Jump to content

Any brand mini DV camcorder recommended


soboyle www.oboylephoto.co

Recommended Posts

My Canon Elura 40 MC mini DV camcorder is on the fritz again, and

I'm sick of sending it in for repairs, can anyone comment on a brand

that tends to be more reliable than the others, Canon is normally

good quality, but perhaps their consumer video gear isn't up to the

standard of their still cameras? I'm looking to spend as lttle as

possible on a replacement, and was considering the Canon ZR-80MC

Mini DV Camcorder since B&H has it for $279.00, the price is right,

but will I end up with a repair nightmare as I have with the Elura?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Panasonic GS-12 that is about $350? that has worked well for me. In fact I have had several panasonic items that have served me well and better than the sony products I have owned. The Gs-12 is very light and easy to operate and I am sure that there are others as well. Personally, if a brand doesn't serve me well, I don't repeat the bad experience, I just buy another brand. However, statistics on the object in question are a much better way of choosing (vs. anecdotal evidence), so I would consult Consumer Reports or some such publication to find the brand requiring least repairs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you want to stick with mini DV, or would you buy a direct-to-DVD

model? According to Consumer Reports, Sony and Panasonic are most

reliable, Canon and especially JVC less reliable. In November 2004,

the Panasonic RM-70 was top-rated but expensive; the Sony TRV-260 was

a best buy. Personally I'd get the GS55 for 16:9 format, but its

picture quality is rated lower than the RM-70.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned four Sony camcorders and don't plan to buy any other brand. They are the professional standard at the high end.

 

You can save money by buying a different brand. Picture quality isn't really important with video, since the resolution is as low as the original digital cameras (480 pixels high) and the contrast range is also low.

 

Mini-DV is editable, whereas DVD is not so editable; DVD was designed as a delivery format, not a production format. (All movies need editing, or they are just too long and boring to ever be watched!)

 

"Brandon's Dad"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with another canon, this time a ZR-80 mini dv camcorder, price is dictating my decision, at $279 it's pretty cheap, and the fact that I have many Mini DV casettes I need to read in the future means I need another of the Mini DV format, otherwise I might have considered the Sony that was recommended. Hopefully I don't regret going with Canon a second time, their still cameras have treated me well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first camcorder, back in the '80's, was a Hi8 Canon. Ergonomically, I liked it better than its Sony replacement, but the Sony has a better picture (evolution of the technology over time, not necessarily attributable to brand).

 

The few extra features my Canon had were actually useful to a videographer. The extra features of my Sony are mostly useless; most of the special effects modes it offers are better done in post, anyway, but my Sony lacks the "matte" effect and stop-motion animation that the Canon had.

 

Canon has a legacy of understanding products targetted to photographers; Sony has a legacy of quality consumer electronics, but seem to lack the traditional photography orientation. This is changing, of course, but you'll have to choose what's more important.

 

For me, a camcorder that actually works, although lacking some ergonomics ideal to a videographer, is more essential than one that's broken. Which is why I currently have a Sony.

 

I should also mention that back in the late-1980's/early 1990's, when I was working full time in the consumer electronics field, Sony camcorders were much easier to service than Canon. I've recenly worked on newer Sony and Canons, and that seems to still hold true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any comments on the low light performance of the ZR-80?

 

I've been thinking of getting a small, cheap digicam and the ZR-80 seems like a good buy, not least because it can use the same battery pack as my EOS 20D which is a significant plus. However I see a bunch of comments on other sites that the low light performance really sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the ZR-80, and like it so far, @ $279 its as cheap as it gets for a digital video camera, and I'm glad to hear it takes the same batteries as the 20D, that will be handy. Will report on it once I'm back from Hawaii, which is why we bought it. Seems better than the Elura 40 I have, which needs repair again; quieter, not much bigger, better zoom, and I figure they have worked most of the bugs out of these ZR models by now since they have been in production for some time. I'm only sticking Canon tapes in this one, I suspect some of the tapes I used in the Elura have caused some of the problems. At least I can wag that in Canon's face it this camera has problems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

There seems to be a rash of CCD failures for the Canon ZR series of camcorders. My ZR70 died after less than 18 months of very light usage. It is hitting several of the models, not just the ZR70. There have been several messages posted at: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/bbs/forumdisplay.php?f=9

 

Look for the "black screen" message threads. The cost to repair the out of warranty units is approximately $165-175.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...