|
|
Posted by Frank on 02/16/07 01:13
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:07:11 -0800, in 'rec.video.desktop',
in article <Re: MPEG4 Camcorders - any good?>,
Gene E. Bloch <spamfree@nobody.invalid> wrote:
>To Smarty - the older product is not HD, nor is it advertised as such.
>
>To Frank - I think it (my oder non HD model) is better than you say[1].
>It's suitable for someone who wants to have a video camera with them at
>all times. It takes useful pictures, but no, it isn't gong to compete
>with even the cheapest run of miniDV equipment.
>
>My own take is that it's really a still camera with video capabilities,
>not bad, but not really great in either mode. And as I stated before,
>its form factor and menus made it not work very well for me.
>
>BTW, I bought it at a very steep discount,which made it more palatable
>to me than it might have been.
LOL. Yes, I understand.
>[1] Maybe that just reflects our differing tastes or requirements :-)
HDCAM SR all the way, that's what I say! (Just kidding.)
>
>On 2/14/2007, Frank posted this:
>> Since we're top posting...
>>
>> Just wanted to say that the original Sanyo looked to me be an okay
>> product for teenagers doing Web video of the YouTube variety, but that
>> beyond that, it wasn't a serious product and shouldn't be taken
>> seriously.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:40:31 -0500, in 'rec.video.desktop',
>> in article <Re: MPEG4 Camcorders - any good?>,
>> "Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In the past, I have been able to find samples of the Sanyo "HD" video on the
>>> web, and have downloaded quite a few of them. I presume the newer, improved
>>> model will (and may already) have samples demonstrating its' performance.
>
><SNIP>
--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|