Quote Originally Posted by calval50
It isn't irrelevnet to me. I realize the still qualities are more important than the video and I think both of these cameras have good video qualities even though the Kodak is 4MP and the Cannon is 3.2Mp. But I still would like to know more about the differance between the video qualities because I will also be using it for that and I don't care to buy a video camera.
Thanks, Val
Sorry, should have made it more clear. My post is two sections, first, I was stating that comparing AVI to Quicktime is irrelevent, the two formats are not indicative of quality, they are just containers for different methods of storing the video. There are many different CODECs used for storing video, and they can be stored in either AVI or QT files. If you knew what CODECs were used by each camera, that would be a valid comparison. You can't just compare AVI to QT. (CODEC stand for enCOder/DECoder, pieces of software that encode and decode the video stream, all use different algorithms, some are better than others at different types of video)

The second part was just my personal thoughts on the subject of video in still cameras.

I should have been more careful to make that clear, I apologize for the confusion.