar specs to this, only it lets you select to do 1080 res at 30 fps, 720 at 60 or 30 fps, and DVD res at 30 fps.

Overall quality of the still images is really good. There's no real good flash on the thing so you have to use it in decent light. Video quality is SURPRISINGLY good, especially at 720p @ 60 fps. I couldn't believe how good the videos look. Probably not as nice as a $500 HD cam, but awesome for $149. The camera wraps them in an H.264 encoded QT wrapper.

I took a 28 minute long video that I'm currently transcoding to MPEG-II for easier and faster editing in Premier, and it's 813MB in size... so you're looking at about 29MB for a minute of 720p 60fps video... or about 137 minutes on a 4GB SDHC card. Probably 2X that with 720 res at 30 fps, and a better amount yet @ the DVD res.

The A-HD+ 1080 includes a removable rechargable battery (recharges when it's hooked up through USB), a STANDARD USB connector - no proprietary junk, 4X zoom, and a voice recorder (WAV format). It's a pretty basic device, but for $149, it's outstanding.

WELL worth $149.

[Vince @ Apr 28th 2008 2:18PM]

My daughter loves the camera except for the microphone. I don't have the camera on hand right now but is there a way to connect an external mike? I doubt it but figured I'd bring it up

[Jason @ Apr 28th 2008 1:50PM]

Owen - beat me to it. :-)

[Neeko @ Apr 28th 2008 1:52PM]

Just read the manual and it uses 3 AAA batteries...Ok that was enough for me. Also file sizes can only be 2GBs..

Crap..
Can anyone suggest a HD camera around $500ish?

[martin @ Apr 28th 2008 3:09PM]

Neeko:

I'm shopping around a bit for a hd compact camera, myself.

for around $500, you can get the sanyo hd700, which is 720 and there are reports that the imaging is off in low light... but pretty inexpensive, small, and seems like you get more than you pay for.

i'm thinking of going a bit higher up, to the new sony tg1, which so far is getting quite good reviews on image quality and is still quite small.

[darkstar @ Apr 28th 2008 3:12PM]

this panasonic 1080p camcorder is 600 bux, i found it on techbargains.com website: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0011FTKFY?tag=techbargainscom

its a pretty good deal i think for a super small 1080p shooter

[Patrick @ Apr 28th 2008 3:47PM]

Yeah but it comes with 3 AAA rechargable batteries and a charger.

[Craig @ Apr 28th 2008 2:29PM]

I've looked for sample video from this but no luck so far. If anyone comes across a clip, please post a link. Thx.

[BigTeebo @ Apr 28th 2008 3:06PM]

And suddenly the market to shoot HD porn just got a bit more affordable.

[Neeko @ Apr 28th 2008 4:27PM]

@Martin

Thanks for the info. So far iam looking at a couple of choices..

1.Aiptek A-HD+ which doesnt seem that bad for the price $170. i know theres much better choices just depends on how serious i am i guess.

2.Sanyo Xacti HD700. Similiar to Aiptek but maybe a little more advanced. Def better features.

3.Canon Vixia HF100 dont know much about this one. around $700

Id love to get the Sony Handycam HDR-SR7 btu $1000 is waaay to much for me to spend on this.

Guess i will decide between these or if i see something on sale.

[Francisco Craesmeyer @ Apr 28th 2008 7:26PM]

Best overall budget "HD" 720 camcorder: HV-20 or HV30, Canon. It`s HDV, tape based. if you dislike it There`s HDD and SD "versions" too. ~ $750,00, the, now, AKA Vixia line.

[Jayembee @ Apr 29th 2008 12:56AM]

So I may just be a sucker for shiny new toys, and perhaps when one is in the early throes of a relationship, one's spectacles exhibit a rosy hue but I picked up one of these devices today and after all of an hour of intensive 'mucking about a bit', I have to say "Well, ya know, that's pretty impressive really..."

The device itself is a nicely designed little package; it certainly looks the part but does quite feel it. It doesn't have the tactile solidity of, say, a Sony gadget but all the same, it doesn't feel flimsy, and the hinges all feel nicely definite. And the screen is bright and colourful. I have seen better but I have seen far worse. The camera starts up pretty briskly and the controls feel solid enough.

The interface, both physical and s/w is a little janky; the mode button cycles you through video, still and setup, so you always end up going through the setup screen. And the UI for the settings is weird; you press up and down on the joypad to select an item and this gives you a row of options, which you still have to press up and down to cycle through - why not left and right; it's a row? Odd. But these are mainly rough-edge irks and not deal breakers.

So what of it's primary purpose? Well, the 5M still images are surprisingly good. In late afternoon light, the buildings around work looked crisp and colourful when I uploaded them to my Mac; lots of detail, nothing much by the way of weird fringing or artifacts, a bit over-saturated but in a pleasant vaguely Technicolor way. Early evening in the garden as the light was beginning to fail, things got dicier. The colours still look good but it was hard to hold the camera steady enough to prevent motion blur (mind you it made the maples look rather arty...). This is not a low-light still camera but in decent daylight I was rather pleasantly surprised by the image quality.

As far as the video goes, I tried the office under florescent lighting with surprisingly good results, outside in the late afternoon, looking really good, in a room with large windows in the early evening, ok but noisy and skin tones get very red, and then in failing light in the garden, things are getting a bit shaky and slightly washed out. Still, the HD videos are huge when you play them; I was quite taken aback when I first opened one and it filled my MacBook screen. And they play back very smoothly; not lateral tearing, even during fast pans and without too much artifacting. The macro mode is pretty good too; the flowers in the back garden looked great with lots of nice depth of field blurring of the middle distance.

The sound is quite respectable too. I accidentally left the camera recording when I was hailed by a neighbour and the resultant random footage of the lawn and the view up my nose captures my half of the conversation very clearly and gets some of the neighbour's (who was about 10' away). There is very little hiss and there is decent mid and bass. Again, somewhat surprising.

Finally, out of the box, you get all sorts of bits and bobs. 4 NiMh AAAs with a charger, RCA cables, Component cables, proprietary USB (ick) cable, two CDs of stuff that I haven't any interest in (since the USB mounts as a storage device and you just drag off the files and they play in QT native and I shall be using iMovie) a wrist lanyard and a soft case. Oh and manuals and quick start guides and such.

Bottom line, is it a world-beating video camera that you can use under wide-ranging and exacting conditions? Hardly. Is it a solid little device that you won't be ashamed to take out of your shirt pocket (yes it fits), that won't be a waste of time to use and will most likely be a deal of fun to play with? I'd say so. Is it worth $169+tax and the shame of a visit to Radio Shack? Oh most certainly yes.

[Schfelzerberg @ Apr 29th 2008 8:29AM]

This might be a good gift for teens or just anyone who loves to take decent DVD-quality videos anywhere they go. The standards of most people who come to Engadget are high so this may not particularly cater to them. Anyway, it's only $169 and it shoots at 720p resolution which should satisfy most people especially if they'll only view the content on a standard definition TV. 8 and 16 GB SD cards now are really cheap too so it's a plus.

[Adam @ Apr 29th 2008 12:30PM]

If all this costs $150 +/- then why do 640x480 "security" cameras with fixed lenses cost about the same and can't even deliver 30 fps? I think the web cam and security cam vendors must be making huge margins and for some reason, people are still paying. Bizarre.

[mirkob @ Apr 29th 2008 1:04PM]

It looks like my new aiptek 720p. It even records to H264 Mov files and the specs are very similar. Maybe it's the same hardware with a new case... like tv phillips and magnavox

[Flunky Carter @ Apr 29th 2008 3:06PM]

@Craig

Sample http://vimeo.com/953710

[ZigFIlm @ Apr 30th 2008 12:06PM]

I just bought both this and the A-HD+ to compare them. At first glance, I like the DXG a lot more. Much smaller and sleeker with a FAR superior LCD screen. I can fit the DXG in my pocket, I can't fit the Aiptek. Plus, the DXG comes with a case! I've shot a little with both (nothing scientific yet) and they appear to be pretty comparable in quality. My main concern right now is why the heck can't I get the DXG to recognize my 16gd SDHC card? The Aiptex reads it just fine. This may end up being the deciding factor for me. I'll post more results when I get them...

[JR @ May 1st 2008 11:06AM]

What is the volume like through the built in speaker?

[Todd Fulcher @ May 7th 2008 8:41AM]

I bought the DXG-569V at Radio Shack last week and I've used it several times since then. I am returning it today because I'm really not pleased. Here are the three issues I'm aware of:

1. The horrendous battery life. This unit will not record for more than 30 minutes on a fully-charged set of batteries. That is unacceptable.

2. Poor sound quality - For any subjects more than a few feet away from the camera, the sound is awful. It cuts in and out as if the unit is trying to determine whether the voice is just background noise that it should filter out or something.

3. Battery issue - The unit comes with four AAA rechargeable batteries, but it only uses 3. The charger holds four batteries, and the directions explicitly state that the batteries must be charged in pairs, so you either have to charge two batteries or four. The extra battery that doesn't get used is going to remain charged. I think this is going to be a big problem.

4. No lens cap.

[mike reyes @ May 27th 2008 6:47PM]

I bought the DXG-569V at Radio Shack last week and I've used it several times since then. I am returning it today because I'm really not pleased. Here are the three issues I'm aware of:

1. The horrendous battery life. This unit will not record for more than 30 minutes on a fully-charged set of batteries. That is unacceptable.

--- What batteries were you using? I use 1100mah GP batteries and they work up to 1.5 hours taking videos and pictures. Also, you must charge the batteries to their fullest before using them. I use MAHA chargers and they really charge good.

2. Poor sound quality - For any subjects more than a few feet away from the camera, the sound is awful. It cuts in and out as if the unit is trying to determine whether the voice is just background noise that it should filter out or something.

----Yes I think the only thing bad about this is the sound. The sound must really be loud and distinct for you to playback well on your dvd.

3. Battery issue - The unit comes with four AAA rechargeable batteries, but it only uses 3. The charger holds four batteries, and the directions explicitly state that the batteries must be charged in pairs, so you either have to charge two batteries or four. The extra battery that doesn't get used is going to remain charged. I think this is going to be a big problem.

---That's why I bought a MAHA 8-slot battery charger. The charger that comes with this thing is just a toy compared to the Maha.

4. No lens cap. ----amen to that.