Photography

I think, in general, there's now a bigger gap between amateurs and professionals.

Amateurs, who just want some easy snapshots or video recordings, who used to buy said camcorders or compact cameras, are extinct. They now use their newest Pixel or iPhone, which provide a good quality for their price, are very simple (algorithms do the dirty work for you + easily accessible UI) and are with them all the time.
They provide a decent quality, and most people don't even notice that at all to begin with.

Professional photo- and videographers on the other hand spend a lot of money for equipment. They want every tiny bit of quality for their work, and often don't care if a camera costs 1500 or 2000 bucks.

Companies noticed that and now only offer two classes: the "phone with good camera" for casual photography, and "fucking expensive equipment" stuff for pros.

We both are the rare exception. I also just bought a compact camera recently, because I don't like photographing with my phone.
We are a dying breed.

The real question is, why do you want 4k?
The sensor-/ image quality is way more important.
4k is just the amount of pixels and is useless if the sensor doesn't get enough light.
You can still have very bad quality and shoot in 4k. The drawback is a lot of wasted memory.

The only reason, imo, to get one is if you shoot for very high res screens or crop a lot in post pro.
But 4k AND good hardware is pro-teretory.

You have 3 options:

• Keep your budget below 300 bucks and use a phone, old used camera or cheap device.
• Adjust your budget to ~400-600 €/$ and get a very solid middle ground device, like a Sony RX100 III/ IV/ V. I belive the III shoots FHD, and IV and up can shoot 4k. They are a solid option and yield a good result.
• Or spend a lot of $$$ and get something very high quality, which would be completely out of budget for you.

If I were you, I would get a used higher quality camera.
They still perform great and will hold a few years into the future, while also being less expensive than new devices.

My honest advice is: if you are the guy who has to shoot weddings, either don't do it and let the pros do it for this special day, or get good equipment that lasts you for the next years. Getting a camcorder right now sounds like a waste of money in my opinion.

Edit: I have said RX100 III, that doesn't shoot 4k. If you want, I can send you an example video I could take for you and then you decide if FHD is enough for you.

Have you considered a GoPro? The lens may not work for your needs, but if it does, they are relatively cheap.

Not particularly cheap but the DJI osmo pocket 3 ($520) is probably the best 4k video quality in a compact camera. The only downside is, no/limited zoom. It's not going to be as versatile in that sense compared to your camcorder, but with good quality 4k you can always zoom in in post.

I know the camera looks weird, but I think it really is the modern camcorder. It's super stabilized with the built in gimbal, uses a nice 1 in sensor, has some depth of field when you want it, and is mostly a point and shoot experience when you want it. It beats anything else in its price class, at least.

You could consider a point and shoot camera from the big names. I imagine something like this might fit the bill. You would have to check out some reviews as I'm not familiar with the non mirrorless interchangable lense cameras.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-b600.html

Technically that camera isn't 4k but I would expect the quality would be better at 1080p than most phones at 4k since the phones have such a tiny sensor to work with.