Camcorder Reviews

I purchased this camcorder to make a low budget movie. I was impressed with how many features (like 540 lines of horiz. resolution) were available on this camcorder that were hard to find on anything but the best quality professional mini-dv camcorders.

The image quality was great when adequate lighting was used, and there was no picture distortion, even on a larger (close to 50") television. I recently had trouble with the tape loading mechanism, but that could just be my fault.

Pros:
-1.33 Megapixel CCD hard to find on less expensive camcorders
-Sharp LCD screen
-Viewfinder has diopter (so you can take off your glasses)
-Accepts many lens attachments (I use a wide angle and telephoto lens from Sony)
-Body feels strong, not cheap and light like many Sonys or Panasonics
-Some of the picture effects are useful (like shutter speeds)
-Digital Wide Angle setting (allows you to reach <1x zoom with built in lens)
-Great battery life for included battery
-High quality mic preamp built in
-Amazing picture quality for price when used in good lighting

Cons:
-Bottom loading tape (can't open with tripod attached, but few cameras don't have this now)
-No focus ring (you have to use the tiny scroll wheel, but focus rings are only available on camcorders that cost $1000+. Just use a telephoto lens if you need to pull focus)
-Remote sensor can only be used in front of camcorder
-Poor low light shots (just use good lighting)

All in all, this is a great camcorder for making low budget movies, as long as you have decent lighting. Many options are available in manual mode, allowing you to have more control over picture. Automatic mode works great too.

I bought this camcorder last Christmas and I've loved it since. I was looking for a reasonably priced Mini DV camcorder and came across this one at a local Sears. It felt nice and sturdy in my hands unlike the smaller ones offered by Sony and Panasonic. I checked some reviews on it, found them to be good and bought it at J&R over in NYC. The video quality is nothing short of outstanding in good lighting thanks to the 1.33 megapixel CCD (a godsend in this price range).

As for faults, the only real Achilles heel this camcorder has is the worthless "Night Alive" mode. Sony's nightvision trumps the JVC in this respect because the picture becomes nothing but a bright, blurry mess in Night Alive mode. I will invest in a video light to remedy this problem and I suggest that those considering this camcorder do likewise. Overall this is still a terrific camcorder thanks to the 1.33 megapixel CCD not usually found in this price range.

When I got this camera my first thought was that it just would not deliver, very skeptical. HOWEVER this is the coolest camera in my collection of photo and video gear. Before I get excited let me tell you a few of the bad things first:

1. Not to sporty on Windows 98, have problems from time to time on my old computer running Win 98 getting this to be recognized.

2. The tape loads underneath which means if you are on a tripod that camera must be taken off in order to change tapes.

3. USB and Firewire ports are underneath the view screen which means the camera must be opened in order to use them.

With that said let me say that the camera performs well on my two other computers using Win XP. I enjoy Windows Movie Maker and this camera, they make a perfect match and good outcome.

If you have Win XP or newer this is the camera for you. PLEASE don't forget to get the Flash and Light accessories which really make this a wonderful camera. It is a lightweight and very easy to use camera. I put a 256SD card in this and have not been able to come close to filling it.

I like being able to video and also digital image at the same time, before I had to use two cameras. This camera puts your digial images on the SD Card and also adds the snapshot effect right on the tape. I use this camera daily and have not been let down yet.

It is not perfect,but I have used it at least once a week for two and a half years now. The zoom is out of this world! I have taken photos as close as two feet and really far away and have gotten super clear shots. I have taken still, moving and portraits. I like it. My friends like it too. It has a lot of flexability for taking pictures. For example; I run the camera and then when I plug it into my firewall I am able to take out still shots,the ones I want.I can also put my film on a video cassette.Personally, I would have rathered gotten a full version of the MGI software for the price I had to pay for the camera though. But I do like the software. I also shoot a lot in the dark. I'm using the night shot & super night shot right now.Super night shot works well although if there is a lot of movement, the pics are distorted. I plan to buy a light soon. Bottom line, I don't regret my purchase.Mechanically, I have had absolutely no problems. I have an 8 hour battery and I use the lcd screen to film. It is sufficeint.

I've had my TRV520 for a little over a year now and I'm very pleased with it. The quality of the video when transferred to VHS is very high. The camera is implicitly easy to use and handle. But to be honest there were one or two things that I found disappointing: The quality of the stills taken are not that great. Unless the light on the subject is very good I find that the images are quite grainy. Do not buy this camera for excellent digital photos. You won't get um. The images are just okay. I'm in the market for a digital camera now. Another thing I find annoying is that the camera shuts off if there no activity for 3 mins. This is a 'battery saving mechanism' but I have not found a way to disable it if the the camera is plug into the AC outlet. Other than that, I think it's a very good buy and I won't be changing it anytime soon.

I've owned camcorders before but never digital. Before I made my choice, I did a lot of research on the net. The Sony products always seemed to show up on the recommended lists. I have a friend who owns the DCR-TRV320 and decided to check it out. I was very impressed with the camera. The features of the 320 and the 520 are basically the same. I like the bigger LCD screen on the 520 though and went for that instead. I Nightshot feature is GREAT on these cameras. You can shoot virtually anything up to 10 feet away in TOTAL darkness. I recommend this camera to anyone looking for a high quality, fully featured digital camera. But note that you can always save some bucksn if you opt for the DCR-TRV320. One extra note though. Get yourself a longer lasting battery with your new camera. Or at least a spare one. Anyone who's owned a camcorder will tell you the same!

I just bought this camera's successor, the JVC GR-DVL505U. It arrived yesterday, and it seems like a great product! I really only tried taking some basic shots and importing them into the PC, but I have high hopes for some great online home video in the future!

P.S. I found the camera online for($) -- With accessories it came out to about the same price most major stores list it as.

This is a great product! It's lightweight, durable and very easy to use. You can add neat effects to what you are filming and can edit them using the software included. One very small yet a flaw none the less is that I can't find any more batteries for the camcorder and I'm stuck with one that doesn't last very long if you're constantly using it. All in all this is a great product that I'd highly recommend.

I bought this camcorder 2 months ago. I have barely used it, but when I do I get great images and superb sound. This would be great with a computer (in which I do not have). I have plugged it in to my television for editing and playback. A good product for family use. Birthday parties, Holidays, and special occasions can all be recorded. This is the top of the line in technology with MINI DV.

Bought this camera and found it to be a great! I really loved the digital camera function. The camera doesn't take the best picutes in low light situations but I found it well lite situations it did great. Easy to download to the computer. The video functions were what I thought were exceptional. I have used a Sharp ViewCam many times and I think this Panasonic camera outdoes the Sharp hands down. I especially was impressed by the many extra features which I did not know were out in the market. Only disadvantage is that it is a heavier camera than I would have liked.

I have just bought this camcorder and it is great. I was looking to buy a digital camera, 640 by 480 resolution or lower. I decided to save my money and buy a camcorder instead. When i saw this camcorder, i could not turn it down and so i bought it. To my surprise it performed in both modes above par. I was also surprise with the amount of features it had, so much, i haven't figured some of them as yet(I bought it today). Anyway, i would recommend this product to anyone who wants a good camcorder for their money.

This is a great product. The digital still feature allows me to put pictures on e-mails and the videos are great! I would recommend it to anyone. The software is great too!!!

All the characteristics of this camera are great. The still digitals to mpegs, but I had to buy a Canon for this particular camera to be compatible with my G4 Mac. I bought the camera before I bought my G4.

This is a very nice camcorder for the money. I love the larger view screen, and the battery lasts quite a long time. The picture quality is very good, but there is considerable noise from the motor that gets recorded on the tape. If you're taping a birthday party or sporting event, the noise isn't too bad, but if you're using it to record the birds chirping on a quiet morning, forget it; the noise from the motor will drown out anything you'd be able to hear, it's that loud. Lastly, I have had several old 8mm tapes from my old camcorder that will not play on this camcorder. They will play on my neighbor's 8mm Samsung camcorder, but not on this Sony. I was a little upset by this.

This is a great camera! It is very easy to use. It takes very clear digital video, and for 1 megapixel CCD takes good digital pictures. It has many neat features. It has a large LCD screen for easy reviewing.

It records Mpeg files on the memorystick for display on computers. This is a great feature although the files recorded are a little grainy. This is great for e-mailing vacation movies back to family members.

The quality of the digital video is great. The bad thing is that you don't get much recording time on one tape. It uses 2 hour analog tapes, but when you record in digital mode you only get 1 hour on each tape.

The picture taking feature is wonderful for vacation. You don't have to carry both a still camera and a video camera around with you. The pictures are only 1 megapixel, but they show up on a computer screen great. We were very pleased with the results of the pictures.

The battery life is very long. We purchased a separate quick charger for our batteries which was a great addition. It doesn't take much time to charge and they last quite a while compared to our old Minolta camcorder.

I originally did extensive research on the "vertical palm size" mini-DV camcorders and narrowed my decision down to the Sony DCR-PC9, the Canon Elura 20MC and the JVC GR-DVM75. Let me tell you that this was an extremely difficult evaluation because all three cameras have their strengths and weaknesses and there was no clear choice. To make a long story short, I ended up purchasing all 3 camcorders and performed side by side comparisons which was the only effective way to full assess the cameras.

Although you can make arguments that one camera had slightly sharper images or another one handled colors well, all three cameras produced crisp, accurate colored images in outdoor sunlight settings. Cannon claims about 400 lines of resolution, Sony states up to 500 and JVC claims 520 lines. Unless you are viewing on a high definition TV or computer monitors, you could not distinguish between the resolutions and even then, the differences are subtle. Under outdoor overcast conditions, the colors for all 3 cameras were on the dull side but the video still was of decent quality. All three camcorders did not perform well under low light conditions. The low light video taping was indoors at night with single or double lamp lighting with light bulbs between 60 and 100 watts. The Cannon Elura produced the poorest quality video (even with the low light setting) - very dark and grainy. The Sony and JVC with standard auto-shutter settings produced about the same level of video quality which was less grainy but still on the dark side. The lower shutter speed settings on the JVC and Sony improves the image but the video becomes very choppy. As stated in other reviews, the Sony Night Shot (IR based) feature is impressive and works relatively well under "no light" conditions but creates the greenish monotone image. FYI, I find the Lux rating of each camera to be somewhat meaningless since there is no standard for this specification.

Sound quality is good on all 3 cameras but I do agree with the other reviewers who have commented on the problems associated with having the microphone located on the top of the camera. All the camcorders pick up some motor noise but the noise seemed to be more prevalent on the Canon. I also thought the sound was a little muffled on the Canon when compared to the other two camcorders. The Canon and JVC have wind screen options but I found them to be of limited value.

Not surprisingly, the digital stills from all 3 cameras were extremely poor. Even with the XGA resolution and built-in flash, the JVC stills were only marginally better than that of the other cameras. The best field stills (captured from video) came from the Canon and then the JVC. If you want to produce "print quality" digital stills, my recommendation is to purchase a separate dedicated digital camera instead of spending extra money on a higher CCD count.

You can read about specific features and functions in other reviews for the 3 camcorders but here is a summary of my side by side comparison:

For the Canon Elura 20MC
Pros: Quality Video, Progressive Scan, extended Recording Modes, good ergonomics and design, well constructed, the smallest of the 3 camcorders, manual exposure and shutter speed settings
Cons: Poor low light quality, short battery life, too small for large hands, microphone picks up the most motor noise of the 3 cameras, poor stills, no software, requires an attachment for external microphone and head phone, no USB support, the least features/functions of the 3 cameras

For the Sony DCR-PC9
Pros: Quality Video, NightShot, the most features/functions of the 3 cameras, battery life was about 30% better than the other camcorders, lens ring for manual focus, 30 mm lens - a little easier to find filters and attachments
Cons: Construction feels cheap, Poor Ergonomics, poor stills, cumbersome menu system, uses Sony's proprietary memory stick, limited remote controller functions

For the JVC GR-DVM75
Pros: Quality Video, High Band Processor emulates progressive scan, Built In Flash, well designed remote controller, good number of features/settings
Cons: Construction feels cheap, Poor stills, short battery life, poor viewfinder resolution, requires a docking station for USB connection,

Here are a couple of general observations for purchasing a camcorder. Most sales people only know the specs of each camera but have limited (if any) "actual use" experience outside the store. The image quality on the LCD screen is not a good indicator of the actual quality of the recorded video - you really need to view the video image on a TV screen. Finally, you cannot fully assess the quality of a camcorder within the confines of a store.

Because I enjoy the special functions and am planning to do quite a bit of indoor video taping I decided to keep the Sony. I really hated to give up the Canon progressive scan. I originally thought I would keep the Canon but the poor quality video in low light eventually prompted me to evaluate the Sony. Based on other reviews, I also had some concerns with the quality of the JVC hardware but the construction seemed to be on par with that of the Sony camcorder. The bottom line is that each camcorder is an excellent product and the best camera for you is dependent on your needs. If you are on a budget, the JVC offers the best overall value, performance, and features for your money. If you are primarily video taping under good lighting conditions and want to capture stills from video, then I would recommend the Cannon. The Elura was also the most compact, most comfortable and best designed. If you need a camera with many digital effects, options and special functions and are video taping in lower light/night conditions then I would purchase the Sony. Good luck!

I bought a Canon Elura 20MC this weekend.

My recent interest in DV camcorders sprang to life when I started working with Apple's Final Cut Pro. It's such a beautifully engineered piece of software, with incredible capabilities. With these kinds of tools available, the idea of making movies becomes much more attractive. (I think no one is truly interested in seeing even ten minutes of anyone's vacation, kids, what-have-you, if it's just the raw video.) With these tools at my disposal, I became very interested in getting a camcorder again.

I'd been hemming and hawing for a couple weeks, lusting over the Canon XL-1, the GL-1, other 3-chip cameras around 2 grand. I usually veer towards professional grade products and as I mention below, I'm glad I'm not lugging an XL-1 around now.

My only problem with them is the "look" of video. I started shopping for a video camera, but what I really wanted was one that pretended to be a movie camera. I wanted non-interlaced frames. If you know what that means, then you know what I mean. I have read great things on the web about the Canon XL-1/GL-1's abilities to create a single, non-interlaced frame and smartly duplicate it into both fields. Apparently, the elura does a similar trick, but I'm not sure how. The X(G)L-1 cameras have three chips, and they use the green channel to construct the other lines and copy the frame into the other field: it ends up looking like a single frame. The Elura only has one chip, so I don't know how they do it, but there's some stuff around the web about how the Elura is lumped into the same category as the other two (much more expensive) cameras when it comes to this feature. One thing though is certain about the progressive scan/frame mode/digital motor drive etc.. No matter what you call it, or which camera does it, the duration of the shutter can be no less than 1/60th of a second, so you end up with footage that looks like film running at 30 frames per second, but with a very high, crisp shutter speed. Everything tends to looks a little bit like the battle sequences in Saving Private Ryan, especially if it moves fast. Anyways, I'd still rather have than not have it, and the footage looks remarkably "filmy" and gritty compared to the other, standard video look. In general I like it, though it's harsher than I'd hoped for. So that's a nice feature of the Elura. From what I've read on the web about Sony's progressive scanning, it's 15 frames per second intended for pulling sharp still frames, and many people have found it very disappointing. It's amazing how "Progressive Scan" is such a touted feature for camcorders, but everybody seems to have a different idea of what it's for and how to implement it.

Another claimed feature of the Elura is an "RGB Primary color Filter" I'm not sure exactly what this means. I know it's an excellent idea to split light into three primary components and have a separate CCD chip for each color: Professional cameras and a few prosumer cameras have three chips, and the image quality (especially the color fideity) is superb because of it. What's this filter then? Is it thousands of RGB spots all lined up exactly coincident with CCD pixels? Is is some kind of special dichroic prism? I don't know. I wish it was something that gave 3 chip cameras a run for their money. I wish Canon would elaborate. The color on my new camera is very nice, but I have a sneaking suspicion it doesn't hold a candle to a 3-chip camera.

When you shop for camera, you have all these ideas about what important, but when you actually take one home, all that goes out the window, and a bunch of other, totally different priorities come into focus. Yes, the whole progressive scan thing is still important to me, and I've been using it all the time, but the best thing about this camera is the size. It's tiny. you can fit it into you pants pocket. You can turn off the beeps and lights so no one knows you're taping, and because of that, coupled with the small size, you're there with it, taping away. The Canon GL-1 or Sony TVR900 seem massive compared to it. Which would you take: decent footage from a single chip, tiny camera, or nothing at all from a machine you're too afraid to pull out bacause it's too obtrusive? It's incredible how compact this camera is.

I have to admit, the Elura is very cool-looking. It has a feeling a quality in the metallic, silver finish and a pleasing weight. It has a nice array of manual overrides that work wonderfully: the focus/exposure locks are placed smartly where you can switch them intuitively while taping. That's fast become one of my favorite things about the Elura. It has an attention to detail in the engineering and miniaturization that make the Sonys look prehistoric: the size and thoughtful placement of buttons, the size of the LCD screen, the implementation of features and the menu system design are all very well done. Nothing is wasted, which is a good idea in such a small device. The supplied battery is a bit anemic, so a spare, larger battery would be a recommended accessory. Another neat thing it comes with is a little docking unit that screws into the base of the camera. It has Mic inputs, headphone outputs and S-video outputs. The lens is fine, and I've just been shutting off the digital zoom feature. Going into the digital portion of the zoom results in abysmal image quality. I think the Optura has higher density CCD, so the digital zoom there might be something worth using, but on the Elura, it's truly a waste of time. The memory card feature is something I'll never use either: at 640 X 480, the still images are something I'd rather not have it at all, so I might as well have just bought the Elura 10: which appears to be less expensive and identical in all respects except the card feature.

All in all, highly recommended.

The first thing I asked myself before my purchase was "How will I want to use the camera?" My main use will be for travel photography and for family video. Size and weight is an important consideration. As a woman, I have smaller hands and the Canon fits very nicely in one hand with easy access to most of the features. I think with more use I will find I can maneuver even more easily through the various buttons and on screen menus.

When traveling, it is most important to have a camera that can easily be concealed and this little gem fits nicely into a pocket that is easily guarded. It is far too easy for a strap or bag to bag to be cut. Also, filming is very unobtrusive and with the 10X optical zoom I can stay far enough from a subject to film comfortably.

The camera does have some drawbacks, but they were not of primary importance to me. Low light photography left something to be desired and the 640 x 480 stills were not of the same quality as the stills with my standard digital camera. Since I do have that camera, and can use it for much higher resolutions as well, the two cameras should compliment each other nicely.

I have only just tried some of the additional features, but all seemed to work well and I may, perhaps oneday want to combine a photo with a frame or blue screen. For me, these were just nice little extras I probably can live without.

When I bought my camera I was able to compare video screen images with other similar cameras and found the in store images to be excellent in comparison with comparable JVC and Sony cameras in the same price range.

I purchased a 2nd small battery rather than the larger one since I wanted to keep the size and weight low. I also purchased an extended warranty which included a yearly cleaning of the camera. That alone, I believe, made it a good value. Having had experiences with video cameras costing more than their value for repairs, this seemed quite expedient.

So far I have found this to be a very enjoyable camera to use and I think I shall have many great years of pleasure from it.

I hooked up this camera to my iMac DV, connected it to the Firewire conneciton, turned on the computer and everything worked great the first time out. I was able to create, edit, and produce a Web film in less than a day.

I've owned the ultura since late January and so far have been completely satisfied with it.. is has a great range of features and turns out incredible quality footage. I also bought a DV Capture card for my computer, and the ultura allows for easy editing of videos. The digital zoom works up to about 64x, and some of the "modes" are not very useful, but all around, it's great!

We went into the store prepared to buy the sony TR 103 and ended up with this canon. It is alot smaller than the sony and the lens is supposed to be better. One thing about these camcorders is to get the smallest one you can afford because it is so easy to take with you. As far as options, it has just about everything you need. We just turn it on and shoot.

summary: if you own a dv camera, it's probably similarly sized to the panasonic dv-600 camera (a little bigger than the size of a mid-sized nerf football). this bag works well for that sized camera, and it looks sharp, too!

more info: this bag has a few nooks and crannies that are good for taking around important accessories. i'm able to carry around about ten tapes, an extra battery, and the various cords* that connect the camera to the tv and computer. in addition, it seems to be padded well - i feel confident that the camera is safe in the bag.

and it looks sharp, too. a couple of people have just randomly stated how they like the bag. i'm not sure why, exactly, maybe because the leather looks like it's of good quality, and the construction looks sturdy.

i like this bag, and i think you will too if you own a dv camera.

Nice quality. Very compact. Will not have room for tons of extra cords and batteries for your camcorder but the essentials will fit. I have a Sharp VL-AX1U and it fits perfectly. If you are buying this for a digital camera it would also work very well.

The great advantage of this bag is that the entire top unzips (it's actually a double run zipper which gives you a wide storage space while everything stays in place). It was great for my movie camera so I got another one for my digital still camera. I can keep 20 mini CDs plus marking pens, extra battery and charger, and my bulky but essential viewing hood. When the bag opens you can see everything, place everything, and when it closes everything stays in place. After a year I've decided the design is probably the most convienent I've used in 30 yrs.

I contacted this seller 15 times via emails and phones and he/she never responded. I guess s/he is dead or something. The camera I recieved was totally different than the one I pictured. I would never ever buy from this person again in my life.
thanks

As a first time buyer I was a little scepticle. I e-mailed once about the tracking of my package because I'd gotten it for my wife for her birthday. Within the next day I had gotten a response with tracking info and all! The package came in right on time for her birthday. Thanks for the great service! The sharp camera works Great!
God Bless!!

Works like a charm. Love it, take it everywhere and video are crisp and clear.

I just brought a 2100DG and it doesn't come with the USB cable to hook up in the back of the computer. I can't download pictures until I find a USB cable compatible with this camera.

This camera is a nice high resolution camera but the focus leaves a lot to be desired compared to a Sony Mavica 83. I have had poor results so far with the macro feature as well. One other thing, is the lens cap does not show when youre using the optical viewfinder, allowing you to take shots of the "dark". With all those things considered, its still the best bang for the buck anywhere.

This camera may not be the best on the market, but it is the simplist to use without lacking features. It is easy to transfer files to and from your comptuer using the CompactFlash card reader for PC and the or the serial connection and the Kyocera drivers to directly read the card directly through the camera. I have had mine for a little over six months and have had no problems with it. This camera provides you with enough to have nice photos without the complexities of professional cameras.