Samsung goes bargain hunting with SMX-K40 and SMX-K45 camcorders

We've already had a look at Samsung's most interesting camcorder introduction of the day (that'd be the HMX-U10), but those looking for a more conventional alternative may take interest in one of these two. The SMX-K40 and SMX-K45 both take a different approach to capturing clips by logging them at 720 x 480 and offering users "HD upscaling" to the HDTV via HDMI. Both devices also boast a 65x optical zoom for those undercover escapades in voyeurism, while the Optical Image Stabilizer keeps things relatively shake-free. The primary difference between the two is the storage options; the K40 requires that you bring your own SD or SDHC card, while the K45 is equipped with a 32GB SSD. Both units sport 2.7-inch LCDs, USB charging and upload-to-YouTube functionality, and they'll each ship this August for $329.99 and $499.99, respectively. The full release is after the break.

Samsung goes bargain hunting with SMX-K40 and SMX-K45 camcorders

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:10PM]

just say no to proprietary HD compression!

actually at the price point they aren't bad :)

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 5:29PM]

You obviously didn't read. These are not HD cams. They are SD with up-conversion option via HDMI.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:25PM]

"Both devices also boast a 65x optical zoom"

65x optical zoom.......................what is this thing.....Hubble?

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:26PM]

Mosquito videography!

[magallanes Posted Jul 14th 2009 5:38PM]

Intelli-zoom (according the photo) and you can bet that Inteli-zoom is some sort of digital zoom + optical zoom + post processing.

yuck!.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:25PM]

i want one =[

[Alex Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:33PM]

Kind of related...

Does anyone know of a site that just hosts sample footage from different camcorders / digital cameras? That would be sick.

[JPFrech Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:52PM]

try steve digicams, a lot of video sample there, everything since the last 6 years

[JPFrech Posted Jul 14th 2009 4:50PM]

The 720 in 720x480 is obviously an attempt to foul people who know little about HD.....hope my father won't buy that.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 5:06PM]

Good observation...

720x480 = standard def
1280x720 = HD ("720p")
1920x1080 = HD ("1080i" or "1080p")

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 5:28PM]

Why bother when a smart shopper can get a HD cam for about the same prices.

[magallanes Posted Jul 14th 2009 5:41PM]

where?

Take note that many el cheapo HD cameras are upscaling.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 6:25PM]

Xacti VPC-TH1, 30x optical zoom, 720p, HDMI out, reasonable performance, $270: http://www.jr.com/sanyo/pe/SAN_VPCTH1/

Kuzo HD VCC002, 20x optical zoom, 1080p (though I'm pretty sure it's actually one of those 1440 non-square pixelers, but it still shots real 720p), HDMI out, performance unknown (but can't be too terrible, Aiptek does pretty acceptable HD at this price point), $200 when it gets released: http://www.jr.com/veho/pe/VEH_VCC002/

And those are not even in the price range of the Samsungs, they're both cheaper by a wide margin.
If you insist on spending around $500 you can get the Xacti VPC-FH1, which is a full-fledged HD camera that does 60fps at 1080p.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 7:22PM]

As I was saying... smart shopper.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 5:39PM]

Here's the thing about non-HD cameras; I'm a fan*.

*I like them in theory. For decades, we've had very rigid standards about resolutions, etc. for videos, and you could never break through that. Now, with the advent of the web, given the correct environment, 320 x 240 video makes as much sense as 1920 x 1080 video. It all depends on where the video lives, who the audience is, etc. So I like that we have lots of options.

THAT HAVING BEEN SAID...

There needs to be a price-point for these options. If you think I'm (a video professional) going to pay $350 for a camcorder that records video at a resolution of 320 x 240, then you're insane. However, I would be more than happy to buy this for $49.99 for my son (future video professional!) when he is two. Likewise, he'll get an upgrade to something nicer, say 480p, when he is a bit older. The price-point for that camcorder is about $149.99. My parents? I'd probably recommend a 720p camcorder because they still look nice enough on a big HDTV, and are perfect for the web. Make it really easy to link it up to a Facebook or YouTube account, and I'll sell them. And then you have me (again, video professional). I want a cheap 1080p camcorder that records very nice video, maybe not as many manual controls and optics, which I'll sacrifice for keeping the price in the $500-700 range. And finally, at work, I want something nicer, and work is footing the bill, so 1080p, very high bitrate, interchangable lenses, manual controls, etc. Lets put that at $1500 (we do web video, obviously for an NFL football game we're talking a different level of camera).

Anyway, so the options are fantastic, something for everyone, but lets be realistic about the prices (fortunately the market will take care of that issue).

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 6:37PM]

$50 is too expensive for QVGA. You can get a VGA camcorder for that price. Likewise, $100 for a 480p camera sounds about right. $150 would have to be a very very nice SD camera.

The $200-to-$1,000 range should be covered exclusively by HD cameras. There is no excuse these days.

Professional 480p cameras will still live in the $1,000-and-up range for a while.

[(Unverified) Posted Jul 14th 2009 11:52PM]

I was thinking of pulling the trigger on a Flip but I was waiting for the 1080 version. This’ll do just fine, thank you Samsung.

[LloydChiro Posted Jul 15th 2009 9:34AM]

The form factor of a flip allows you to just keep it in your pocket, getting shots that you would get when you're not planning on taking your camcorder around.

The video quality is merely good, but I think the packaging is brilliant.