I have $2000 to spend on a camcorder, what should I get?

[videocheez]

I'm expecting my bi annual bonus in a couple of weeks and i want to buy a good cam corder that's good for shooting in low light and will work with an external mike. I would like to use the DVCAM media if possible because i heard good things about it but will consider minidv. I have been thinking about the Cannon GL2 but I thought i would take suggestions from the forum.

Thanks in advance,

VC

[adam]

Please post in the correct forum. This is not a guide.

[scottvf]

I have the Sony NTSC DCR-TRV50 Mini dv camcorder. It retailed 1,800 when I bought it (about 1 yr ago) And I found it for 1,400 online at www.bhphotovideo.com . Here is a review of it -> http://www.sony-digital-camcorders.com/review-DCR-TRV50.html
I love it. Great clear picture. Has widescreen option, digital camera, and video effects.

[lightbluecollar]

get the trv-80 lot better video resolution and is perfect for destop editing professional video if you have a good computer.

[AcuraTL]

If you are near a Microcenter, youc an get the Sony TRV950 for $1599 plus tax. They are having a sale.

[troyvcd1]

if you got 2000 you might as well go with the serious sony vx2000. All the other camcorders mentioned will leave you wanting more.

[FulciLives]

if you got 2000 you might as well go with the serious sony vx2000. All the other camcorders mentioned will leave you wanting more.

The SONY VX2000 is a "kick-ass" camcorder as is the CANAON GL2

Can't go wrong with either of these two champs.

It boils down to what you are using it for and the "look" that you want.

The SONY has a very SHARP image but some think that it is OVERLY sharp and looks too much like "VIDEO" whereas the CANON has a softer more "FILM" like look to it.

So if you are wanting to make your own mini-movies or whatever go with the CANON unless you want a sharper more documentary type look then go for the SONY.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[SLICK RICK]

I think the VX2000 is alot past his price range, if not post a link on where to get it cheaper. I am trying to save up, so that I can get one myself.

BEST BUY has them for 3,000$.

SLICK RICK

[ImaWeTodd]

Check out http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/

He compares a bunch of cams. Plus there is a ton of video info. It's a little out of date (6 months) but he does do the vx2000, trv950, and GL1.

[txpharoah]

Be sure to give bhphotovideo.com a try. They are VERY WELL RESPECTED supplier of video, audio, and photo equipment. Most of what I own comes from there, as well as much of our hardware at work.

And when it comes to video cameras, give digital CANON products a good look. Especially their pro series stuff. Panasonic or JVC for SVHS. And Sony for BetaCam SP.

[Jester700]

Yeah, the VX2000 is around $2500, but for serious quality, definitely popular. A cheaper and smaller option is the old TRV900. It's better in low light than the newer 950, though not up to VX2000 level.

Avoid single chippers, especiialy the "cute & tiny" ones. Low light performance will seriously suck.

[nsklanfra@libero.it]

How about JVC DV300? It is a very good camcorder: thre CCD 1/3" /470Kpixels heach (Made by Sony!), Zoom 14X (Canon Lens!!!) a good 12 bit analog/digital converter for better resolution.

It is in the professional gamma of camcorder.

I bought it yesterday, after a comparison against other model. Against the brand new Panasonic MX500 the resul were impressive. You may have a look at it.
Maybe it is a little bit overbudeget, but if you want the best....

[SaSi]

I'm looking for a Camcorder myself these days. Although $2000 where you live translate into 4500Euro where I do, I'm looking around the same models described.

I looked at the Canon MV650i. Lower cost, nice on paper and small. Offers a 22x optical zoom lens. Tried it for a couple of hours and the results range from excellent to disappointing. Night shot, well forget it. All you get is an indication that there is something happening. More like night goggle vision, not video.

I have also tried the Panasonic MX500. It flies. It has three CCD, and although I have yet to understand why and how 3 CCDs are better than one, I've seen that myself. Clarity is superb and colour balance outstanding. You need an expensive TV to realize the full quality. Looks much better on my EISO monitor than on my low cost small 21" TV. This one is a definate winner.

I am also flirting with the VX2000. It's expensive and I have not yet tried to see usability and image quality, however there is one thing that I consider a minus for this. It's BIG. REAL BIG. And heavy at 1.6 kg. My old Canon A1 still camera is that heavy after I put the motor drive, zoom lens and flash on. And it's not really comfortable to shoot with.
The Panasonic weighs 680gr. And using this one will not get you misinterpreted for TV Crew.

Well, just trying to find reasons to excuse myself for not spending 4300 Euro for a camcorder...

[videocheez]

Today after work I went to Fry's to try out the Sony VX 2000 and the Cannon GL2. I noticed what Fulcilives said about the Sony having a sharper picture at least through the LCD it was more crisp where the Cannon was a little fuzzier. I dont know if the LCD appearence is a good indication of what the final product will look like. The Cannon has a 20x optical zoom which was real nice compared to the Sony's 10x. I could read the price tags accross the store. I can't belive the price difference from the stores like Fry's and Ritz camera compared to some of the online distributors. I've seen as much as an $800 difference. I'll try them at Fry's but buy them online.

VC[/quote]

[FulciLives]

Today after work I went to Fry's to try out the Sony VX 2000 and the Cannon GL2. I noticed what Fulcilives said about the Sony having a sharper picture at least through the LCD it was more crisp where the Cannon was a little fuzzier. I dont know if the LCD appearence is a good indication of what the final product will look like. The Cannon has a 20x optical zoom which was real nice compared to the Sony's 10x. I could read the price tags accross the store. I can't belive the price difference from the stores like Fry's and Ritz camera compared to some of the online distributors. I've seen as much as an $800 difference. I'll try them at Fry's but buy them online.

VC

I'm no expert when it comes to camcorders but I have a couple friends that make a living shooting commercials and stuff like that and they much prefer the "look" of the Canon models such as the GL2 over the SONY because of the SONY looking "too sharp ... too much like VIDEO"

BTW if anyone has ever noticed it looks like they used the SONY (probably the model that the VX 2000 replaced) to shoot the JACKASS stuff for the MTV show so watching those might give you an idea of what a SONY looks like in practise.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
I agree with buying something like this on-line as the price difference between on-line sources and normal retails stores is just outragous.

[jessieqwert]

Going back to what videocheez asked LCD appearance is not an indicator of final quality. Especially for these pro models you have to look at the tape being reviewed on a tv or studio monitor. Whether or not you want a clear, crisp picture on your LCD to review is personal preference.

Now if you see a $200 camcorder with a really fuzzy looking screen thats a different matter

As for deciding between the Sony and the Canon the only criteria I can speak for is that the Canon looks like it will be lot more comfortable for extended periods of shooting. Its also cheaper by about $200 on average using pricegrabber.com

[/b]