Showing posts with label surveillance cameras. Show all posts
Showing posts with label surveillance cameras. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Pentax Optio S50 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom

Pentax Optio S50 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical ZoomBought this camera about 6mo ago. After ~2GB of pictures:

1. Decent quality you gotta understand that it is not SLR so for a compact it is OK. Viewing 100% size shows no visible defects.

2. Really small important since what good is your camera if it stays at home most of the time. That one fits in the pocket, but you'll feel it there.

3. Takes AA batteries good thing just in case

4. Has multiple modes and settings not too useful, but it doesn't hurt either.

---------------

Now for what could be better:

1. Slow as you would not believe shooting @5MP and best resolution. When this red light is blinking (writing to card) you can't do anything and it lasts forever.

2. Slow in general takes too long between you push the button and the picture being actually taken. Pple turn around, move out of frame and so on.

3. Buttons are tiny well, the camera is tiny too, but still...

If you plan to use gloves or just have large hands forget about it.

4. Battery usage I use rechargable 2400mAh ones and they don't last too long. Indoor shots almost always use a flash so battery indicator goes yellow after about 20-30 shots no matter how you recharge your batteries (there are different ways to do it)

Conclusion: It is worth the price if you need really small camera to take anywhere and want to stick with the combination of SD storage and regular AA batteries

I bought this camera after looking at several other cameras. I liked the size of the camera, Pentax name and claimed battery life. I think the color reproduction is ok, but not great, and the picture clarity is ok, but not great. Using 2400 mAh recharageble batteries made this camera almost useless. Since almost every shot requires a flash, I only would get 30 or so pictures before needing to switch batteries. And since NiMH batteries loose charge when not in use, I would find the batteried dead if I left the camera a few day. I have since purchased some 1400 mAh, Li-ion CRV3 rechargeble batteries. These are a must for anyone with this camera. I can't tell you how many pictures it gets per charge, because after 2 weeks it is still on the first charge, and has not even dropped from the full charge indicator! This is several hundred pictures, viewing and deleting pictures on the camera and transfering the picutes to a computer. As a bonus, since the CRV3 battery supplies a full 3V, the flash charges about twice as fast. (NiNM AA batteries are only 1.3 V each)

The main problem with the camera is how incredibly slow it is. This camera is mostly used to take pictures of our kids, and kids do not sit still enough for this camera. Every aspect of shooting a picture is very slow. The other draw back is that this camera needs a lot of light, and the flash doesn't help for anything more than a few feet (about 10 or so) away. Outside shots are usually fine if the sun is at least partially out.

I am currenly looking for a faster digital camera, with a bigger lens to help in low light situations.

Buy Pentax Optio S50 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom Now

I bought this camera as my first digital camera. its simplistic design and 5mp are what turned me on to this product. when i got it home and started to play with is i realized it had an abundance of features that i didn't notice at the store. it can take point and shoot pictures easily, it has a manual focus override, and you are able to take black and white or my personal favorite black, white and red! these are just a few of the features on this relatively inexpensive camera. to top it all off it takes really really good high resolution pictures that you'll think were taken by a professional.

Read Best Reviews of Pentax Optio S50 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom Here

I bought the Pentax S50 last December. I already own a Nikon 5700 but I was looking for a camera that I could:

a) take anywhere, and

b) take scuba diving

With its compact size and available underwater housing (and even supported "marine" modes) the Pentax seemed to fit the bill. I was actually undecided between the S50 and the Casio Exilim, so I actually ran a side-by-side comparison of the two. The S50 lost out in almost every discipline, the most important being picture quality (even though I was comparing to a 3MP Z30!), which I actually found to be quite poor on the S50. Apart from this, I was disappointed by the LCD screen, which was smaller and far less sharp than the Casio's, the larger size (although not by much) and the general build quality the buttons, flaps and doors just felt cheap compared to other cameras.

On the positive side, I did like the idea of being able to use standard AA's, but when you consider the amazing battery life of today's ultracompacts, it's really not an advantage. I was also impressed by the incredible array of features and options that the S50 packs in unfortunately, these don't make up for the poor picture quality. My advice would be to choose a Casio Exilim. If price is an issue, get the Z30 or Z40 you will still get better pictures.

Want Pentax Optio S50 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom Discount?

this is a great little camera. i bought it because of its size. it has some great features like being able to reduce the file size photos stored on it. panoramic assist is good and its very easy to use. it has some drawbacks too. red eye reduction always has to be used. the pictures are quite dark in low light settings and my biggest problem, low battery life. it uses 2 AA batteries. the rechargable batteries that came with it were charged for 12 hrs as recommended. i only got about 90 pictures out of them (16 were with

flash). it also takes a while to write the images to the disk( even with the enhanced SD II card)

but i still think its a great camera.

Save 41% Off

Monday, August 25, 2014

Cablesson 3 Feet Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Cable for Apple iMac

Cablesson 3 Feet Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Cable for Apple iMacThe cables, and have had no issue. I found this on another review so i think its important for Mac Dummys

For those of you who are having a hard time getting the audio to work:

* Your computer must support audio over the Mini DisplayPort. To find out if it does, go to System Profiler (option-click the Apple menu, System Profiler...), click the audio tab, and under the outputs should be listed: "HDMI / DisplayPort Output." If it is not listed, chances are your computer does not support it.

* You must select your TV as the output device. To do this, either option-click the audio menu icon and select it under "Audio Device:," or go to System Preferences (Apple menu -> System Preferences) -> Sound -> Output and select it. Hope this helps.

Just but the latest Mac 2012 version and bought this adapter as i have read extensively on these adapters.

Basically the confusion is that the new mac use thunderbolt and i can confirm i am running the video and the audio using this adapter.

I did have to enable the audio from the mac to the TV by going into system > audio.

Buy Cablesson 3 Feet Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Cable for Apple iMac Now

This product worked perfect to hook up a Mini Mac computer to a Gateway monitor. Great color and no adjustments were needed.

Read Best Reviews of Cablesson 3 Feet Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Cable for Apple iMac Here

Worked perfect for me i had to see on the internet now to enable the audio, i have pasted over here so others can follow too

List of Apple computer models (must be made after mid 2010) with audio pass through :

* MacBook 13-inch (MC516LL/A)

* MacBook Pro (MC374LL/A, MC375LL/A, MC371LL/A, MC372LL/A, MC373LL/A, MC024LL/A, MC700LL/A, MC700LL/A, MC721LL/A, MC723LL/A, MC724LL/A, MC725LL/A)

* MacBook Air (MC505LL/A, MC503LL/A)

* iMac 21.5-inch (MB950LL, MC508LL/A, MC509LL/A)

* iMac 27-inch (MB952LL/A, MB953LL/A, MC510LL/A, MC511LL/A)

* Mac Mini (Server) (MC270LL/A, MC438LL/A)

* Mac Pro(Server) (MC915LL/A, MC561LL/A, MC250LL/A)

* All thunderbolt models

After connecting this cable from your Mac computer to HDTV, please follow the below steps to send sound to HDTV:

1. Open Apple > System Preferences

2. Select 'Sound' with a speaker icon

3. Go under 'Select a device for sound output' section to find your HDTV is listed as an output device

4. Choose HDTV instead of built-in speaker as your audio outlet

Want Cablesson 3 Feet Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Cable for Apple iMac Discount?

Arrived yesterday. Works as advertised with my 2011 MacBook Air and OS X 10.7.4. Also sent video/sound through HDMI switch to my Denon AV receiver (has only 2 HDMI inputs) and then on to Samsung TV. Again, works properly. Would be helpful if instructions came for configuring Mac's Display and Sound settings through System Preferences had been included. Fortunately, info in other Amazon reviews and on web allowed me to properly set up the system. Key point for purchasers to know is that the cable must be connected to the TV (or AV receiver) BEFORE trying to change the Display and Sound settings. Your Mac will not give you the choices you need until the cable is connected. Hopefully, the cable will have a long lifespan...

Save 72% Off

Thursday, August 14, 2014

GTMax 6 FT Micro-HDMI to HDMI Cable for Pentax X-5, Optio WG-3, Optio WG-2, Optio WG-1, Optio WG-10

GTMax 6 FT Micro-HDMI to HDMI Cable for Pentax X-5, Optio WG-3, Optio WG-2, Optio WG-1, Optio WG-10 etc with *Cable Tie*This cable lets me view my photos taken with my Pentax X-5 camera right on a HDTV. This makes selecting which photo to transfer to my Mac much more efficient, I only transfer the best images. Viewing the photos on TV allows me to check the focus of each photo before transfer. Great Product, Great Service!

Save 80% Off

Thursday, July 3, 2014

HP DreamScreen 130 13-Inch Wireless Connected Screen

HP DreamScreen 130 13-Inch Wireless Connected ScreenLets first just get some things out of the way before I talk about the quality of what the device DOES do lets talk about what it does not, yet claims to do.

Downright Lies

--------------

The following quotes are from the HP site itself:

"The HP DreamScreen is a gateway to the Internet using your wireless network to access

weather info, Snapfish and your favorite web destinations."

This is just untrue. There is no integrated web browser. It has three web `apps' on it: SnapFish, Pandora, Facebook. That's it. It does not read RSS feeds, or do much of anything you probably want it to do, simple things like display news or recipes.

"Stay current with social network sites like Facebook"

`Like' facebook? There is only Facebook: nothing else.

"Be organized with a built-in alarm clock & calendar."

This is laughable. Wondering how to sync the calendar with outlook or google or anything; maybe even just add appointments, I finally consulted their online documentation. Here, seriously, is the feature list for the calendar `app':

"View the current month, press right or left to view the next or previous month."

BWAH HA HA HA... *sigh*

"Touch-enabled controls--Get fast, easy access to information and entertainment with simple touch controls embedded in the display"

This is referring to some buttons around the bezel of the screen and is just so untrue they would have to change the marketing campaign in Europe or get sued. This does however remind me of the old In Living Color sketch where the handcapped superhero always says he is `not handicapped, but HANDY-CAPABLE!'.

"Videos--Watch home movies and video clips in full screen Its simple!"

It's as simple as taking your video, recompressing it to a supported video codec, resizing it to a specific resolution, and then physically transferring it ot the device -so simple grandma could do it! (with gordian knot, virtualdub, CCCP, and all those other video tools she has)

The Screen

----------

Resolution

The thing is a frickin' 300 dollar photo frame, but it's resolution is 800 x 480, this equates to 0.38 megapixels, at the time the frame came out, the average cheap point n shoot ranks 9 to 10 megapixels: this is well over twenty times the resolution of the screen!

Because of this, it can take 10 full seconds to load a photo and downsample it to 800 pixels from it's original resolution. This makes browsing photos a pain, and loading photos from your camera cards nearly useless. Power users will use photoshop or xnView to batch all their content to 800 pixels.

There is aliasing galore, as 800 pixels is the resolution of many phones and handheld devices, not 13' photo frames!

NOTE: The official specs on the HP website and elsewhere say the DreamScreen 130 is 800 x 480, however, it's own documentation on the CD is came with claims a resolution of 1280 x 800. I called HP and they confirmed the lower resolution for the DreamScreen 130. There may be a middle road as some sites report: "13.3' Widescreen800 x 480 pixels upscaling to 1280 x 800 pixels", which would mean you purchased a 1280×800 screen and they didnt feel like making the software go higher res for the more expensive display. Jesus.

Color Reproduction

It is a cheap TN panel, the gamma of your images widely fluctuates depending on the angle they are viewed. I would be ok if they had a low resolution but used a nice IPS, SIPS, or OLED panel, but this is just unremarkable. The black point is a dark shade of grey, in all seriousness, the panel quality seems on par with something like the panels they use in the dashboard of a Prius, or other industrial UI readouts.

Streaming / Network

Streaming requires lots of Microsoft Windows Media software and services running on a PC server in your house that is always on, they relied on this instead of doing the footwork themselves. If you were under the impression from their marketing that it could read files off samba shares or work with Macintosh, you would be wrong.

Software / User Interface

The software is pretty terrible. It is very clunky and unresponsive. Many times it does not recognize that physical media has been inserted and must be rebooted. The UI graphics themselves show terrible compression artifacts.

When you bring up the on screen keyboard to type in, say, the name of the device, it clearly shows buttons like [ [ [.com], and others to make it easier to browse the web, however there is no web browser! There are other places in the print ads and UI itself that refer to features the device just does not have!

"Touch Screen"

The device claims to have a `touch sensitive screen', and IT DOES! A small area around the bezel of the screen has botons that can be pressed/touched! This product is in NO WAY a touch screen device, and has no touch sensitivity, other than the buttons on the bezel, the marketing is a lie.

Open Source?

On the CD that ships with it, they have a ton of readme files showing they used a lot of GPL'd code, however the source installer did not work on my windows 7, x64.

Conclusion

Pros:

* They used Linux and GPL'd code so they will have to release theirs soon, hopefully it will be taken under the wing of the open source community and all these issues can be fixed by hard working college students and kids in their spare time.

* The packaging/box is very high quality with a great look and feel

Cons:

* The screen is low res and low quality

* The device is way overpriced for the quality of it's screen and software

* The docs and UI refer to features that just do not exist

* No battery, it must always remain plugged into the wall

* Super-glossy, all you may be seeing is windows!

* Software-wise, the average cellphone is vastly superior in extensibility and quality (browsing photos, playing mp3s, videos...)

* The UI looks like a rip of cell phone UIs, but only in pictures... There are no smooth animated transitions, nothing in common with the user interfaces they seemed to want to copy. To an experienced person, the UI feels like something HP outsourced to Asia and sent them a poor art-bible of the end product they were expecting...

* The device seems unfinished

Photos look great on this and the widgets seem to work pretty well, though you're restricted to those that HP wanted to install. No Flickr? But there are serious problems here. Everything takes a LONG time. Opening up Settings seems to take much of a minute (okay, closer to 15 seconds). It's slow. And the user interface? It looks like it was designed to be a touch screen interface but then that turned out to be too expensive. So you're always scrolling around the screen getting to exit and open buttons. It's pretty painful.

Pros:

Looks nice

Good resolution

The Internet Radio bit seems to work well

Cons:

SLOW!!!

Only the widgets that HP wants

Dreadful and painful user interface, you're just going to be unhappy working with it

Bugs all over the place (radio station genres, spelling errors, sometimes the slideshow button works, other times it doesn't)

I'd wait for version two of this. Let the bugs get fixed, have them improve the user interface, get some more widget options, and install a faster processor. Then it'll be worth something like the asking price.

Buy HP DreamScreen 130 13-Inch Wireless Connected Screen Now

I got this for my mom as a Christmas present. I got her a Westinghouse 14 inch frame a couple of years ago and that set the size bar pretty high. With the HP Dreamscreen I hoped to improve upon the previous frame in several areas.

With the previous frame, found that having a digital frame is a lot of work if you have to change out the pictures on a memory card all the time especially if you don't live near your parents. So I was hoping to find a way to do this remotely. The Snapfish option sounded promising (but why no flickr, photobucket or imageshack?). Facebook seemed sketchier to me, as Facebook already crunches your photos when you upload them and doesn't even present them THAT well on a PC screen.

We finally settled on the snapfish option and save the images at 800x480 and that works very well. I am very pleased with the images on the screen. The odd size is a bit of a problem, but overall the images look great and are crisp and bright.

Pandora radio is pretty cool. The sound is above average but it only goes so loud and starts to get tinny at higher volumes. It is a neat "gee-whiz" feature though. I haven't played with HP radio yet.

Facebook has been buggy for me. I even updated to the latest firmware when I fired the frame up for the first time (and another bright spot was that the frame logged onto my wi-fi flawlessly and easily.) But Facebook is SLOW and the pictures don't look great from Facebook, as I suspected they would not. The Facebook feature would actually make the frame worth buying for that alone if only those pictures were better quality.

The remote control works well, the controls are ok. Not great, but there are worse out there.

I spent a bit of time trying to change the slideshow settings for the Snapfish account before I realized that you have to be in the PHOTOS section. Press options there and you change the transition, length of time each photo shows on the frame and various photo options for ALL of the different modules (facebook, snapfish, etc...)

One good point to HP is the packaging. When you open the frame, it is almost like opening a jewelry case. The box is well designed and everything inside is protected nicely and the presentation is outstanding. If the product lived up to the packaging it would get 5 stars all the way! As it is, I would rate this as 3 stars if you are looking for more than a picture frame, but as a wireless digital frame, it is a five star unit and it has exceeded my expectations.

Read Best Reviews of HP DreamScreen 130 13-Inch Wireless Connected Screen Here

After reading some of the reviews, I had low expectations. This is a great piece of gear. It really is no slower than your home pc would be. It is a great device for streaming music, photos, etc. The internet radio is worth the price. Hook to your stereo system and listen to hundreds of stations, many with cd quality. If you have a home network set up this is nothing else that compares. I have owned mine for only a couple of weeks and there have been 2 firmware upgrades which added enhanced features.

Want HP DreamScreen 130 13-Inch Wireless Connected Screen Discount?

Sadly, the digital photo frame market is mostly flooded with no-name products that are seriously lacking in several areas. One would expect a "world class" company like HP could offer a much better product, but so far as several others have reported in their reviews, HP has largely failed. This product looks great on paper but is disappointing in reality.

Consider this: You can buy (from HP no less) a very nice complete netbook computer with a better higher resolution screen, a much faster processor, WiFi, a full keyboard, expensive Li-Ion battery, hard drive, etc. for the SAME PRICE as this photo frame which has none of those things. So why does HP use a substandard 800 pixel display that makes your photos fuzzy? Why do they use a little toy processor that makes everything so slow as to be painful? Why isn't there a motion detector to turn the frame off when nobody has been in the room for a while to save energy?

Why also, isn't this device UPnP-AV or DLNA compliant so it can automatically pull pictures off your PC, NAS or home server? Other less expensive devices offer this functionality. The "internet" features of this device are severely limited. You can buy devices at a third of the price that do much more (but granted have a smaller screen). And you can buy devices at a third of the price with a better, higher resolution screen, than the DreamScreen.

I would suggest waiting until more companies figure out the "high end" digital frame market. There are new wireless offerings from Buffalo, D-Link and others that conform to home media standards (UPnP and/or DLNA) that put the DreamScreen to shame and can do much more. Hopefully such competition will force HP, and others, to get their act together.

Sunday, June 8, 2014

Supereyes 2.0MP 0.1~400X Handheld Easy Control USB Digital Microscope Loupe Magnifier with LED and

Supereyes 2.0MP 0.1~400X Handheld Easy Control USB Digital Microscope Loupe Magnifier with LED and StandI have both Mac and PC, this elegant piece works on both of them, Win 8 32 bit and Mac OS X 10.8.2. They have a mini software CD but for Windows only. It didn't really bother me since I don't have DVD-ROM in my netbook. So I download the software from the website: On Mac, I use Photo Booth to open it. It is so simple to use!

I like the way of the manual focus control. You could push the black button up and down to find the focus, so only one hand is in need. The image quality is very good! I use it to check my acnes, and found a lot of hidden pimples, which I am unable to see on a mirror. There is a shoot button on the device. If you want to take a photo, you could click the button without move your hands to the mouse. But based on my test, the button only works for Windows, not for Mac. The LED adjust button works on both systems.

I also used it to check my coin collections. The microscope clearly shows the scratch on coins. I guess it has some sort of "auto light balance", since it will adjust the brightness automatically to match the light reflection from the coins.

I am very satisfied with my purchase! Definitely 5 stars! But I do hope the manufacture could provide more colors.

~

I've ordered hundreds of items on Amazon in recent years; most products have been great, occasionally some not-so-great, and very few have been inferior products. This is the first one that was so bad it compelled me to leave a review.

Call me unreasonable, but when you realize ten minutes after the UPS guy left that the software seems only to install in an Asian language, and then the tripod literally comes brand new out of the case in a half dozen little broken plastic pieces (the threaded tripod mount was in fragments of the cheapest, grittiest, shoddily-made plastic I've ever felt therefore no way to mount the scope), it's safe to assume I don't need to go any further with the camera itself before I package the whole thing back up and get it ready for return.

Not that it matters at this point, but additionally, you need a lighted magnifying glass to read the poorly written instruction manual (I'm young and have 20-15 vision in both eyes), The broken-English disclaimer card in the case that asks you to contact them to work out any problems before leaving negative feedback suggests to me they already know how unreliable and cheap the product they're selling is. I was really hoping this would be a good product, and I understand there are good ones out there, this just isn't one.

This is a Mickey-Mouse, unprofessional pile of cheaply made Asian junk in a box. Shame on this manufacturer.

Buy Supereyes 2.0MP 0.1~400X Handheld Easy Control USB Digital Microscope Loupe Magnifier with LED and Now

Friday, June 6, 2014

Vanco 280532 HDMI Over Category 5e Cable Extender

Vanco 280532 HDMI Over Category 5e Cable ExtenderThis is my 4th Vanco product and again very pleased. 115' run of CAT5e with perfect picture at 1080P between PC and monitor/big-screen. Have also used the same product for another install at 100' CAT5e. Yet, another install using the Vanco 280723 HDMI Cat5 Balun/Extender Kit with IR (two CAT5e cables) @ 100' with perfect results. If all else fails go with Vanco and hi-quality CAT cable.

Save 44% Off

Monday, May 26, 2014

Canon EOS 1D Mark IV 16.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and 1080p HD Video (Body Only)

Canon EOS 1D Mark IV 16.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and 1080p HD VideoI had the Mark IV on order with Amazon since Canon's product announcement on October 20th of 2009. Since my local camera shop received the unit on Monday January 4, 2010 and Amazon still listed it as "Not Yet Received" I purchased mine from the local retailer despite the additional $464 in sales tax.

I have been a Mark III shooter since June of 2007. For my professional work, my primary subject matter is live theatrical performance which includes acting as well as dancing ranging from ballet to traditional Tango to the very fast paced ballroom, specifically shooting Burn the Floor, which is just completing their Broadway run this month. Live performance shooting has many of the same elements of sports photography, except the lighting is much lower and at times more severe due to stage lighting. My Mark III performed well in most instances although I did have occasions where the autofocus did not perform as well as I had hoped. But to be fair, I cannot say with 100% certainty that it was the fault of the gear or the user, me.

For my non professional work I utilized the Mark III for extensive street shooting in the rain, high wind and many other adverse conditions. In all cases the camera performed well enough that I could only blame myself in those instances where I didn't get the shot. This includes night shooting of high movement subject matter.

I have never been concerned about the 10.1 MP size of the Mark III having had many of my images blown up to 6x8 feet posters used on the outside of theatres and large shots used in four color programs. I had several concerns with the Mark III which I had hoped would be addressed in its successor, the Mark IV:

1. A higher ISO range with equal or less noise

2. The ability for the focus point to switch when changing from landscape to portrait orientation. Although the Custom Function allows one to change the rear wheel to adjust the focus point, I prefer to use that dial to adjust for exposure. Having to switch in a very fast paced situation caused me to miss some great shots.

3. More selection of focus points for manual focus point adjustment

Other than those three wishes, I was happy with my Mark III. In all three cases, the Mark IV met my wishes. I have done a comparison in low light, low contrast situations with both Marks at ISO 6400, which for the Mark III was considered H1. As such, adjusting the ISO from 3200 to 6400 was not possible in 1/3 stop increments. More on that later. In the comparison, the Mark IV handily beats the Mark III in terms of detail and noise at ISO 6400. Much more detail is visible which has something to do with a higher MP count, but at 100% crops, there is a marked difference. The noise on the Mark IV is less and of a different quality than the Mark III, more film like than digital.

During performances I had only used ISO 6400 in conditions which made lower settings impossible. I have always thought that a noisy shot is much better than one that is blurred beyond usage. My clients agree. One of my favorite lenses to use while shooting on stage as well as from the house is the EF 24-105mm f4.0 IS L. The focal range on a 1.3 crop sensor is just PERFECT, but the slowness of the f4.0 kept me from utilizing that lens with the Mark III unless lighting was sufficient. This will all change with the Mark IV as ISO 6400 is just fine using a f4.0 lens in my conditions.

Keep in mind that everyone needs to decide how a camera is to be used, under what conditions and it is naive to think that an investment in current glass won't influence a decision to stay or leave any brand of camera. I am heavily invested in Canon glass and all of them are L series lenses. I find that the color and sharpness of L series lenses are worth the investment, especially since I purchase most of them on the used market. There are folks who love to go back and forth on brand, pixel snooping, stats, etc. in hopes of proving themselves 'right.' I am NOT one of those people. To me a mediocre/poor/boring image is the same whether you take it with film, a full frame DSLR or medium format camera. (BTW, I'm not sure why 35mm is considered FF anyway. I consider 2.25x2.25 my idea of full frame!) My personal opinion is those who often argue ad naseum about camera stats take the lousy or boring pictures anyway.

I have NOT been able to use the camera in high movement, low light performance photography as I write this. My first opportunity for that comes this weekend. It will also be the first time I have the chance to shoot with two separate cameras with different lenses attached. That will give me a good, but not scientific comparison of the cameras, but more important for me is whether keeping both is worth the effort. I will decide if the Mark III gets a new home or not.

My advice is to base your hard earned purchasing dollars on what is right for your situation. My Mark III has performed well in the past and I'm confident after some of my own testing that the Mark IV is even better. Time will tell and as I gain more experience shooting with this new tool, I may add my insights here in the future. Best of luck with your own shooting!

UPDATE January 9 2010

Today I had my first opportunity to shoot in low light with the Mark IV. Although it was NOT as high movement/low light as I am accustomed, it was a very good initial test. I shot a choral group with musicians, so movement was nice and slow, except for the conductor. It was also the first time I was able to use two camera bodies without switching lenses. On the Mark III, I used a EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS and on the Mark IV, I utilized the EF 24-105 f4.0 L IS. This focal range allowed me to cover all that was necessary. Obviously I used the f4.0 on the Mark IV because of its higher ISO range and noise performance.

I want to say that it will take some adjustments moving to the Mark IV. As I reviewed some images from other photographers using the Mark IV prior to receiving my own camera I had no idea what conditions the photographer's lighting conditions presented. I can say that because of the new sensor and ISO performance, it makes scenes appear MUCH more well lit than I experience with my human eye. In the past I have run -1/3 to -2/3 EV when using my Mark III to prevent blow out in highlights even using Highlight Tone Priority. Tonight I set both cameras on 0 EV to compare. The Mark IV presents a brighter image, about 1/3 stop brighter than the Mark III.

Because this was not a paid gig, I took more chances with the imagery than had it been for pay. I found that in camera Noise reduction of 1 Low suits my taste much better than -0 Standard in the Custom Settings function. There is a different quality to the noise produced at Standard over Low. I prefer Canon's Low setting, but your preference may differ. The highest I found it necessary to set the ISO tonight was at 10,000. Upon examining the images on my monitor, there is the most noise in the subtle shadow areas around the subject's chin and lower neck. This is normal in my experience along with noise in large solid color backgrounds. But the noise at 10,000 is easily much better than the Mark III at ISO 6400. In addition the detail that remains at 10,000 eclipses the detail, or lack of detail in the Mark III at 6400. I measure my detail in the hairline wrinkles around the eyes and in the forehead of my subjects. The Mark IV sustained those details where the Mark III at 2/3 stops lower ISO did not.

Also the noise produced by the Mark IV is more chroma than luminance. In my workflow, chroma noise is MUCH easier to reduce than luminance noise. The dynamic range of the Mark IV in terms of color is FAR superior to the Mark III, but I attribute this to a new sensor and new processors. Camera bodies are really just like computers, as soon as they come out they immediately begin to become obsolete. The color and white balance are MUCH better than my Mark III. It still takes some adjustment, but much less than the III.

The automatic focus point association between landscape and portrait is a God send! Also the Mark IV takes advantage of UDMA card speed. I purchased a 32gb Sandisk Extreme CF card for the Mark IV and it's rated at 60mb per second. In shooting RAW burst, the ability of the Mark IV to write to the card after the buffer is full is easily three times as fast as the Mark III, but to be fair the III doesn't have UDMA capability.

So far so good. I plan to keep my Mark III simply because shooting with two cameras with different focal length lenses is the only way to go for my work. At some point I will replace the Mark III with another IV, but that will take time and a few more clients. It will be interesting to see how the images look at high ISO in large format, which much of my work is used as with clients. I'm happy with my choice so far and anticipate that more work in my normal venues will continue to show favorable results.

My issue is now how to build up my neck to support two 1D bodies with a 70-200 on one and a 24-105 on the other! When I use my 28-70 in place of the 24-105 it's going to be a real pain!

FINAL UPDATE: January 17 2010

Tonight I had my first opportunity to shoot a theatrical performance with the IV. I can only say that Auto ISO along with AI Servo will change how I shoot theatre. The settings I used tonight were Highlight Priority On, AI Servo, single shot, Auto ISO, ISO range L to 12800. The lenses I used tonight were the EF 24-105 f4 L IS and the EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS. Anticipation is such a major part of theatrical shooting, waiting for just the right expression, gesture and moment. I was able to capture images tonight with a clarity that I have not experienced with my Mark III. Auto ISO constrained within the parameters I wanted left me free to concentrate entirely on capturing the moment while retaining a speed proportionate to the focal length. By freeing me up from keeping an eye on the shutter speed, which was set by the Auto ISO, I was able to compose my shots more accurately. Using AI Servo for my focusing also allowed me to follow the subject and keep them in focus just before pressing the shutter. I watched and anticipated their expressions like never before.

The ISO varied between a low of 800 in very good stage lighting to a high of 12800 in those scenes where it was too dark for me to know the actor's expression. I ran an EV value between -.33 to -1.0 to compensate for harsh spot lighting, so common in stage work. In those cases where the shot was very dark, where the actor's face was shaded in a very dark manner, ISO 12800's noise is very visible, but not to the point where a noise processor will bring the image back to usefulness. In those cases where light is medium, I will NOT have to use noise reduction post processing for printed images in large format.

So with my last entry I will simply say that I am pleased to have made an investment in the new Mark IV. It surpasses my Mark III in a way that will now allow me to press the limits of my ability to capture even more compelling imagery. And in my work, an image that moves the viewer is one I'm proud to produce, regardless of the equipment. The Mark IV will certainly push my own skill limits in a way I'm happy to undertake. It's a tool that will help expand the level of my own creative process.

Best of luck to all of you in whatever you decide to purchase and shoot. It's time for me to get back to work.

UPDATE February 28 2010

I'm not sure how many of you who own the Mark IV have upgraded your firmware to 1.0.6, but if you haven't, I would recommend the update. Although Canon has not released specifics about the update I can tell you that from personal experience, it helps to track objects that pause for 1-2 seconds before moving. Prior to the update I noticed that when a performer paused, the AI Servo mode hunted a bit attempting to stay on the same trajectory as the subject's last known movement. With 1.0.6, that pause causes the camera to hunt much less than before. I have now had the chance to use the Mark IV in two live theatrical performances, one publicity shoot, low light street shooting and one wedding. (My gawd I hate it when I get coerced into shooting the occasional wedding, but when my regular clients 'ask' what is a guy to do?) and the image quality along with high ISO performance is remarkable. In real world applications ISO up to 10000 is very usable for print in large format.

In addition, having studied Canon's guide for AI Servo and High ISO usage is necessary in order to customize the camera for specific applications. I highly recommend reviewing the material. You can download the PDF from Canon Rumors at this link:

You'll have to scroll down a bit for the link to the PDF.

UPDATE May 4 2010 Noise performance with Adobe Photoshop CS5

Having used this rig for quite some time now in various low light/high movement situations I wanted to comment that I have avoided the use of the higher range of ISO, specifically H1, 2 and 3. In those cases where I wished to reduce the noise levels in post processing taken at ISO 12800 I had used Noise Ninja with good results. I recently purchased Adobe's new Photoshop CS5 and decided to process some images taken at H1 and H2 through their Camera RAW noise reduction scheme.

Obviously the quality of light has a large bearing on the amount of noise in any high ISO image. But I can say that using the new Camera RAW noise reduction in CS5 now allows me to use both H1 and H2 ISO on many more 'non emergency' situations. In the past Noise Ninja did not yield acceptable results at H1 or 2, blurring the detail beyond my acceptance level. CS5 removes that obstacle and I now find that shots taken at H1 (ISO 25600) are VERY useful both in print and on the web. H2 at 51200 are also useful when run through the noise reduction program. Yes, there is noise and if one is expecting a very low level of noise I would recommend you NOT venture into those ranges. But if like me you are sometimes REQUIRED to get a shot that captures the moment in more than acceptable fashion, I highly recommend the use of CS5's Camera RAW noise reduction with the Mark IV. It is a combination that has allowed me to capture and produce imagery like never before.

(Edited to fix my poor grammar and reword a few things to be more clear)

The 1D mk III was my first 1-series body. Before that I had, in reverse order, a 5D, a 20D, and 300D. Each step along the way was nicer and nicer. I couldn't imagine a better camera than my 1D mk III, but now I have it.

Over time (mostly through reading about the camera) I learned that my mk III had poor autofocus. I had an early version with the defect, but also because the mk III apparently did not live up to the autofocus of the 1D mk IIn. I had the defect fixed, and my auto focus was better, but still not as good, or so I had read, as the mk IIn autofocus. I can attest that I certainly felt frustrated with the mk III autofocus on a regular basis.

I haven't been to a sporting event yet, so I can't speak to that kind of focusing, but in good light with a stationary subject my gut feeling is that, yes, focusing is better in the mk IV than it was in the mk III. I can also attest that in near darkness conditions, such as when I can't even see my subject (and a 1.2 lens), the autofocus is astounding. Astounding there is relative; in this case I mean it often acquires focus, which is quite a feat in near total darkness.

This camera is 16MP instead of 10MP, but so far I haven't noticed much of a different in quality from the smaller photosites. Canon said the microlenses were an improvement, and I'm quite willing to believe them.

My ReallyRightStuff L-bracket from my mk III fits perfectly, which is a nice bonus. It uses the same batteries as my mk III was well. The mk IV doesn't come with a wall adapter like the mk III did, but I have a mk III so it wasn't a terrible loss for me.

The battery life is supposedly down with the larger sensor. Canon claims something like 1200 shots I think, while the mk III supposedly got 1900. I know I usually got 7000 per battery if I drained a battery over a few months, or about 12000 if I shot a major event in a single day. While the battery performance still seems good (I didn't start with a fresh battery, and I've been out in the cold a lot with it), it is definitely not as long-lived as in a mk III body. The battery smart-logic only understand shutters, and doesn't keep track of video, so shooting movies will play havok with matching up a shot count to the battery life.

The aesthetics of the menu system are much improved. It is basically the same menus as the mk III, but they feel more polished now.

The high iso is, well, high. I won't lie to you: at H3 you get something barely above garbage out of the camera; but you get something! It's absolutely astounding to be able to shoot in that much darkness. H2 is pretty bad, and H1 is kind of all-right. And I haven't found anything that needed any of the H modes; 12800 has been more than adequate for playing around in. I'm quite happy with the exended ISO, and noise at that level is something I expect. The camera can be pushed further with H3 than I even pushed B&W film, and the results are quite good for the circumstances.

When you stick to ISO 12800 or lower the results are quite spectacular. My gut feeling was that 12800 is about as good as 3200 on the 1D mk III, but I hadn't specifically compared them to see. I've uploaded a comparison picture to Amazon showing two shots that compare the ISO. The mk IV 12800 definitely seems to be better than the mk III H1 (6400).

I like the new rotation-selectable AF points. I like the new corner brightening options.

The video I've barely played with. Auto focus in video sucks, so you need to manual focus. The lack of a level control on audio-in is a serious deficiency. The video does look good though. I've barely played with it though, and I've never owned a video camera (I've only owned a film-based movie camera), so I'm not sure what I can say about it. I do know that it takes a long time to upload a minute of Full HD to YouTube.

I guess that is all I can think of at the moment.

I like my new camera.

Buy Canon EOS 1D Mark IV 16.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and 1080p HD Video (Body Only) Now

I have been a Canon shooter for a while now but seriously considered jumping to Nikon with the release of the D3. I stuck it out with my 1D3 which, despite the negative reviews, performed exceptionally well for me.

When the D3S released it was all I could do to resist hitting the "buy" button. I wanted to see what the 1D4 specs looked like before I made my mind up to either stay with Canon or do like many other Canon pro body shooters and make the switch to Nikon.

The 1D4 released and I liked the specs, so I bought the camera. I was one of the first in the US to get my hands on a 1D4, I received mine at the end of January when the first few bodies landed. I've been shooting with it for a month now and I can say, it's an amazing body.

AF:

The autofocus system is noticeably superior to the 1D3's, which was outstanding to begin with. My 1D3 didn't have the sub-mirror problem that plagued other users, so in that respect I was lucky. My 1D3 had its quirks, like losing focus on subjects rapidly approaching or not really doing so well in very low light. The 1D4 not only remedies these quirks of the 1D3, it goes even further and takes an already great body and makes it exceptional. I've shot basketball games in dimly lit stadiums, I've shot outdoor (albeit winter) sports, I've shot birds, I've shot in studio and each and every time I'm impressed with the 1D4's performance.

ISO:

The high ISO is good, but not what I had hoped. I mean, with a little noise reduction in post processing I can easily get beautiful images at ISO 12800. Anything past 12800 and the images are for the most part unusable. There is some chroma noise at ISO 6400 and above, but the luminance noise is more noticeable. Despite having some grain to the 6400+ images there is amazing detail in the high ISO images. They clean up very nicely and produce print quality work. It is about 1 stop better performance than my 1D3, which is good. It's about even with my 5D2 with the slight advantage going to the 5D2. But the fact that it's close is amazing.

Controls:

I really like the new features like being able to register two different AF points based on camera orientation. I also like being able to have two AF points registered for each orientation. I can select two points in the horizontal position for example and while shooting hit the AE Lock button and toggle between them instantly. This is very helpful when shooting sports and other events. The ability to use the joystick to quickly select a new AF point is also a nice touch, one that I use often. The lack of a video button seems a bit odd (such as the one found on the 7D) but I don't really use the video function on DSLR's, so this is a moot point for me. Aside from a few under the hood changes, the controls are quite similar to the 1D3 cosmetically, something that's kind of comforting to long time 1D shooters.

Auto ISO:

This feature finally made it to the 1 series and I LOVE IT. I've never worried about Auto ISO in the past, mostly because Canon never really offered a solid implementation. I've been using it on my 1D4 and all I can say is "nice job!" It's very useful.

Overall:

I would say that the 1D4 is more of a 1D3n release. True, it does have a totally new 39 point cross-type sensor AF system and a vastly improved LCD screen along with some other tweaks, but nothing really all that different from the 1D3 that it replaces. I am very happy with the upgrade from the 1D3 to the 1D4 and would make the purchase again. It's a very solid system.

Read Best Reviews of Canon EOS 1D Mark IV 16.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and 1080p HD Video (Body Only) Here

I've had the pleasure of using a pre-production 1D Mark IV for several weeks now, and I barely use my 5D Mark II anymore. As a photojournalist, this camera does everything I need it to -most important for me:

Low noise high ISO. I have no fear whatsoever going to ISO 12,800. Images are still sharp and have good color. No ugly lines at all. Perfect for shooting sports in stadium with crappy light (see link below).

Better autofocus, especially in low light. With any camera I've used before, autofocus on low light was terrible. It's still not great, but it's a lot better.

10 FPS, with a large buffer. With a fast card (60 MB/s or higher), you can lay on the shutter for several seconds on highest quality before it starts to lag.

Compared to the 5D Mark II, this thing is built like a beast. I've banged it around a lot and it still looks brand new.

Here are a couple galleries shot entirely with the Mark IV. I believe the ISO for the first one is 5,000 and the second is 4,000:

Want Canon EOS 1D Mark IV 16.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and 1080p HD Video (Body Only) Discount?

Mark Kitaoka pretty much nailed it with his detailed review, but I figured I'd add some of my own experiences and opinions as well.

I've shot with a 5D Mark II and a 50D but this is my first foray into OWNING a 1D series camera (I've shot with them before, but I was always borrowing them and never really got to really know one inside and out). The first thing that owners of anything but the 1D series will notice is the build quality. As solid as the 7D and 5D and even 50D series might feel, the 1D cameras are just in another league. Button layout is very intuitive I found myself easily able to adjust everything I need while looking through the viewfinder, and quickly at that. Switching to video is also seamless you can set it to switch to recording with a single button push instantly not only switching to video mode, but starting recording at the same time. Video quality is astounding.

What most impressed me, though, was being able to shoot a basketball game with shutter speeds up to 1/4000th of a second with ambient gym lighting and get good results. Being able to shoot at ISO's of 10,000 and above with good results gives you incredible freedom to crank the shutter speed up and capture every aspect of the action freezing action as never before with indoor sports.

The following shot was taken at ISO 12800:

.

Noise is visible in dark areas, but I'll take an image with that noise level all day for the ability to shoot at the shutter speeds that shot was taken at.

Here's an example of ISO 5000:

.

The lack of noise in that image is, in my opinion, phenomenal for that ISO.

To the person who thinks this camera is completely unwarranted for your current 'level' of photography, I'd encourage you to reconsider if price isn't the issue. The blazing fast AF, improved AI servo performance, video, and high ISO performance will open up completely new areas of photography to you. I know people who can afford this camera and have chosen not to get it simply because they felt it was just beyond what they needed. That may be the case, but if you feel like spoiling yourself, this is one purchase you won't regret. I love this camera and cannot wait to shoot a wedding with it.

Sunday, May 18, 2014

Sony VPLDX11 Multimedia Projector - 1024 x 768 XGA - 3000lm - 4:3 - 4.11lb

Sony VPLDX11 Multimedia Projector - 1024 x 768 XGA - 3000lm - 4:3 - 4.11lbThis is one of the more powerful yet smaller projectors I have ever used. It is ideal for mid-sized conference rooms and classrooms or even watching a movie on the wall, better on an actual projection screen. It has an incredible 3000 lumens and accepts a wide range of input signals, including both PC and video sources. It can be floor ceiling or rear-mounted. I have used it to connect to a BluRay player and the picture was awesome. I have a regular briefcase I carry it in and it's even lighter than my laptop.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Fujifilm Finepix E500 4MP Digital Camera with 3.2x Optical Zoom

Fujifilm Finepix E500 4MP Digital Camera with 3.2x Optical ZoomI own a Fuji 3600 and it is an amazing camera and when I bought it, it cost about $350. The E500 by Fuji is a camera that is almost an equivalent to the 3600, but cost about half the price. The E500 offers 4megapixel quality, which is more than enough for any normal user. There are 9 different shooting modes, and then there is also a black and white option, and a chrome option. The quality of the LCD screen is the best I have seen on a digital camera, it is much better than the grainy crap that is offered on the HP digitals. The camera has a movie mode that includes sound and it takes an alright video (If you want a movie, buy a camcorder). An interesting thing about the E500 is how it stores pictures on the XD card it uses. I have some pictures already taking some space up on the card and when it tells how many shots are left with the different qualities, it says that there are 194 1mp pics available and 144 2mp pics available. The difference should be larger, but the quality of all the shots are great, no matter the quality setting. The camera also has a very good night mode that will get a ton of use. The pop up flash is a common feature on many of the digital cameras and it isn't a problem (unless you are too lazy to have your finger punch a button). The worst thing about the camera is the time between shots. It takes about 8-10 seconds after the flash of the first shot went off before you can take your second picture. The zoom on the camera is very good. The camera overall is great and I would recommend it for anyone. I bought mine at Niceelectronics.com for about $188 dollars (total including shipping and handling), much cheaper than the advertised Amazon price. And don't waste your time looking at Canon, because their cameras have a fault that is much too consistent for my taste. In many of their cameras the lens will no longer return to the camera and it will say error F18. Three of my colleagues have had the same issue at some point or another with the Canon cameras. Fuji and Nikon are the best way to go when looking for a reliable digital camera. This is a great camera.

I was looking for a digital camera that had an equivilent lense to a 28mm. I was discouraged by so many nifty cameras that only went down to a 38mm equivilent. The difference here with that wide angle is phenominal. The biggest point I'd say is indoor, close up (not macro, but a party for example). Capturing a group of people at a close distance is much easier than having to take steps backwards up to fit every one into the photo.

A must have is the docking station. For one thing it includes a couple of rechargable batteries (the docking station is also the charging unit). A big plus for me was not having the hassle of finding the USB cable whenever I wanted to upload pictures to the computer. I find it very convenient. The docking station is not a significant expense, and you're getting an awesome camera at a really great price.

Buy Fujifilm Finepix E500 4MP Digital Camera with 3.2x Optical Zoom Now

Pros:

* Low Price for 4MP

* metal face

* good looks

* light weight

* 2" LCD

* lots of manual controls

* good quality images

* Optional cradle makes charging and image transfer a breeze.

* Webcam feature if you use Windows XP full version.

Cons:

* Poor night shot capability but can be adjusted by software.

* To install FinePix Viewer software on Windows XP-upgrade version, you must go thru "My Computer..." or call tech. support.

Read Best Reviews of Fujifilm Finepix E500 4MP Digital Camera with 3.2x Optical Zoom Here

I recently purchased a Fuji E500, and it has been great. The only reason any of my pictures turn out bad is because I am an idiot who doesn't know how to work a camera or because I don't have something to steady my hand with. The "macro" mode takes amazing pictures, and the other modes do good as well.

It has lots of options that I don't play with because I don't know what they mean, and if you don't really know much about cameraing the instructions don't help much. The presets work very well, however.

The only bad thing I have to say about the camera is that the zoom can get grainy when it is maxed, but that happens with any digital zoom I hear.

Buy one. The Amazon shops have them pretty cheap for what you get.

Want Fujifilm Finepix E500 4MP Digital Camera with 3.2x Optical Zoom Discount?

This camera is a great size! I love it! Takes excellent pictures, fits perfectly in your diaper bag (I'm a new mom). Colors are so vibrant, love being able to take black and white or color just by changing a button. I took some black and white photos of my son's feet and blew them up to an 8x10. I get so many compliments on that photo. I highly recommend this camera. It is easy to use, the user manual and software are well designed. The only suggestion I make is invest in rechargeable double A batteries. Also love the larger LCD screen, makes viewing photos easy. We took this on several vacations and have used it to make holiday photo cards.

Save $0.04 Off

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Aqua - Vu Micro AV Underwater Camera System

Aqua - Vu Micro AV Underwater Camera SystemThis is a handy and very portable device that helps you better understand what is happening in the water. It is very simple to use....just turn on the monitor and start watching "the show". The camera takes good quality images and has a very wide field of view. Winding and unwinding the cable is easy to do due to its small diameter. Because of its size, the screen is not very big and under bright sun light, it is difficult to see any screen image so you need some kind of shade producer. If there is one capability that I would like to have added, it is the ability to send the image to a video recording device. Depending on water clarity, you will be able to see what a "fishfinder" is actually marking.

Friday, February 7, 2014

ViewSonic PJD7383 XGA 1024x768 Ultra Short Throw DLP Projector - 3000 Lumens, 3000:1 DCR, 120Hz/3D

ViewSonic PJD7383 XGA 1024x768 Ultra Short Throw DLP Projector - 3000 Lumens, 3000:1 DCR, 120Hz/3D Ready, 10W SpeakersWe're using two of these projectors in an opera production to fill a 10' x 26' 8" screen from 8' 2" away. At this distance, the projector lens is located 18" above the top of the screen -the steep projection angle means the performers can play quite close to the screen without casting a shadow.

3000 lumens can light up a big screen in a darkened theater, and the projector is very quiet.

The only limitation is that due to the extreme wide angle of projection, the projector and screen must be carefully aimed to avoid keystoning and the projector needs to be located precisely in space to within less than an inch.

This is fantastic technology for the price.

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Canon EOS 20D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens

Canon EOS 20D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 LensAnd that includes all the offerings from Nikon, Olympus, and Minolta/Konica. I LOVE this camera. The 10D was felt by many to have focusing issues and though I did not have any significant problem with my 10D in that regard the 20D represents a substantial improvement in this area. Canon still is not offering (in this price range) a camera with eye control or 45 focusing points, BUT the nine focusing points that ARE offered are well placed and the camera focuses quickly and surely resulting in tack sharp photos.

The pictures this camera takes are simply beyond belief. Beautifully saturated, tack sharp, NO, and I mean NO noise at 400 or below and barely discernible noise all the way up to 1600 ISO. For all practical purposes 1600 ISO is an entirely usable speed resulting in fantastic pictures. What Canon has accomplished in reducing noise and increasing pixel density proves that they are, for now, the technology leader.

Another big advantage over the 10D is the instant on feature which does not leave you sitting there helplessly until the camera turns on. That happens instantly! A new flash system, ETTL II is a vast improvement over the 10D. And, to my eye, there is an improved dynamic range with slightly less blown highlights.

The in camera processing results in far more pleasing pictures than the previous 10D or Digital Rebel. This camera has a greater burst (more pictures quicker) that the previous 10D.

Now there is currently an issue with mirror lockups reported by probably 10% 20% of all owners. If you encounter this problem before you update the firmware then simply take the battery out of the camera, reinsert it, and you're good to go. Canon has issued a fix and it is available on their web site. It completely remedies the problem so, not to worry!

One of the greatest things about digital photography is the ability to build a digital dark room for next to nothing. With the included Photoshop Elements you are well on your way to producing pictures that you could only have imagined in the pre-digital days. I am able to recoup pictures that I never would have considered salvageable before this camera.

The other thing I like about Canon is the lens system which IMO is second to none. Also, Canon continues to innovate at a furious pace driving the price of these digital cameras relentlessly downward.

I sold my 10D to purchase this camera and for me it represented a significant improvement more than justifying the cost of the upgrade.

So, I LOVE the camera. LOVE Canon. And LOVE digital. All in all I'd say I'm a pretty happy camper!

This is my second digital camera. Previously I had used the Fuji Finepix s5000, but wanted to move up to an SLR system so that I could eventually use a variety of lenses.

I was very concerned at the beginning of my DSLR buying processit seems to me that once a person buys a body and a few lenses, they are committed to that camera maker's "system" pretty much for life, so I wanted to be very certain that this was the right choice. If you purchase a 20d, you are not just buying a 20d, you are making (often) a pretty serious financial commitment to Canon technology.

I chose a canon 20d for a few reasons; I had decided early on in the process to stick to Nikon or Canon, as they are the clear leaders not only of Digital SLRs, but of Camera technology in general. Thus, though certain other SLRs like the Olympus E-Volt or the Pentax *istD are attractive, they simply do not have the range of accessories or the support community of either Canon or Nikon.

I ended up seriously considering three cameras; the Canon 350d (Digital Rebel), The Canon 20d, and the Nikon D70. From talking to other folks who were in the same situation as me, This seems to be a common range of choices people face

I ended up choosing Canon because it seems to me that they have a slightly better line of lenses than Nikon, particularly those available on the used market. This is important, because the more you use your DSLR, the more you will want that lens that is just a slightly wider angle, or just a slightly faster aperture, etc.

Once I decided to go for Canon, I chose the 20d over the 350d primarily due to size and toughness. The 350d is a great Camera, and its sensor is very similar to the 20d. However, the 20d's magnesium alloy chassis is much heavier than the 350d. It can certainly take a lot more abuse than the plastic 350d bodyand I tend to take my camera on a lot of long trips. The 350d is a lot lighter, which is nicebut I frankly found its body too small to grip easily. As I have very large hands, this was a serious disadvantage to me. For someone with smaller hands the 350d probably feels fine. You will have to pick one up and judge this for yourself.

The layout of the camera itself is a lot easier to use than the 350d as well. The camera requires far less attention when shifting settings than the 350d, and thus frees up your "focus" for the subject you are shooting. I cannot stress how ergonomic and intuitive I find this camera to be.

Since I have purchased the 20d, I have not regretted it for a minute. This camera is a real joy to work with. The viewfinder is nice and bright (looking through glass again instead of an EVF is a pleasure, believe me). The range of ISO settings from 100-1600 is wonderful, particularly nice are long twilight/night shots at ISO 100 that give you some lovely colors. Shooting night and low light with the 20d will blow your mind. The CMOS sensor of the 20d produces almost noiseless images at high ISO settings.

The best feature of the camera is the quick start up time. It can go from dormant to actively autofocusing in 0.2 seconds. My previous camera took 2 seconds to "turn on." That may not sound like a great deal, but I lost countless shots due to that fact, and it is what pushed me most to upgrade my camera.

I tend to shoot on aperture priority or A-DEP (like auto, but with no flash), but there are a variety of "pre-set" modes for portraiture, sports, night shooting, and so on that are easy to use.

The megapixel count is nice, but not really that important. Comparing images made from the 6 megapixel Nikon D70 and 8 megapixel Canon 20d, one can't really notice any difference until you blow them up to ridiculous sizes. At this level of the MP game, the quality of the lens you use is far more important to final resolution than the sensors pixel count. If you compare the kit lens (18-55mm f3.5-5.6) at its wide focal lengths and lower apertures with the canon 50mm f1.8 prime lens at f8, It looks like you are shooting with 2 different cameras. The same holds for Nikon as well, so don't decide for the 20d simply because it has more megapixels than the D70. Of course, even the worst canon lens beats the hell out of my old digicam on its best day.

I have had a few problems with some older third party manufacturer lenses made for the Canon mount, Like Sigma and Tamron, not working with the new 20d body; but I have been told that if you ship off the lens to the manufacturer they will rechip it for free. All currently manufactured 3rd party lenses ought to work with this body. Keep in mind that the Canon digital sensor is smaller than 35mm film, so there is a "focal length multiplier" that makes your lenses "longer" than they would be on a regular film SLR. The focal length multiplier for the 20d is 1.6 . That means a 100mm lens on a film camera acts like a 160mm lens on a 20d. For those who like to focus close up with telephoto, that's great, because you can buy a relatively inexpensive 300mm lens, and it will shoot almost like a 500mm telephoto. I, however, usually shoot wide (more "peripheral vision") and prefer shorter lenses, so this is a pain. Of course, I would love to have a "full frame" camera like the Canon 5d, but the price is simply to much.

It has a number of strengths and weaknesses, which I will detail below:

Strengths:

The variety of lenses is excellent.

Lenses on second hand market are reasonably priced

Introductory high speed lens (less than f2) is inexpensive (canon 50mm f1.8)

Autofocus aquires targets quickly

Continuous shooting mode is quickautofocus recalibrates for each shot.

Extremely high ISO capability (1600) for low light situations

Body is physically tough.

Very fast top shutter speed (1/8000) allows open apertures in well lit situations.

Manual focus easy to use

Pop up flash is very high above camera, and thus avoids casting shadows

Flash recycles quickly

CF card memory system is versatile and inexpensive

User interface is the best I have ever seen

Can be used as a blunt weapon if you are mugged

Weaknesses:

It ain't cheap

Very heavy, particularly with long lenses

You may end up spending money on glass that rivals a serious crack addiction

Longer focal length multiplier (1.6) than film, or than Nikon (1.5).

Doesn't work well with older 3rd party lenses without rechipping.

Mirror is very loud, particularly if you are used to a point and shoot.

Comparison with Nikon:

20d is better at telephoto (lenses have internal motors)

D70 is better at wide angle shots (focal length multiplier is lower)

20d is better at low light (lower noise, lower ISO setting).

Nikon fans believe that all Canon users are heretics, and vice versa, so why compare them you dirty heathen.

Buy Canon EOS 20D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Now

Update:

I just spent three weeks in Africa in a very desolate and harsh environment with this camera. I have to add Don't overlook the construction on your dSLR. I had heavy long telephoto lenses on it and the performance of the magnesium case, metal mounts, weather proofing, battery grip all is just amazing. I hate to imagine how a lesser plastic frame might have performed. After traveling by rattling/vibration ridden truck for days, dugout canoes in the middle of swamps, airplanes, hiking -I came to appreciate Canon's commitment to construction. This camera and and the entire EOS system held up superbly under extremely abusive circumstances and can understand why professional photographers prefer this brand. And the pictures? Oh My, the pictures are just simply the best pictures I have ever taken in my life. Not just because of the locations but because of this terriffic equipment. My friend who had another major brand of camera complained about a muddy ant inside his lens, imagine a muddy ant inside his other major brand lens while he was shooting -not with my Canon equipment (the sealing held up great). Albeit he's a better photographer so he probably got amazing shots I didn't -I didn't worry about the equipment. A+++ to Canon for the camera, the lenses, the battery grip everything.

On other news, I just read that canon is releasing the 5D so I guess my info from the original review was correct. Its definitely a bigger higher end camera and at $3,200 definitely in a different class. I think I'll keep my 20D for telephoto work and but with its full frame sensor, I might get a 5D for wide angle photography. Again, amazing equipment from Canon.

Original Review:

I'm a first time dSLR buyer (bought the 20D from Amazon -great service). This was a big jump for me and I read and I read before I decided on this purchase and whether I should jump into the dSLR world. I'd outgrown point and shoot a while back.

On the 20D. I agonized over the 10D and the 6megapix Digital Rebel until the 20D came out and I quickly decided on the 20D. I picked the 20D because of solid magnesium case, 9point autofocus, 8.2megapix sensor and DIGIC II, and Instant On. So even after the Rebel XT came out -the 20D is in a different class altogether. The 20D is a professional chassis and you can use it as a pro camera -the Rebel is for world travelers (In my opinion).

My agony now is over what type of photography I want to do. I only have the kit lens and a $79 dollar 50mm f/1.8 II ... lenses are expensive especially the good ones as I'm learning:

Here is what I've learned (intended for the new people who are wondering if they want dSLR or not). dSLR is really about the lenses and the options that you can use on the camera. You need great lenses for great pictures. This is my gradeschool version on dSLRs and lenses and I hope it helps:

The setup -Lets suppose you are standing next to your car and on your car's hood sits your girlfriend and on the hood unbeknownst to her sits a litle grasshopper. Behind your car is a lake and in the distance there's a huge snow capped mountain. This is the difference lenses make:

Prime Lenses: Would let you take wonderful facial shot of your girlfriend (boyfriend). If the lens has a good aperture, you might be able to blur the background so you only get her beautiful face and get rid of the annoying mountain and they tend to be light and small. (Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is a prime lens -$350)

Super Wide Angle Lenses: Expands the foreground and compresses the background. So you'd get a picture of your girlfriend on the car which would both be huge and a lake that would stretch to the horizon and the mountain would look tiny in the far off distance. (Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L is a super wide angle lens -$1,800)

Telephoto Lenses: Compress the foreground and magnify the distant objects. You would wind up taking a picture that would magnify the mountain in the background but your girlfriend, car, and lake would either be very small and compressed in the foreground or they wouldn't even come out in extreme telephoto lenses as you'd only get the mountaintop and cut out the rest. Your girlfriend would also wonder about your relationship at the sight of the humongous lens: good telephotos can be HUGE and heavy! (Canon 400mm EF f/2.8L is a super telephoto lens $6,000)

Macro Lenses: Let you take pictures of very small things and they tend to allow you to focus quite close in on the subject. You'd walk up to your girlfriend and she'd wonder what you were doing so close to the hood. You'd give her a peck on the cheek and then you'd close in on the little grasshopper next to her. With a macro lens, you'd could take a great picture of the little grasshopper and it would fill my frame. If your girlfriend is like mine, she'd be off the car as soon as she caught glimpse of the bug. Old stereotype here no disrespect ladies I know a few that would put me to shame. (Canon EFS 60mm f/2.8 is a macro lens -$450)

Zoom Lenses: Are any lenses that allow you to shift the focal length. That is to say I can make it more wide angle or more telephoto. The 20D comes with a 18 to 55 zoom lens which gives you marginal wide angle and up to 3x telephoto. Not a bad kit lens but its not USM (Ultrasonic) so autofocus is not as fast and not as accurate and can fail to focus sometimes and its not IS (Image stabilized) which lets you take clearer pictures without a tripod. (Canon EFS 17-85mm IS USM is a zoom lens that covers some wide angle at 17mm and some telephoto at 85mm -$600). You can turn the barrel and you can change focal length!! What a wonderful invention but they're more complex with more parts than primes and the extra parts add weight and they generally affect the amount of light they let in (aperture stuff) but you don't have to change lenses and they offer more flexibility.

Now bear in mind that if you're out there in the middle of a blooming field in Georgia and start changing lenses, you can get dirt or pollen in the sensor. I only change my lenses indoors in a non windy environment.

Exposure and Shutter Speed: Exposure is controlled by the ISO sensitivity of the sensor (ISO rating is another arcane film invention basically lower the ISO number the more sensitivity to light). One of the problems with smaller sensors was noise (graininess) on the pictures at high ISO numbers. Well not on the 20D the noise is imperceptible to me. Shutter speed is also controlled by your 20D...and the 20D has a great shutter 5frames per second, up to 1/8000 of a second. Wow! So you have two out of three big components taken care of here and the 20D is first rate on a ton of other things like custom White balance etc.

A note on Aperture. Its just how much light can come into the lens (the size of the hole). The lower the aperture number f/# on the lense the more light it allows. Aperture determines depth of field (how much of the foreground + background is in focus) and it constrains shutter speeds. Now aperture is a function of lens construction -a 400mm f/2.8 lens is humongous and costs $6,000 while a 70-300mm telephoto f/4.5 to 5.6 is $1,200 but with the 400mm lens (get this)...you can use faster shutters and freeze the action of a quarterback spinning in midair across the field on a night game (or freeze your son as he's swinging a bat in little league: ball bat and son frozen in midair!). With the 70 to 300mm, you'd have to use a slower shutter and you'd get blurr and blurry does not make the cover of the USA Today nor brings a smile to grandpa. On another example, if you've been hiking for a month to take a picture of a sloth that moves at 1cm a year in some god forsaken South American jungle, the 70-300mm lens will weigh allot less and allow you to run faster than the 400mm white monster lens. If I'm a nature photographer, I'd rather come out with the picture than fall victim to some relocated pigmy tribe because I couldn't run fast enough and have someone years later find my bones still clutching my white 40lb $6,000 lens in the middle of Brazil still attached to my 20D with a flashcard full of razor sharp gorgeously blokehed* pigmy and sloth pictures, ala blair witch project. So get a lens for what you need -I guess is what I recommend. (*Blokeh are those out of focus circles of light in the backgrounds of pictures taken with expensive good lenses)

A word on Nikon. There are two camps of photographers these days Canon and Nikon (well there are others like Leica but if you own a Leica you're probably a pro, don't care about feature battles and are laughing at my gradeschool analysis). The 20D is more expensive and better chassis feature for feature than the D100 go compare 8.2megapix vs 6.1 and the list goes from there. Nikon owners will tell you that their lenses have backwards compatibility 50 years...yes but you'll have to manually focus those lenses and on some of them you have to pay some guy to saw off some metal flaps to make them fit the D100. Canon EF has been around since 1986 and there are a ton of autofocus lenses out there. EF is the standard lens mount that fits the 20D and there is a newer mount called the EF-S Mount that also fits. Canon is very conservative in their advertisement as they aim for educated consumers: D100 claims a burst mode of 144 pictures -yes but on the low quality setting, 20D can do the same if you cut the quality down...you'll hear spot metering, megapixels, focus speed --you need to read to understand all of this and make a sound decision. Nikon makes great cameras and I don't want to get into a war. If you already own a bunch of recent Nikor lenses -your mind is already made up. A good friend of mine owns the D70 and another the Digital Rebel and me with the 20D -we're all happy. After much review and a ton of reading, I liked the 20D better for my purpose as a personal preference I bought it and am very happy.

On crop factors. Lenses are still stuck in the 35mm film focal length format world and 35mm film is bigger than the sensors on the 20D and this means simply that the EF and EFS lenses turn out more telephoto on the 20D. So a lens marked 10mm is actually a 16mm (multiply mm times 1.6 to get actual focal length) on a 20D and other small sensor cameras (Rebel and Rebel XT). The crop 1.6 crop is not extra zoom -it only appears that way, its actual lost information. So, to telephoto photographers, this means you carry more weight than you need in physical glass and to wide angle photographers, it means its harder to find lenses that do true wide angle bc the sensor is too small to capture all the information. EFS was designed so they could make smaller lenses at least so don't lose information but they're still labeled "old school" and you still have to multiply. EFS was designed to take advantage of the smaller sensors on the 10D 20D Digital Rebel and Rebel XT. The higher end Canon cameras use a 35mm size sensor. People wonder if Canon will adopt bigger sensors for all lines and if they do, then EFS will probably go the way of the dodo. On the other hand, bigger sensors are expensive to make so who knows where it will go and the 20D has very low noise at higher ISOs (used to be one of the reasons they thought bigger sensors would prevail -that and the 35mm mindset and large number of lenses out there for 35mm). I can't predict the future -Canon seems to be still investing in both EF and EFS though and I think that for the next 3-6 years you're fine with either EF or EFS.

I heard a rumour that Canon is planning to release a new camera between the 20D and their higher end 1Ds around December? If you must have latest and greatest and have $4,000 to spend you might want to wait. If true, I'm sure the chassis will cost $2,500 $3,000 -just rumours here. I'm keeping my 20D until I can make money to justify more expensive than this extremely good camera. In my opinion, this new camera would not supplant the 20D as much as it would provide Canon a more complete EOS Digital line from Digital Rebel all the way up to the 16.7megapix 1Ds -they'd provide an true entry level Pro Camera in the $2,000 to $3,000 range. Most interesting to me will be if it has 45pt autofocus and the size of the sensor. Also interesting, Canon is releasing a new 60mm EFS f/2.8 Macro lens. Good quality and interesting choice in focal length. Amazon carries it. I think Canon is telling us something with the type of EFS lenses they're releasing and the market they are targetting. Keep watching Canon.

Back to my 20D, I've only bought a 50mm f/1.8 lens for $79 and the kit lens and a tripod. I can't wait to get a USM (ultrasonic silent 0.5 second focusing lens) with IS (Image stabilization) -if I can only decide what type of photography. But with what I have, I've taken pictures that have floored my friends and everyone who has seen them. Someone actually said, "I'll pay you for that picture." And that is a great complement to me and to the 20D and the complement goes to the 20D because my lenses are cheap! I am a huge Canon fan now and long and short of it, the 20D is an amazing camera and the best prosumer chassis out there (period!).

Read Best Reviews of Canon EOS 20D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Here

I purchased the Canon 20D package with the stock 18-55mm zoom lens about three weeks ago. Since then, I have taken several hundred pictures and am very happy with the camera highly recommended if you can justify the price. I've broken this review up into sections due to its length.

1. Lens

a. 18-55 mm stock lens

The lens isn't great, but on the other hand, it's not bad. On the pro side, it's lightweight, cheap, small, and seems to focus fairly quickly. The only bad thing about the lens is that it produces slightly soft pictures, but if you won't be blowing the pictures up too large, you probably won't notice.

b. 17-85 mm USM IS lens

Being obsessed with quality, after having the camera for about a week, I purchased (also on Amazon) the Canon 17-85 mm USM IS (Image Stabilized) zoom lens. I've been very happy with this lens and would recommend it if you can afford it. The IS is quite impressive it really works. This lens isn't perfect either, but it seems noticeably better than the 18-55 (and only six times as expensive!!).

2. Compact Flash

I'd recommend that you purchase a SanDisk Ultra II 1 GB compact flash card with it these are sold here on Amazon. This card provides about 5 MB per second write speed which is significantly better than many of the cheaper cards there are some websites on the net which review cards (and even one which has tested them all in a Canon 20D) it's worth looking into.

3. Battery

The battery life has been very good for me so far the specs say that you can take about 1000 pictures with flash on half of them, and I don't doubt that (although I haven't pushed it that far yet). The charger is also nice and compact (easy to travel with) and charges the batteries in about an hour and a half (fast!).

4. Design

This camera is fun to take pictures with! Through the lens composing allows precise control of depth of field, focus, and cropping it's also much easier to use in full sunlight as compared to a point and shoot digicam. It operates much like a film SLR in that you set most of the settings on the top LCD panel, compose through the viewfinder, etc., but it also adds the color LCD screen to view the pictures you've just taken. The other thing I really like about this over a film SLR is the ability to set the ISO and white balance on the fly. With film, you'd have to load a different roll of film for different lighting conditions or ISO now it's the simple twist of a dial. While these features are available on most consumer point and shoot digital cameras, they're generally much harder to get to through the menu system. One great advantage of this camera is that it has so *many* buttons and dials it's very easy to get to most frequently used functions without wading through extensive menus. They're also very ergonomically placed so I can switch most settings I care about while looking through the viewfinder just by feel.

Another nice pro is the backlit top LCD panel which makes night shooting easy.

5. Bad Points

Hmm.. Not much I can think of that I don't like about it. My camera came with a 'starter quantity of dust' (quoted from some other website) on the imaging chip but I was able to blast it off with a rubber bulb. Be aware that digital SLR's tend to gather dust on the chip especially if you change lenses a lot but this is nothing against Canon it happens on them all.

It's a shame that it doesn't show you the current ISO setting in the viewfinder (or on the top panel unless you hit a button). Several times I've left it at ISO 1600 by accident when I didn't really need that speed.

It's a little heavy, but I find that I actually like the weight makes it feel more solid.

I wish it had an IR receiver so you could use an infra-red remote with it but alas it doesn't (even though the Digital Rebel does!). I had to buy the Canon RS-80N3 wired remote (which works well).

7. Conclusion

An awesome camera overall definitely go for it if you can afford it! I still kept my old compact digicam as a backup for cases when I don't want to carry an SLR, but in general, I'll use it 95% of the time. Much more enjoyable to take pictures with than a standard digicam try it you'll like it.

Want Canon EOS 20D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Discount?

A year ago I sold my Digital Rebel on eBay and purchased the 20D. I have since not looked back. This camera has brought nothing but joy to myself and others. The sharpness and colors from the famed Canon sensor are true to their reputation. Friends and family all love the pictures that come out of this camera. I take it with me almost everywhere I go.

After selling my Rebel, I debated upgrading to the new Rebel XT or the 20D, which I'm sure many of you might be having right now before pulling the trigger. I held both in my hand and played with them at the PMA tradeshow where the XT was introduced. It was very light and felt very small in my hands. I don't have exceptionally large hands, but the XT felt like it was designed for smaller hands. That being said, it is a great travel partner to have being so compact and light-weight.

The other drawback, however, is that the user interface is quite different from the 20D. Although it may seem like a trivial feature, the dial navigation on the 20D has been immensely more convenient and practical when shooting compared to pressing the buttons on the Rebel or the XT. I didn't like having to navigate through the ISO or other changes to white balance via the LCD screen. I definitely think there's a reason why the 20D is more expensive beyond the fact that it has the solid magnesium alloy body. The user interface for me was worth the extra money as well. The more you take photos, the more you will realize the freedom that comes with controlling your aperture, shutter speed, white balance and more with the 20D interface versus the XT. That being said, it is still several hundred dollars more expensive and the XT has pretty much the same sensor (just 0.2 fewer megapixels) with the same results in a different body. So don't be concerned about getting inferior photos with the XT, because the differences are mostly all external.

I highly recommend getting the kit lens with either camera. For an additional $70-100 it is well worth it just for the range and it has pretty decent quality results. Bang for your buck it can't be beat. Make sure you pick up a EF 50mm f/1.8 II USM lens for another $70-80. This is a powerful little lens at a great price.

(...)

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Canon VIXIA HV30 MiniDV High Definition Camcorder with 10x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom

Canon VIXIA HV30 MiniDV High Definition Camcorder with 10x Optical Image Stabilized ZoomI've used higher-end ProSumer camcorders for a while and virtually every other generation of video camcorder since 1980. I recently used a Sony HC3 HDV handheld but gave that to my daughter when I got this HV30.

The HV30 has a great picture and all that. So I think I'll focus on what's either really cool, or a bit off-putting for a buyer.

Really Cool:

Video quality is the best you can find on today's one-chip HDV camera. Some 3-chip cameras have a better color depth but many 3-chip cameras actually have a worse picture. They did a great job.

It plays other Canon HDV tape. I own and use a XH A1 3-CCD canon HDV camera and the HV30 plays its tapes even better than the XHA1 seems to. That's great because I can save the A1's guts for a few more years.

It has virtually every output port you could wish for (today). HDMI, Component (yes Component!), Composite, USB and Firewire. Its very complete.

It worked with Apple FinalCut Pro without any trouble. I can't even get he XHA1 to work with it without screwing around with it for a while.

It has a mic input jack which Podcasters love, but I and other have been having trouble with it. I believe Canon didn't make a simple mic jack but some kind of phantom powered mic this or that, which hobbyist would not really use. So to make it work, and this is the tip, you have to go into the menu and turn on an option, then go into a different menu and adjust the gain and/or volume. Oops, maybe this should be a "not so cool" item.

The Not so Cool.

The ergonomics are poor. My hand doesn't feel comfortable holding it no matter how I adjust the hand strap. I've never had this issue with any other camera.

The Record start/stop button is in the wrong location. They put their goofy "joy stick" right where a person's thumb falls while holding the camera, so you're instinctively pushing on the joystick instead of the start/stop button while filming. The worse part, the Joystick is really crap as an interface element.

Noisy camera. The camera makes noise when you move it (shake it) it makes noise when you zoom and it makes a ton of noise when you insert or eject a tape.

Poor image when filming motion. If you're filming a scene and you move the camera, you are going to get streaking of the image. Why? I believe/assume its because unlike Canon's great D-SLR cameras in low light, their video equipment doesn't have the lower ISO (low light) capability that Sony's or everyone else has. Not sure why, but it seems to be a consistent theme with Canon. Fortunately it has a built-in light useful for those birthday parties but not much else.

The Bottom Line

For the under $800 it costs, its worth it if you're filming your vacations, holidays, birthdays and whatnot.

If you're a podcaster and want something with every connection known to man, its more than worth it for the HDMI and mic jacks alone.

If you wish you could afford the Canon XH A1 or better and want nearly as good a picture, this is the camera for you.

If you simply want a tape drive for your XH A1, this is actually cheaper than a commercial CANON HDV tape drive.

The bottom, bottom line is Sony had lost its way and CANON's HV30 is the current champ in the hand-held HDV camcorder race. I like sony better, but I don't like getting nickeled and dimed to death. You buy the Canon HV30 and you'll be happy with the results.

Canon VIXIA HV30 MiniDV High Definition Camcorder with 10x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom

I'm very happy with my Canon HV30. I rate the picture quality, color quality, low-light ability, white balance all excellent. The zoom control is a little close for my fingers and I found myself holding the camera less firmly (ie with the tips of my fingers rather than my whole hand) which would be wearisome on a long shoot, but tripods are still the best way to shoot video for steady pictures. On the other hand the anti-vibration correction seems to help a lot.

The total package is good, not excellent and includes a battery with a nice contact protector that doesn't look like it will fall off (unlike the protector plate on the Elura and Optura that has to be taped on because it is so loose.) The plate keeps the battery from discharging on the keys in your pocket or bag. It also includes a charger which will also operate the camera without the battery, which is very handy. This is only good, because it won't charge the battery unless it is in the camera, so you can't charge while shooting with another battery.

The package also includes a remote control (see above) that frustrated me the first time I used it and seems to be of marginal utility. However, all of the minor problems with the package can be remedied with an add-on accessory. The camera is what does the work and it is excellent.

I've had this camcorder only one week. It was a busy week with kids graduation and parties and night club rock concerts on the video agenda but I learned a lot shopping for this camera and using it all week, so maybe my story will help you.

First, why miniDV rather than flash, hard disk or dvd? I already have two mini dv cameras, a Canon Optura and an Elura. These have given me good service and images that were the envy of my Sony, Samsung, and Panasonic-owning friends. The only brand I compare to Canon is Sony (for similar consumer equipment). I rejected the flash and DVD models because the recording time is too short. DVD, in particular, is a rip-off with just 15 minutes for a $10 disk.

This kind of short recording time is OK if what you want is to capture 1 or 2 minutes of magic moments and have them immediately available to put in a player. Personally I find the tape just as good for instant replay on the built-in video screen. It takes a couple minutes longer to rewind the tape.

The hard drive models have a recording time advantage that initially attracted me, but the transfer issue is what made me decide to stay with a minidv. Ultimately all video has to be transfered to another medium to be used and archived. I have been transfering my minidv tapes to computer hard drives and dvd for years.

Transfer is a tediuos, time-eating process that has caused me to spend more upgrading my computer and software than I spent on the cameras. Yes, I can make DVDs with my video; I can make YouTube videos; and I can put my own video stuff on my iPod and Zune. But it takes a lot of time to get the results I want.

Why tape? It's cheap and convenient. Video takes a lot of disk space to store the original and then to edit and render into other formats. I buy the cheap tapes but I only record them once. I can carry 2 or 3 which give me 2 or 3 hours recording time. The real restraint is the batteries. Once I have the image on tape I don't erase it. I can play it immediately if I want to, but the ultimate goal is to transfer it to hard disk for editing and archiving. The real godsend is the recent plethora of cheap 500 GB (now 750 and soon 1TB) external USB hard drives. The transfer time is a chore; so is the indexing.

Tape is patient. I can do it on my schedule. With a hard disk, it can get full at a time that is inconvenient to transfer but I need to do some more shooting. Then I would have to consider the dreaded DELETE of something I shot. With tape I can postphone transfering and editing for months without impairing my camera readiness. After I transfer, I still have the tape.

I considered the Sony HDR-HC9 and the older Canon HV20 vs. the Canon HV30. I was tempted by the 6MP in the Sony and also by the low prices on the HV20. I saw a deal on an HV20 for $520 but it was gone before I made up my mind to settle for it. Ultimately I was looking at $999 for the Sony or $771 for the Canon. The HV30 had 30p mode and the $228 savings provided a budget for extra batteries and other goodies.

So am I happy? Yes.

My wife used it at my kids' graduation. Perfect color and detail, oohs and ahs from everybody. My wife just uses automatic mode with the lcd screen hanging out. I took some mobile shots in my car, one-handed through the windshield. The anti-vibration mode works great, as does the autofocus. During this shoot there were times when the camera was looking almost directly into the sun. The meter responded quickly and closed down the aperture, but the resulting scene was a little dark (not too bad, actually). There is a back-light compensation button that could have helped but I didn't think about until later.

Then it was off to a night club. I took a recharged battery, not totally topped off because of numerous replays of some of the recent shooting. The lighting was typical dim night club ambiance with flashing disco lights on the dance floor and stage. My plan is to film the whole show.

I have plenty of tape but just the BP-2L13 that came with the camera, which the manual rates at 75 minutes using the viewfinder, or 70 minutes using the LCD. I also know that new Li-on batteries need to be recharged a few times before they reach their full capacity.

47 minutes of continuous filming is what I got, using the viewfinder. The image in the viewfinder was bright and easy to see. I wear bifocals but I was able to hold the camera several inches from my face and still see the edges of the viewfinder screen enough to frame the picture I wanted. My Optura and Elura both had decent viewfinders, but many was the time when I just pointed the camera and hoped my framing was ok because the image was so dim. The HV30 is really a huge step up.

I haven't had enough experience with this camera to fiddle with the focus and white balance while shooting so I left it on automatic. The colors of the spotlights were changing very quickly and I was panning the stage and the crowd, zooming in and out. After the battery died I took it off and held in my hand to warm it so after the show it gave me a few more seconds of shooting. Considering it wasn't topped off on the charger and it was only the first time it had been cycled I wasn't that disappointed. I just ordered a BP-L24H rated at 145 minutes recording time on the viewfinder from Amazon for $99 with some of the money I saved over buying the Sony.

The images were fantastic. I've shot in light like this with my Optura and ELura and there were always dark shadows with almost no detail. The Vixia showed great detail in the shadows. The automatic white balance reacted in a pleasant way to the red, orange and blue spotlights. Occasionally, on a wide shot of the band, while I was panning, the lead singer would be washed out from the bright spot on him while the rest of the band was in shadow but the overall effect made him look rather god-like which was cool. When I zoomed in the aperture closed down and I got excellent skin color and detail on his face. The anti-vibration did a great job because most of the images were pretty steady even though I was handholding and the crowd was bumping me often.

The sound was the only detail that keeps this from being perfect. The sound started out OK for the first few numbers, but as the night went on and the playing got louder, there was a lot of distortion because of the overloading. The band used big Marshall amps and I was standing 3 feet in front of an eight-foot high stack of speakers so it is to be expected. For a more acoustic or quieter show the automatic limiter would have been fine. Next time I won't stand in front of the speakers.

At home I hooked it up to the HDTV with the HDMA cable, tuned to the HDMA input with the TV remote and fired up the camera with the included remote control. The remote is a little skinny thing that does't provide any feedback when you select a function. My bedroom is less than 15 feet long so it couldn't have been more than ten feet to the camera. I had to get up and check the display in the camera to make sure the tape was rewound. This would be strictly an experimental item to be used at close range in a shooting situation.

On batteries: I have bought the "compatible" batteries and been burned many times. On my Canon sure-shot the compatible batteries would be charged (Charger light is green) but the battery would run the camera no more than 5 minutes. Same problem on my phones. For my Optura, I bought three "compatible" batteries and they worked fine. YMMV.

For editing, I've been using Ulead Visual Studio 11.5. The HV30 doesn't come with any software for movie editing or even transfering to disk. The included CD has software to transfer still pictures to a computer, but you don't need it. I verified that the HV30 is recognized automatically as a digital camera when you plug in the USB cable to the computer running XP.

I didn't install the Canon software, but I did install a miniSD chip (not included) and take some pictures. There is a different button to snap still pictures which I missed the first time I took a picture. Even if you have the switch on the still position, it starts the video tape recording if you press the camera start button. The three megapixels doesn't maake for a great picture but it may come in handy. This isn't one of the feaatures that attracted me to the camera but it may come in handy.

It copied my video from the camera and I edited it into a DVD. My Visual Studio 11.5 edits and burns AVCHD, but I haven't got a player that will read AVCHD anyway (other than my computer). I'm waiting for the Blue Ray burners to come out at reasonable cost, then I'll probably get some software that burns those. My computer is a quad-core Pentium with 4GB RAM.

If you read all the way to the end you are really a glutton for detail like me. I don't really care if you buy this camera or not. You should buy the camera that is right for you and your budget. If I felt I could afford it, I'd get a 3CCD profesional model with interchangeable lenses. I'd hire a grip to carry my equipment and set up and hold the boom mikes. I'd get some professional grade editing equipment too, like Avid. I'd get one of those business disk duplicators that print the labels and burn the disks while I sleep. OK, I'll stop.

Buy Canon VIXIA HV30 MiniDV High Definition Camcorder with 10x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom Now

I've had the HV30 for about 1 week now, and so far I think it's great.

I previously used the Sony TRV38, another very capable camcorder. The HV30 comes in a slick, black color and is slightly smaller than my Sony TRV38.

I have three young kids, so I take tons of video mostly indoors. The HV30 has very good low light capability. There's some grain in the darker videos, and the shutter speed also slows (you can see the stuttering movement in the video when taking in very low light). However, you can still see faces clearly. One cool thing I like about this camera is that it has a manual controlled LED light that can add about 3 feet of light when it's too dark. Sony has that 0 lux Night Shot that works in complete darkness, but the colors change to green and black and makes the eyes look scary. I prefer the LED light feature on the HV30 over Sony's Night Shot.

You can select from 5 different shooting modes:

1. DV (regular)

2. DV (wide screen)

3. HDV (high definition wide screen by default)

4. HDV 24P (cinema mode)

5. HDV 30P (progressive mode)

Although I don't have a high definition TV yet, the colors in every mode looked great on my regular TV. The 24P and 30P modes give the video a "movie look and feel" (thus the name cinema mode), and this is cool just to have. I look forward to shooting something all in 24P or 30P and showing the DVD to family/friends. I'm sure they'll be amazed that my home videos don't "look" like home videos.....and this is all due to the camcorder modes.

You can take photos using the HV30 (saves onto mini SD card). You can use the camcorder as a stand-alone digital camera (3 megapixels), and there's even a flash on the camcorder for the digital camera. You can also take still photos while you're recording video. I use this to take photos while recording only because it's a nice little extra thing to have. The pictures are not all that great but not bad either. It's definitely a bonus that both video and still pictures are built into this one camera. I would still recommend a dedicated digital camera to take better quality still photos.

I backup all my videos to DVD because it's easier to watch that way. I prefer the miniDV tapes because it stores "pure" video and information like the time and date. I just started doing a little video editing using Sony Vegas software....and that seems to be a nice software package. The final video on the resulting DVD looks great.

I thought I would stick with Sony products, but so far I am enjoying the Canon HV30 and have no regrets.

I will probably be adding more to this review as I use the camera more.

Update April 7, 2008

Still liking the camcorder because of the 24P and 30P modes. You can really see that difference in the images compared to regular mode. Your video editing software must support HDV (high definition video) in order for you to edit any high definition stuff. Sony Vegas Movie Studio doesn't have it, but the Vegas Movie Studio Platinum edition DOES have it. Make sure to buy the right software if you're going to do editing.

I noticed that the sound is a little soft. Maybe there's a setting for this, but another possible reason is that the Canon's HV30's microphones are on the top of the camcorder facing up compared the my Sony TRV38's microphones on the front facing forward. This does not bother me too much.

There's an automatic lens cap which makes protecting the lens very convenient. No more fussing with a lens cap or having it dangle in your videos.

The package does not include a neck strap...you would think Canon would throw in a strap for a $900 camcorder. I bought a regular Canon strap at a local shop for $18. I think this is worth to have to keep the camcorder secure.

The battery is a cheap one and keeps a charge for about an hour or less. Since a miniDV tape is 1 hour, it would be prudent to get a better battery just to be safe. Canon makes an extended battery for about $60.

Read Best Reviews of Canon VIXIA HV30 MiniDV High Definition Camcorder with 10x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom Here

Everything you read about this camera is true. I owned one for a couple of days and the picture was extraordinary... the camera was a breeze to use...

And then I turned up the audio. Whoa. What's that humming?!

Now, I had seen plenty of reviews (even on the older HV20) warning of a little tape noise in the audio. I own two other Mini DV cameras, and you do hear a little bit of the mechnism working. But this is different. It's disruptive. And I'm not alone in my thinking here. Do some digging and you'll find a few other reviews cropping up online with this complaint now.

If audio's not a big deal to you, or you plan on using extrenal mics, I'd say this is still an insanely great camera for you. But if you're getting it to grab baby's precious moments or anything like that, I have to strongly warn against getting this due to the tape noise in the audio. I consider it a deal-breaker.

On the upside, I'd like to note that I got a great deal on this camera using one of Amazon's partners on here, Butterfly Photo, and they were prompt, courteous, and easy to deal with when I returned the camera. Recommended. I'll likely be using them again to order my new camera (gonna give the HF100 a try instead... possibly an ever-so-slightly less perfect picture quality, but most reviewers are saying no moving parts = prestine audio and for me that makes it a far better overall final product.)

Want Canon VIXIA HV30 MiniDV High Definition Camcorder with 10x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom Discount?

I've spent the weekend shooting and editing with my Canon HV30, and overall, I'm very pleased with it. The image quality and color reproduction (when you switch "vivid" on in the settings) is superb. It's small, lightweight and the controls make sense. In a couple of hours I was able to put the manual away and know what I was doing. Low light performance is pretty good, with just a bit of noise all the way at iso 1600 (outside at night). It shoots very well indoors in normal lights and the auto white balance works perfectly as well.

It isn't all perfect, however. The manual focus control is inaccessible and sloppy. Thankfully the autofocus is very accurate and doesn't do a lot of hunting for what to focus on. The other problem is the zoom control. It is WAY too sensitive. You can set it for variable speed, but the slightest tremble in your finger causes a bump in the speed. I think I can learn to handle it. I'll just have to be very aware of keeping a light touch. I don't think I'll be able to work with the manual focus.

The camera doesn't come with a firewire or USB2 cable to connect to a computer. You need to buy that separately. But I was able to download hidef video effortlessly to iMovieHD using a Mac without any other installed software.

The built in microphone sucks. Definitely get Canon's optional shotgun mike Directional Microphone DM-50. That will handle just about any sound situation you run into. Also count on getting an extra battery pack or two. The included battery won't shoot long enough to fill an hour long tape. There are different sizes of batteries. Get the biggest one you can afford, along with the outboard charger, so you can be charging up the next battery while you are shooting. Also get at least four blank DV tapes to work with. You don't want to switch framerates, resolutions and aspect ratios on the same tape if you can help it.

Your whole kit, including all the accessories will fit in a very small camera bag. Pretty slick. And the quality of the movies you'll shoot will amaze you. Played back on a hidef screen, this camera is capable of producing very professional looking video.