Is FUJIFILM FINEPIX S4300 worth shooting my short film on?

I thought I was able to buy something a bit better; but due to financial reasons, I do not think that I can buy a camera. I'm planning to use my iPHONE for sound--have done it before for best projects and it worked. But as for camera quality, recommend the FUJIFILM?

No.

I suggest you buy a real camcorder (under $300) which can shoot in Full HD and has a good optical zoom lens.

If you spend an additional $15 for a Directors Slate (clapper), you can sync the crummy sound from the camcorder with the better sound from your iPhone. I would suggest you spend an additional $100 on a Zoom H1 sound recorder so that you get even better sound. Any sound recorder you have to hand hold will transmit any hand movement sounds directly to your iPhone microphone

If you think it's worthy to consider then that should be fine.

Fujifilm practically own the bridge camera market, and the S4300 is a very nice piece of kit, given its viewfinder and manual controls.

Like just about any camera in its class, however, its video capability is marginal at best - stills cameras with video feature just don't to very well at video - but it's better than nothing.

Like all digital cameras, it EATS batteries, you should add a couple of sets of Lithium, or invest in a charger, and the highest-capacity rechargeables you can afford. If you stick to Alkalines, you'll be swapping out your batteries every five minutes.

The S4300 does record video in HD, 720p. It does not record in full HD, 1080. And it only records in 30 fps. Some cameras record in 24 fps to give it a movie look, and others record at 60 fps so you can do some slow motion, or even higher frame rates to have more flexibility for slow motion. As long as you know your limitations, you should be able to work with the camera.

No. The S4300 has a sensor size and, most importantly, a pixel size equivalent to smartphones. Therefore your image quality won't be any better than just using a smartphone. However, the fuji has the advantage of having a much better lens that can zoom.

With digital cameras, the image quality is product of the lens and sensor. The bigger the sensor and the pixels, the better the image quality in terms of low-light performance, resolution (how big you can print - but not to be confused with sharpness), and dynamic range (ability to render details in a wider range of light from shadows to highlights).
Any of these would be a significant improvement over the S4300 - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/...rtclk=sort

Here's a link that compares sensors: http://www.digicamdb.com/compare/fujifilm_finepix-s4300-vs-sony_alpha-a3000/

Now, for video and especially for video devices at your price point, you will get the best results with using a traditional camcorder like these: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/...50&mxp=225

The advantage of a real camcorder vs using all still cameras that just happens to have a video feature, is that the camcorder can record longer than the 12-minute limit of all digital still cameras. Due to a 4GB file size limitaion, all still cameras are limited to just 12 minutes of record time in full HD. Also, since they are not camcorders, the sensors will get hot fairly quickly and then the camera will shut down. This won't happen with camcorder and why you should seriously only consider camcorders for your purpose.

The features found on camcorders allow for easier use and better control over the video than a camera that was first-and-foremost designed for still photos and not video.