Here's one that a former editor use to hammer at me all the time when I was shooting for newspapers: When you think you're close enough get closer.
This applies to videography as well, especially ENG.
When I was shooting news, when I'd arrive at a news scene I'd start shooting with a short lens and keep getting closer. Then I'd switch to a long length lens and keep getting closer. When I was practically on top of the scene I'd switch between a short lens and a zoom to get a good mixture of shots.
(Bear in mind, I had three or four cameras handy with different lens. That's not easy to do with camcorders except by using the zoom effectively to get perspectives of short and long lenses.)
I've found that when no tripod is available, zooming in or out (if it's well done) actually keeps the viewer from being aware that the videographers hands are not as steady as they used to be
I agree. It's all about the subject matter. What I was referring to was footage that is constantly zooming in and out no matter the subject.
When I shot the footage of my step-daughter and later edited it, I'd use clips from the static camcorder whenever I was zooming in with the other camera and then cut to the other camcorder clips that was already zoomed in. A couple of times I left in a short amount of the zoom but usually as it was just about to end.
But I still believe that endless zooming in and out makes for dizzying video.