They are on sale at Best Buy right now for $119. I just picked one up as well as a 4GB Kensington SD card for $40. Going to try it out for a week and see how it does. Any requests for footage?

Yo Duane, Alan from the F-Chat podcasts here!!! Howdy !!!

I'll get some F-Car footage with this camera on Sunday. Will report back.

Yo Duane, Alan from the F-Chat podcasts here!!! Howdy !!!

I'll get some F-Car footage with this camera on Sunday. Will report back.

Hi Alan. Looking forward to seeing the footage. Is there a new F-Chat podcast in the works?

I did a quick test with it in my car (mounted to a headrest mount). It was not that bad. Actually better then my Canon HV20 on the same mount. And I think for uploading to YouTube the lower quality of YouTube works in it's favor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exIsy8nrV74

Some videos clips from a car show today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypJF5m9pC-Y

Does anyone know if it is possible to transcode movies from regular HDV 720p to the H264 4 Mbit codec this device uses? I have access to MPEG Streamclip, and this little camera might be useful as a low quality playback device for HD clips.

Also, I picked the camera up to try out, and I'm impressed with the image it can make in static shot situations. I plan to velcro it to basketball goals to get "slam dunk" POV shots.

Well, with the blockness and all the short comings, would you guys say it is at least better than a DV camera in the same price range like a Canon ZR series?
How's low light and dynamic range? How long can you record?
Thanks.

Well for a start the image blockage is greatly reduced, if not erased with static shots. Read tri-pod.
If you want to run around like an amature a frame based codec cam will do much, much better.
Image detail is definately higher then low cost SD cams, and has decent latitude.
Low light is suprisingly good. Very little video noise, and colour is quite natural. As far as recording, it is limited by memory card or power. If you use wall power you are only limited by the SD card memory. For example an 8GB SDHC card (about $70) gives you 4.5hrs 720p30 or 10hrs 480p30. If you run of the battery you get 90min record with LCD active. Good new is replacement batteries are about $10. Nice!
Try viewing a few clips for most of your answers.

Well for a start the image blockage is greatly reduced, if not erased with static shots. Read tri-pod.
If you want to run around like an amature a frame based codec cam will do much, much better.
Image detail is definately higher then low cost SD cams, and has decent latitude.
Low light is suprisingly good. Very little video noise, and colour is quite natural. As far as recording, it is limited by memory card or power. If you use wall power you are only limited by the SD card memory. For example an 8GB SDHC card (about $70) gives you 4.5hrs 720p30 or 10hrs 480p30. If you run of the battery you get 90min record with LCD active. Good new is replacement batteries are about $10. Nice!
Try viewing a few clips for most of your answers.

I saw the clips but it's hard to tell from an internet clip.
So, from all that you have said, should I take it as:
Latitude, low light perfomance, image detail and color, are all better than a DV camera? I'm specially worried about latitude and low light.

By the way, what is the Aiptex A-HD-200? The PAL version?

I saw the clips but it's hard to tell from an internet clip.
So, from all that you have said, should I take it as:
Latitude, low light performance, image detail and color, are all better than a DV camera? I'm specially worried about latitude and low light.

It depends what DV camera right? As you can imagine there is quite a difference between the low end $200 and the high end $10,000. Personally I find the low light and latitude adequate especially for the price. But it isn't exceptional.
Try to get native format clips (I believe there were some at the beginning of the thread) not recompressed web clips.

Has anybody tried using these for a helmet cam? Particularly for mountain biking? Seems like a cam with less moving parts than one using a tape transport would be ideal.

It depends on what level of quality you expect.
The lack of image stabilization and a very low bitrate with the Mp4 codec from what has to be a less then stellar encoder, can provide very poor quality when the image is bounced/panned around.
That said I have seen some very nice in-car speed footage, at it looked quite nice. But an in car mount will be many times more stable then a bike. The cost is so low I would say give it a go. Chances are that most shots will turn out well, depending how it is mounted.