|
|
Posted by Smarty on 12/09/06 17:35
Quentin,
This question arose quite recently and became controversial. My opinion is
that low cost miniDV camcorders have evolved to the point where some very
adequate low light performance can be had for relatively little money. You
might take a look at one such possibility, the Canon Elura 100, which sells
for a bit over $300 in the U.S.
See:
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Elura-100-MiniDV-Camcorder/dp/B000DZH4D8
This camera has an automatically adjustable shutter speed and built-in video
light, both of which are designed to contribute to its good low light
performance. As you can see, the 42 people who reviewed it were very
satisfied with the camera, giving it a 4 out of 5 star rating. Other reviews
are also very favorable elsewhere.
There will be others on this forum who call a low cost solution like this a
bad choice, and recommend spending more, buying nothing, or finding a used
high end camcorder with better sensors, better optics, etc. If you have
access to a local source of used equipment from a reputable source, this may
be a better solution, but buying used camcorders on the Internet or from
unknown sources is a recipe for disaster in my view.
All (I repeat) ***ALL*** of the camcorders struggle in low light, and use
various techniques of bandwidth reduction, increased gain at the expense of
noise, and other strategies to provide a partial solution. There is a good
reason why supplemental lighting is used professionally, and "ordinary
bulbs" will not, even with the best camcorders, give excellent results.
Hope this helps,
Smarty
"mbp" <user@example.net> wrote in message
news:kXAeh.7236$kM2.4390@newsfe7-win.ntli.net...
> Hello
> I am looking to spend some cash on a miniDV camcorder
> I want to spend the lest <200
> Which one would you recommend for low-light, as in indoors lit by ordinary
> bulbs?
>
>
> TIA
>
> Quentin T.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|