Pocket Camcorder Options

What kind of quality are you expecting? I have a Pentax WS80 I picked up a while ago. It's shock resistant, water proof, and freeze resistant. It does 720p at 30fps as well as still shots. It's very small and light but does not use AAs. But spare batteries for it are like $12. Without having weighed the battery, I'm guessing it weighs less than 2xAAs. It takes OK pictures but goes down hill quickly in low light. I'm also used to the image quality of my Nikon d7000, so my opinion of image quality is tainted.

The most important quality feature I'm looking for is something that doesn't wobble too much while walking. I have a camera that I really like for still shots but I'm not a fan of it's video. Anything that is 720p or up would be fine.

My wife asked me the same question about three months ago and I suggested she look at this review from digital camera review: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/shoot_and_share_guide_01.htm

Turns out the Kodak z18 was the best option for her. Obviously, the flips are no longer a viable option.

I've seen the video she makes with the Kodak camera and it is pretty impressive.

"something that doesn't wobble too much while walking"

This is going to be a problem with any cheap camera. The problem is the lack of image stabilization. Most of the mid-range shooters have digital stabilization but nothing is better than optical stabilization. It's your requirement for AA batteries that going to keep you in the super low quality camera range. You may want to reconsider this.

In my opinion the Canon PowerShot S95 is the best all around point and shoot. It has an excelent image sensor and performs very well in low light. It also boasts optical image stabilization and 720p video. Let's not forget Canon's excellent optics. (forgot to add, it shoots RAW, for any photo geeks reading this).

A lot of the flip video style cameras have a fixed focus pinhole sized lense. The image quality is poor. They use digital zoom, YUCK!

I'm just thinking from the mindset of 1 camera to do it all. I personally would not want to pack 2 cameras.

"I'm just thinking from the mindset of 1 camera to do it all. I personally would not want to pack 2 cameras."

Yeah, that's probably going to be the best way to go… I hated the idea of bringing redundant gear. Perhaps I can just run some image stabilization software from my current camera and save the $$

I am looking at the Lumix TS-3 for a solution to just one. Brand new model and a bit more than most point and shoots, but a great deal of features that should translate into better quality images.

Check out dpreview.com before pulling the trigger on a new point and shoot. They do some pretty comprehensive reviews. I'd get an S95 if I was in the market, though the price is very hard to swallow.

I like my little Pentax for what it's worth. I don't have to worry about it gettign wet. Plus if I break it, I won't be out a ton of money.

I just got my Nikon d7000, which is not going anywhere near the trail, too new and expensive. I have an old Nikon D50 DSLR that I plan on taking with me next trek. Unfortunately it does not do video nor is it lightweight.

I have the Kodak Zi8 and I like it.

I think one of the things you might look into is the speed of the SD or SDHC card that you are using. A higher speed rating (class 6 for instance) is going to eliminate some of the issues. It might be worth it to test on your current camera to see if that makes any improvement on the video quality.

A better explanation is located here http://www.sdcard.org/developers/tech/speed_class/