Camcorder Reviews

This case is sexy and very professional-looking. It is obviously rugged and well-constructed. But just a few minutes ago, the shoulder strap slipped through the hitch system, and the case (and expensive camera therein) slammed onto the pavement.

When I first got this case, I had noticed the ridiculous attachment of the strap (relies on friction, expecting slippery nylon webbing to grip to itself... stupid) and wondered if I should do something about it.

Other complaints - the "swivels" that connect the strap to the box - don't swivel. So the strap gets all munged up and twisted. Very annoying.

Lastly, with a quick-release tripod plate (Bogen/Manfrotto in my case) left on the camera - the case won't close! STUPID. Even a thinner plate (not that I've seen one) wouldn't work - the fit is so designed. Maybe carving out one of the rigid foam supports in the lid will fix this.

Anyway - I think you'd be better off cutting custom foam for an excellent Pelican case (also readily available on Amazon.com).

The Canon case is a very pretty thing, and will give your rig a very professional look, if that's most important to you. But a Pelican would likely survive a drop out of a car on the freeway... no way this thing would.

Unfortunately, if you need a ruggedized case, this is as inexpensive as they come. If you want a truly ruggedized case for professional use, this is not it. If you use a quick release tripod attachment the camera does not fit in the case.
It is quite effective for storing all of your cabling, power supply, tapes, and a few other accessories. And, let's face it, if you shelled out for the GL-2 you are going to want to protect it.
If you truly need a well protected camera and intend to use a Bogen quick release mount, and are lugging this thing all over heck and back, get a custom cut case. Otherwise, this is a great deal at the price, and very sexy.

Prepare to replace the batteries(3AAA) every 2 weeks !

I liked this mouse a lot when I first got it, but it consumes batteries about every two weeks or so. It's getting expensive to maintain and recently (I've had it about six months) it's been sticking and acting up, even after cleaning and I have to pick it up and move it around it a lot to "unstick" it. I also have the keyboard, which has been fine - not a single problem, and I think I've only needed to change those batteries once or twice, but the mouse consumes A LOT of batteries. I am going to move on to an optical wireless mouse.

I received this camcorder for Christmas. While the picture was very good, and the features plenty for my family videos there was an annoying whine in all recordings. I found it was recording the whine into the tape, not just a mechanical whine while playing inside the camcorder. I contacted JVC and was told that unless I had a receipt and proved I received the camera within the past 90 days I would pay for its repair. Even if I got the receipt from the person that gave me the gift I would pay shipping to have it repaired.

Perhaps I expect too much, but when I open the box I expect something to work, and if it doesn't I expect the manufacturer to immediately accept blame and fix it. Being treated as if I am to blame because I have no receipt at Christmastime is poor public relations. They should at least be able to check the serial number for a manufacture date and then see if my story is reasonable. I had another product fail recently and was promptly sent a replacement without the first question of whether I had a receipt. That company will receive my business in the future, JVC will not.

The JVC Camcorder Model GR-SXM240 is one of the best I've
used in years. For the price you pay,you can't beat It.
Sharp pictures even in low light conditions. I recommend this
Camcorder for every one to use.
There is one problem while charging the battery the main circuit
board smoked. This board cost approx. $205.00. I recommend watching the camcoder when charging.

I found the video results from this camera outstanding; clear and crisp with perfect color. I also found this camera easier to load tape and battery than my old Hitachi Hi-8. However, I find using the controls of this camera somewhat difficult and cumbersome. If you can't afford a Sony Digital Hi-8 camera, I suggest this JVC compact camcorder. With Super VHS-C tape in the camera and Super VHS tape in the JVC VHS recorder, for the price, you can't go wrong.

Like most purchasers of camcorders, I had my first child last August. Thus, I decided to buy a camcorder to take hours of video that I will never watch again. On the other hand, if I didn't buy a camcorder, I would be a horrible parent, right?
Anyways, I did a fair amount of research online and in print (Consumers Reports). I finally decided to purchase the Panasonic PVDV201, based on the recommendations of several electronics salespeople. However, I spent quite a bit of time testing this camcorder. The PVDV101 is not a worthy alternative as a camcorder for several reasons.

First, the PV-DV101 is a MiniDV format digital camcorder. The Digital8 camcorders (generally sold by Sony) are a little cheaper for the tapes. On the other hand, the camcorders are a bit larger and a fair bit heavier. If you have old 8mm tapes you want to replay on a camcorder, Digital8 is probably the format for you. This was my first camcorder, so I went with the MiniDV format because of the weight difference, and also because the picture quality seemed a bit better.

One caveat about all of the PV-DV models: The digital zoom requires you to press a separate button, which is a bit awkward. That being said, it is rare (in my experience) that you will need zoom power in excess of 18X, which the 101 provides. The digital zoom is a bit of a marketing ploy. (By the way, the PVDV201 provides 20X optical zoom, a bit better)

If you have previously fallen for the Sony marketing blitz, and think that only Sony can make good consumer electronics, just shop the prices, and you will see Sony is...more for comparable features.

The picture quality on this model is not as good as others, like the PVDV201. I found this camcorder to okay in quality, but for slightly more money, the PVDV201 is a much better alternative.

A few additional concerns: (1) the digital still photos are okay for e-mails, nothing more; and (2) the picture quality is not as good as other similarly priced models.

I used to have a SONY Hi-8 (TRV 87). I think that produced far crisper images than this, supposedly "digital" PV-DV 101 from Panasonic. The picture quality here is unexpectedly grainy. Low light recording is awful, even with their low light setting turned on. Once the 20X optical zoom is at its max, digital zoom doesn't kick in automatically. You actually have to hit a digital zoom button to get it on. This can cause an awful interruption in your recording. Also, this camcorder doesn't come with an electric adapter (it is optional and you have to buy it separately). Thumbs down on my behalf. [The still photo shot was impressive, though!]

This is good video camera however it desperately needs more features. This is the perfect camera for a person who doesn't like special features. Despite the flaws, it is a great machine for the price!

To use the Elura 2 or 2 MC effectively you have to have the BP-422 or a third party battery. The standard battery is quite pathetic. If you have the big LCD screen open, you can literally see the battery life draining away as you shoot. Maybe 20 Min of life. Just sad.

Unless you have 5 of these batteries, you cannot even shoot a 60 minute tape. It is preposterous -- to have this battery as the standard for this video camera.

The whole reason for buying an Elura is it's SMALL. Same thing for this battery.

It runs the camera for about an 45 minutes. Am I taping the whole time? No. The camera uses energy when on whether taping or not, so it would be silly to ask Canon to predict how many actual minutes of tape will be shot.

I carry a spare in my pocket. (They're small, so it's no problem.)

stay clear. it is the worst software I have ever purchased.

I was really excited to try this product, but after hours and hours of frustration, I finally gave up. On the surface, the GUI interface is very slick and it seems like Studio 8 could do everything I wanted (record analog video, edit, and create VCD's). It has nice editing features that are fairly intuitive. However, the application locked up or crashed regularly (I installed v8.8). You can use the auto-save feature to help minimize loss of work. When it was running, I was constantly encountering little quirks and made the user's experience frustrating. Plus, it was painfully slow on my PC (P3, 1GHz, 384MB RAM, WinME). Pinnacle should reduce the GUI 'fanciness' and work on making it run faster and smoother. It seems that it would be a great product, if it worked as promised. My recommendation: Wait for Studio 10!

The card and software installation went smoothly. I burned my first test cd within 30 minutes. (about 10 minutes in length)
There is a few seconds pause when I click on a drop-down box, but other than that everything worked fine. My machine is a 1.73 ghz Athlon, 640 mb ram, Windows XP Home. I would suggest reading the manual and using a pretty fast computer.

I used this piece of junk to rewind one of many mini DV tapes for a client I was working with and it ate the tape. I had to take the cassette apart and spend two hours trying to gain back his precious memories. Tape is so precious when it's so fragile and cherished memories can be crumpled to a stringy mess but if that's the way you like 'em - go Maxell!
I too had all the problems listed in the other reviews! Before this, I bought Maxell's Hi-8 rewinder only to find out it does that same exact thing....eats tape.

It rewinded the first tape ok, except the START button wouldn't stay down. I had to keep the button down with my finger.
But on the second tape STOP button got stuck and somehow it eat the tape.

I got it from radio shack, it's going back there tomorrow.

I have to admit that I was tempted not to purchase this product after reading the reviews. But because it was a cheap enough risk, I went for it. My first attempt to use it failed! One of the buttons ( i forget which one) was stuck, and all I could think of was this problem sounding familiar, as if i had read it from one of the reviews.. So I felt pretty stupid.. but.. somehow i was able to "unstuck" the stuck button. Surprisingly, that was the only problem I've had.. I've had it for about 6 months now - i use it about twice a week, and am quite happy (knock on wood)..

Monster Cable makes a lot of great cables. I think they are most known for their stereo cabling which is of much higher gauge than generic speaker cables, and they have great cables for the RCA in and out jacks as well. These are all ANALOG signals, and the extra quality can (and does) make a huge difference.

On a digital connection, ambient interference is automatically filtered out. I don't own this item, but had to say I did in order to write a review. Cheap IEEE1394 cables are just as good. If you want to line the pockets of Monster Cable, replace that junky speaker cable you bought at Radio Shack!

I have just returned the Monster IEEE cable [...] after comparing it side by side with an inexpensive [...] cable. It is all marketing hype as far as IEEE link is concerned. {The less expensive} cable worked as good as the Monster Low Noise, Gas injected etc. cable. So do yourself a favor save some money.

Do not be fool by marketing and pay 4x more for the same result. Monster Cables are great for all ANALOG signals. You do not need gold connectors for DIGITAL data. A $10 cable will do exactly the same. Do not worry about noise on a 6-foot wire unless you are planning to loop this on a high voltage power wire. Technology is moving away from Monster Cable.

This product was a huge disappointment. The channel noise of the transmitter/receiver almost drowns out the speech signal. The Signal to Noise ratio is 10-15dB at best(useless), even with a higher quality replacement lapel microphone. When the same microphone was connected directly into the camcorder, the SNR was at least 40-50dB. I went back to the store to see if I had a defective unit, but the other unit I tried had the same characteristics.

I bought this for use with my Sony camcorder. I chose it because it was a 900 MHz system rather than the 100 MHz systems from Hysonic, etc. The included lapel mike is not very good. Lots of distortion and very cheaply made. I tried a better quality Radio Shack lapel mike, #33-3013 and got much better results. Compared to putting the mike right into the camcorder, the wireless transmitter shows considerably more noise and lower sound level. No noticeable difference in frequency response, at least for voice recording. Dropouts started occuring when I was about 50 feet away. Bottom line is this isn't broadcast quality but certainly adequate for amateur use.

This is possibly the worst "webcam" that has ever existed on this planet. For starters, unless you are using the camera in bright (and I mean solar-flare bright) light, you probably won't even get a recognizable image. Most of the time what you will see on your screen is a black and red mess moving at approximately 2 fps. Two frames every second is obviously way too slow for any kind of video, and the optics in this camera make it unsuitable even for still snapshots.

I originally purchased this cam because it was one of those free-after-rebate deals, but even the sales tax I had to pay was too much for this piece of junk.

If you want a usable webcam, buy a Logitech.

I purchased the program origionally without doing my homework. At the time it was an 'ok' camera, but I would never buy another one like this. The reason that I purchased it is due to the 'stitcher' program (for making 360' Quicktime video files)that was bundled with it. ~ At the same time "you get what you pay for". Most people want a high quality camera, but don't feel the $110 (or more) for that technology is worth the price. Even so...it would be nice if these 'low end' cameras would do a better job.

and I want my money back.
A friend of mine gave me this for X-mas and It seems to crash Paltalk all of time. Focus is always an issue and it seems to zoom the picture too much