Digital-Camcorder Reviews

I actually borrowed a DCR-TRV720 from a friend to shoot my kid's school play. Then purchased a DCR-TRV330 which is smaller with a smaller LCD. The DCR-TRV720 was so much better I took the 330 back and purchased the older 720 model! The large LCD is great and I find the color viewfinder helpful.

The DCR-TRV720 has excellent video in good light. At low light levels it gets a bit noisy. The super low-light mode (NightShot) is amazing. You actually can video in NO LIGHT! It is a bit green (due to the infra-red) but compare that to getting no image at all.

When coupled with Adobe Premier and a firewire enabled computer you can produce near broadcast quality video.

The still image mode is too low resolution for anything other than quick snapshots for the web (640x480). But hey, its a digital video camera! Ideal for using with your computer to edit your video with no loss. The memory stick also allows for some special overlay effects I've yet to play with.

Overall I am very pleased. I found the image quality better than any other DV camera in it's price range. Battery life is GREAT! But you'll want to buy a second high-capacity battery...

Great camera, video recording is phenomanal and the 450x zoom is a fun feature not to mention all the cool filter options for recording and editing (solarized, B&W, etc.)... One thing though - it only records photo images resolution with 0.3 megapixels (640 x 480) that's a snapshot and can not really be manipulated on a computer(enlarged) with out revieling excessive pixelation. I reccommend 2.0 megapixel (1600 x 1200) at a minimum, it offers much more room for enlargement and manipulation of the photograph.

I am working with one of these 720's every day since 2.5 years and I think based on my experience that the 720 is one of the most beautiful and versatile camcorders ever built by Sony

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.

This was my first wireless mouse. To start off, physically, I didn't really like how the base station was so oddly shaped, hard to fit in somewhere. The mouse seemed a little big. Installation was super quick and easy. I had my mouse running in less than 10 minutes. No problems functioning except when it is low on battery life which seems quite often. It is a quality product, but changing the batteries annoy me. I have to replace my batteries every 3 months or so it seems. Overall, perfermance is excellent, just didn't like how it used up batteries so fast.

That's about it! No more wires all over the place, the wireless joysticks are great for playing away from the chairs! the keyboard never skips a bit! and the mouse is super accurate, best investment in wireless I ever made! Did I mention NO WIRES?!?! The mouse use to need a battery change every 5 or 6 months, then I changed to alkalines... they are still kickin'!

The base station does its job. It doesn't run on batteries as the mouse and gamepad does, but on an ac adapter like most electronics, so no need to worry about the battery dieing on you. The range on this is far, so I have it behind my computer where it doesn't get in the way and frees up desk space.
You only really need in front of you when setting up the wireless mouse, gamepad and/or keyboard for the first time.

Well, after a bit of a wait I finally replaced my Sony hi-8 camcorder with this hc85. It is amazing the amount of features that are packed into this package. I've had it for 48 and here's what I like so far.

Very sharp stills (in still mode) and obviously very sharp video. It works well in low light and the touch screen is very cool. I thought it would show a lot of finger prints from touching it but they're not that noticeable. The ability to do a still capture while shooting video is nice but the resolution is only 640x480 & is kind of lousy (haven't figured out how to change that one's resolution...or even if you can). As for still captures, it has all of your typical controls (red eye, forced flash, etc). I also like that the lense size is the same size as my old camera so I can use my old filters & wide-angle lense. There are a lot of capabilities & features which almost feels somewhat overwhelming when you're trying to capture images so I'm not so sure about the various modes & usefulness. I do like that it has the ability to take in an analog input and convert to digital so I'll be transferring my old hi-8 stuff to digital for storage on DVDs.

As for any weaknesses, I haven't found it yet, and I look forward to several years of use. Some items to note: It is twice the size of the PC line but then again you get a better lense & more features. The memory stick w/ it is useless (8mb) as well as the battery (it has a 1 hr & I have done several recharges already). These last two items are why I'm only giving 4 stars instead of 5. I don't even know why they give you an 8mb stick when they know it'll be tossed as soon as you open the box!? It can only hold 8 pictures @ max resolution!

Good luck & enjoy.

I bought this camcorder about a month ago after I bought the DCR-TRV70 which was not working properly. This Camcorder is so much easier to use than the TRV70 and I like the larger LCD screen. I'm still learning about the camera but, I don't like the still pictures. My 8 month old is always drooling and the stills have silver dots on all his wet spots. Also you have to have very good lighting in a room to make the videos bright enough. the video always seems very, very dark indoors. The only time this does not happen is in the mornings and early afternoon. I'm going to try a video light for 40.00 to see if this will correct the problem. I'm also having problems streaming my video into my computer but the memory card goes right in and it's tons of fun to take my mpg video's and e-mail them to family. Nobody has had a problem opening any of these videos on there end. I love the video but, if your used to really sharp 4x6 or 3x5 from a 3 or 4 megapixal camera you won't like the photos from the DCR-HC85.

I'm quite impressed with the new Sony DCR-HC85. I had been looking at some of the Panasonic 3CCD cameras in this price range as well as the Canon Optura Xi (which is a little more expensive). In the end I chose this camera for the following features:
* very large (and sharp) CCD for the price
* 0lux night shot mode, though somewhat gimmicky. grainy, and green in practice, is very effective for taking sleeping baby shots
* reputedly much higher reliability and better repair services (vs the Panasonic)
* large reflective/transmissive LCD that's highly visible in both dark and light
* many videophile-oriented features (more on that below).
* can operate as a webcam

Upsides:
* Though many online reviews have questioned whether or not the touchscreen-based interface is a good thing, I found it to be more than adequate for my needs. One of the first things I did was rearrange the menus with my favorite features up front. Very easy to do and makes the camera feel "customized". If the camera weren't capable of these customized personal menus, however, I'd imagine the somewhat slow and bulky interface would get pretty annoying.
* True anamorphic 16:9 widescreen functionality works great and is easily understood by video importing tools.
* Nice shape, easy to hold. I have shaky hands and prefer a slightly larger camera to hold onto.
* Its optical image stabilization is amazing. Once again, I have shaky hands and was worried about getting steady video. Exceeded my expectations on this point.
* Setting it up as a webcam was straightforward and the quality was great.
* Nightshot Plus is eerily effective. The video ain't gorgeous, but it sure does do the trick. I'd imagine that the accessory shoe-based IR light that Sony offers would improve the functionality of this feature even more.

Downsides:
* Camera comes with an 8MB card that can only realistically hold 8 photos. Kinda pointless unless one is just test-driving the feature.

* Camera comes with just a single FP50 lithium battery which doesn't hold enough power to record an entire 60min DV tape (unless, possibly, you turn off the LCD, use just the viewfinder, don't use anything on the accessory shoe, and film straight through without stopping). I guess that's what keeps the price down.
* Camera doesn't come with a FireWire cable. I was not able to use Windows Movie Maker 2 using just the included USB cable (although USB streaming with MSN Messenger worked great with that). I had plenty of FireWire cables in my bin of extra computer parts, but just don't see how you can get professional results without one.
* Though the camera supports both progressive scan and true anamorphic 16:9 widescreen (both features helpful in acheiving a film look with a digital video camera), you can't use them both at the same time.
* Some default settings are questionable (but easily changed). Why default to 4-track 12bit audio vs 2-track 16bit? Why default to beeping melodies on key presses? Some odd buttons on the default Personal Menu (which is what you customize).

Overall, I'm a big fan of this camera and would recommend it highly.

We bought this camcorder to record our children. We went with it based on reviews we'd read here on Amazon. It has lived up to our expectations. It's easy to use and takes really nice shots. The best part is being able to hook it up to our iMacDV with firewire and edit the footage.

This camcorder is an excellent product, as are all of the Sony range. Basically, it offers easily accessible and professional features in the guise of a consumer Digital 8 camcorder. The Picture and Digital functions are amazing and offer a discernable edge to home movie making. The Digital 8 format is fantastic, as it allows you to utilise existing Hi-8 tapes, and reduces the cost of tape purchases, given that the new Mini DV tapes are significantly more expensive. My only criticism of the product is that aside from not being the current model, it seems that the primary extra feature that this model offers over the lower models is that it has a larger sized LCD screen. Aside from that, this is an excellent product and quite possibly one of the best Digital camcorders on the market.

This is the first camcorder I've ever owned, and I love it! I looked at camcorders in several price ranges, but this one had all the features I could want with a price tag less than $1,000. The LCD is crisp and bright and the picture quality is nearly flawless. I've taped two family weddings with quality that is as good as professional work. Because it is a Sony, I look forward to many years of high-quality performance.

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.

I purchased this camera in Singapore last May and I paid $1100. I compaired this camera to literally hundreds. If you have ever been to Singapore you would know its the electronics super center of SE Asia. This camera didnt simply out perform other models like JVC, Sony and Canon. It destroyed the competition. Night vision on this camera is fantastic compared to the long list of others I tried. This model is user friendly with easy to follow directions. The Samsung website has fabulous tutorials of how to work this camera too. This is selling for a way lower price than I paid. Its a steal at this price. Get the camera and you will know what I mean by performance. The guy that wrote the 2 star review.. he must be writing about a Sony.

This product is great. It's a DIGITAL video camcorder and is just so smartly designed (controls on the back within easy reach, remote control can snap onto/into the camera, etc), for the price of a poor analog camera with less features. Everyone I've talked about the camera is nothing less than enthusiastic about the quality and value for the money. It even has an effect (unfortunately called Make-Up mode) that will only highlight one color (like in "Schindler's List", as CNET noted).

I do have to say that I'm very creeped out by the "Ray Chan" negative review here, in which he copied negative reviews from the CNET boards, and then pasted them (all put together) as his own negative review here on the Amazon site. On CNET, he's known as the "Sony freak", because he goes to all the Samsung products and gives them bad reviews in really bad English, while pushing Sony products. He's managed to bypass the bad English here on Amazon by taking other people's reviews as his own. You can see the negative reviews he copied at: http://reviews.cnet.com/Samsung_SC_D590/4852-6500_7-9879939.html?tag=box
Creepy ...

I first purchased a Sony IP5 and was very disappointed. I hesitated to purchase the SCD590 due to some negative reviews... but I also felt that the reviews may have been staged. Anyway... I bought the camcorder... and we love it. QUALITY is GREAT... and that means picture, features, ease of use, and mechanical. We've had our SCD590 for about 3 months.

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.