Yes and not for both questions.
I like the way some of them look, they're cool!
I probably would use them to record my little kids in 3-D, but for professional (and paid) 3-D work, I wouldn't.
1-Because those 3-D camcorders have a fixed StereoBase (or Interaxial like some calls it), that limits your stereo creativity a LOT.
You need to change the StereoBase constantly depending on the nearest subject/object on the frame, and when using different FL (Focal Lengths). Please see the 1/30th Stereo Rule here:
2-Although I like the use of smaller sensor sizes for a deeper DOF (Depth of Field), especially useful when using wide lens apertures like f1.4 in low light environments, a 1/4” or 1/3” sensor sizes packing 1080p resolution (or more in some cases) are plainly too small. At least a 2/3” sensor size is called for that kind of resolution.
Even the Panasonic AG-3DP1 3-D camcorder that is supposedly the current “top of the line” professional camcorder has 1/3” tiny sensors.
Smaller pixels mean lower light sensitivity and lens diffraction problems, see this:
3-Most consumer grade 3-D camcorders (read: cheap) compress the 2 side images into 960x540 pxs resolution in a side by side 1080 video format.
4-Highly compressed recording video codec. There is not such thing like “lossless” compression for video. Don't believe me? Read this guy's website for more info: (click in “Our Work”)
Wisconsin & LA.
Edited by Cesar Rubio, 19 October 2011 - 07:03 PM.