Rating: 
Summary: It Plain Does The Job !
Review: Having read other reviews (one, here). I am compelled to write in praise of this little gem. I spent hours doing a spreadsheet analysis of the 5 or 6 contenders, using; size (in my hand), portability, video quality, ease of use (I am not a pro), and various tech numbers. Compared the Sony (PC 105, 330,) JVC and Panasonic to other Canon models. Well,..for MY use, this beauty does the Job. Hey, I throw it in my barn jacket and it's there (Very Important, why have one if you can't use it). I have 2 extra batteries (they are tiny) and a 256K SD card. What else? It takes great home movies, the stills (set to highest everything) are great "snapshots" I print out dozens(4X6) on a Canon i960 (dedicated just to pics). It works and it's a good deal (less than $900 delivered). So,.. it's not an XL-1, but heck, I wouldn't want lug that big thing around.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Family Camcorder, but in low light. . .
Review: I bought this camcorder in the fall of 2003 (it is Jan 2005 as I write this). We bought it to take with us on our trip to Disney World. It replaced our Sony 8mm Steady Shot camcorder that we bought back in 1994. I wanted a camcorder that was small enough to pack into a belt pack. The old 8mm required a good-sized camera bag that was a pain to lug around places like Disney World.
I really liked the fact that the camera could take still pictures too, as it meant there was a chance we wouldn't have to lug our Olympus D510 (2MP camera).
It worked quite well for that trip. An added benefit of it being so small was the fact that I could bring it along on long hikes. I took it with us the next year when we went to South Dakota to hike the Black Hills & Badlands.
Outdoors, this camera is excellent. The still photos are OK, I wouldn't recommend getting this camera to replace a camcorder AND digital camera, you won't be satisfied.
Inside and in low-light, however, the camera leaves a lot to be desired. It is understandable, the small lens can only gather so much light. I would say that our older 8mm camera performs better in low light. For indoor shots, I usually try to make sure we have ample lighting. The lack of an acessory shoe on this camera prevents you from attaching one of those [annoying] video camera spotlights.
The swing out LCD is the right size for viewing, it rotates around completely so you can use it for self-portraits, or just getting some really odd-angled shot (my relatively new Canon A85 has a similar LCD, though much smaller).
The one thing that I find is the most useful as of late is something I did not research as a requirement when shopping for a camcorder. The Analog->Digital pass-through feature blew away two other Analog Video capture cards. My old Dell (4550) came with a video capture card that would drop numerous frames. I bought an ATI All-In-Wonder card to import all my old analog and it didn't even compare to the pass through on the canon. Now I connect my old 8mm to the Optura 300, set the video mode to pass through and capture the video through the 1394 port, storing as .avi (on a nice big drive).
I've never used any of the funky digital effects. I would suggest saving your $$ and not making the inclusion/lack of effects part of your criteria for choosing a camcorder. You can do everything you need in your video editing software (I use Adobe Premiere Elements 1.0 now).
Somehow I have become a Canon-Fan over the past few years. When I bought this camcorder it was the only Canon gadget I owned. This past year I added the Canon A85 and the Digital Rebel to my collection of digital toys. To add to that last note, I am 'looking' at another camcorder and am only looking at Canon models (the Optura Xi to be exact).
I realize it might be late in the game to be rating this camera as the Optura 400 & 500 are out now. If you are researching those please take my experiences with Canon & the Optura line as positive notes on their offerings.
Rating:
Summary: Great camera with certain limitations
Review: I bought this camera as a supplement to by TRV80 to use on hiking trips in the southwest when space and weight are a factor. I love the picture quality and the 2 megapixel shots are definitely better than sony's although not quite as good as a dedicated digicam at the same resolution. As for why I chose this unit over the Sony's 330, it was largely due to price. I could buy two of these cameras for the cost of the sony and since I do not need the hotshue or the minor increase in still resolution, I felt the Canon was more cost effective. I should point out that the rest of this review will focus on problems I had with the unit. I can't be sure if these negatives are common with vertical compacts like this or if the issues are Canons alone so I will let you be the judge. Also, if you are planning to use a tripod or have a way to brace this camera while shooting, most of what I am about to say will be irrelevant. However, if you are using it on the go and will be taking action shots or using it at maximum telephoto range, you may be disappointed. Location of Microphone - It is located on the top of the viewfinder (by the way, the viewfinder is fixed and cannot be adjusted). Up until now, I did not notice that I breathe heavily as it never factored into my other videos. This unit had me holding my breath while I shot so I did not ruin the scene. Location of Zoom - This problem will vary with the size of someone's hands but I found it to be difficult to operate and hold the camera steady unless I used my pinky to control the zoom. My hands are small and I needed the top three fingers to steady the camera while I moved it. This problem is further exacerbated by tendancy of the zoom too move to quickly if not properly controlled. Photo/Tape switch - A seperate switch is used to move between the SD card and the Tape. Sony integrates this function on the start-up dial switch which makes it easier to remember to turn to the desired setting when turning the camera on. As it was, if I had last used the photo setting and turned the camera off and then wanted to shoot video, I almost always screwed-up and started recording in MPEG format on the SD. Not a terrible problem but it wastes time and may cause you to miss quick moving wildlife scenes. In fairness to the mechanical functioning of this unit, it probalby deserves four stars and not three. However, if you do not need the still camera feature, there are better cameras out there for your money and I just can't excuse the location of the microphone.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Camera if you have a reeeal steady hand.
Review: I bought this camera as a supplement to by TRV80 to use on hiking trips in the southwest when space and weight are a factor. I love the picture quality and the 2 megapixel shots are definitely better than sony's although not quite as good as a dedicated digicam at the same resolution. As for why I chose this unit over the Sony's 330, it was largely due to price. I could buy two of these cameras for the cost of the sony and since I do not need the hotshue or the minor increase in still resolution, I felt the Canon was more cost effective. I should point out that the rest of this review will focus on problems I had with the unit. I can't be sure if these negatives are common with vertical compacts like this or if the issues are Canons alone so I will let you be the judge. Also, if you are planning to use a tripod or have a way to brace this camera while shooting, most of what I am about to say will be irrelevant. However, if you are using it on the go and will be taking action shots or using it at maximum telephoto range, you may be disappointed. Location of Microphone - It is located on the top of the viewfinder (by the way, the viewfinder is fixed and cannot be adjusted). Up until now, I did not notice that I breathe heavily as it never factored into my other videos. This unit had me holding my breath while I shot so I did not ruin the scene. Location of Zoom - This problem will vary with the size of someone's hands but I found it to be difficult to operate and hold the camera steady unless I used my pinky to control the zoom. My hands are small and I needed the top three fingers to steady the camera while I moved it. This problem is further exacerbated by tendancy of the zoom too move to quickly if not properly controlled. Photo/Tape switch - A seperate switch is used to move between the SD card and the Tape. Sony integrates this function on the start-up dial switch which makes it easier to remember to turn to the desired setting when turning the camera on. As it was, if I had last used the photo setting and turned the camera off and then wanted to shoot video, I almost always screwed-up and started recording in MPEG format on the SD. Not a terrible problem but it wastes time and may cause you to miss quick moving wildlife scenes. In fairness to the mechanical functioning of this unit, it probalby deserves four stars and not three. However, if you do not need the still camera feature, there are better cameras out there for your money and I just can't excuse the location of the microphone.
Rating:
Summary: Great camera with certain limitations
Review: I bought this camera just a day before my trip to Alaska and it worked out great. Since there was not much time to read the thick manual, the controls were intuitive enough to operate. The video quality was great.
Pros:
- Great size. Very compact
- Great video quality with 2 Mega Pixals
- Easy to operate. Cons:
- Still pictures come better in light. Not good if the light is less
- Red eye reduction does not seem to work well for still pictures
- In the video, the sound recording seem to pick up wind and other noises more than you actually hear.
- Some times still pictures are not in focus.
Rating:
Summary: Great product for the price!!!
Review: I bought this goodie for less than $700 bucks from onecall.com, an authorized canon dealer so this qualifies me to a get a free 128MB SD card.
PROS: Really compact compared to lot of other cameras i compared with that had the same features, it really fits in my jacket pocket. Out door videos are amazingly great, had to be with 1.3MP of video quality, the other option i was looking at was sony 330 but that was way too pricey for me.
Still shots are exceptional although you cannot compare it with a stand alone digital still.
Menus are not complicated, even my wife can use it without hassels.
I had read reviews about the motor noise from the tape but i found that it had absolutely no noise when you record at the desired sound level in a quite atmosphere.
I know lot of reviews state that the microphone placement is bad as it sits right on top of the view finder but i didn't find this to be a serious problem as it picks up the subjects sound very well. The only problem with the mic placement is the sound variation when you speak vs. the subject speaking.
Zooming capability is amazing, the zoom is really smooth when compared to sony.
Image stability is excellent as long as you stay with in the optical zoom, once you hit the digital zoom(beyond 40X) you need to be really still, the manual provides you with few tips to increase the stability. Also, i rarely go to the digital zoom as 10X optical is more than enough for my use.
lots of predefined shooting modes.
This goodie provides a lot of digital effects.
The previous review said that s/he acciendtly recorded MPEGs instead of DV, but the on screen icons give you a clear indication of the media you are recording on, so no problem their as long as you see the on screen info.
LCD resolution is fantastic and i liked the fact that it is not too big, there by minimizing my battery drain.
The best feature i personally like compared with sony pc101/105/109 is that this one has all its control on the body, sony has a touch screen menu option and you could mess up your screen if you are not really careful.
Cons: The most outstanding problem i found with optura 300 is the low light recording. This provides 3 various low light recording but in the dark the super night shot mode any moving images create a drag effect and the recording resoultion is also grainy. Having said that the indoor + low light mode is adequate when shooting inside a home with no day light. The only problem is when it is pitch dark sony seems to be doing better.
Battery life is terrible, the battery provided with canon lasts 30-40 minutes, so i had to go in for an upgrade on the battery.
but i guess all camcorders have the same problem.
Overall it is a great camcorder for indoor and outdoor use.
Rating:
Summary: Fantastic Digital Camera Choice
Review: I would highly recommend this camera to anyone who is in the market for a camcorder. I purchased the optura 300 several months ago and have been utilizing it heavily ever since. The camera takes excellent movies of both indoor and outdoor events. I could not be happier with my choice. I did purchase a longer-lived battery which has worked out well. I keep the standard battery charged as a backup, but the larger battery has never died on me even during days that I shot a significant amount of footage. I would like to point out of few issues I have had with it:
1) The instruction manual leaves much to the imagination, especially with how to download the recorded motion pictures onto a PC. There are many other gaps in the manual. 2) This camera is not for the technologically challenged. I would guess that this is not limited to this specific camera, but is an issue with the entire class of cameras. To burn DVDs and do any kind of editing, the user must have a video capture card & firewire installed on their PC. In addition, downloading movies onto a PC requires LOTS of hard drive space. I installed a 2nd hard drive for this purpose. In addition I needed to install a DVD RW drive so I could burn DVDs. I also upgraded my RAM. Although all of these are easy installs in newer PC's, it can be a daunting task just for a person to figure out what is actually needed not to mention knowing how to actually install it. Combined with shortcomings in the manual, I could see this being fatal for some users. If you are technologically challenged, I would recommend the cameras that burn directly to DVD. 3) At the extreme end of the zoom, the camera seems to have trouble focusing and is very shaky. This is not that big of an issue as long as the user keeps this in mind while framing the video. 4) I am not really happy with the quality of the still images captured by this camera. These images can be saved onto a flash card or onto the digital tape. With perfect lighting, the images are good, but I have found that when the flash is needed, the images are completely over exposed. The red-eye reduction feature does not work at all to reduce red eye. Please do not let these negatives taint my review. I love this camera but I wanted to put all the issues that I have found with it out there.
Rating:
Summary: Good DV Camera, but MPEG digital below par
Review: MiniDV
Okay, if you want a compact (hand-size) DV camera with excellent video, this is a great product for you.
The DV recording has many advanced options you can access by changing the configuration through menus. The default configuration is great for automatic recording without having to know what to configure and how to set up. Easy to use in auto mode.
The MiniDV tape loads to the back, but it will not fall out unless you try to make it fall out.
The resolution/picture is very sharp, and you get the necessary accessories to view video on the TV in high quality: Audio/Video and SVideo cables. MPEG4 - really ASF (Microsoft Advanced Streaming Format)
So I was disapointed with this.
Perhaps the video cannot be written to the card fast enough to allow for higher resolution, so the resolution is half the size of what is recorded on MiniDV. AND when you play it back on the TV, it is only displayed in half size (half size view area than normal TV (and MiniDV Tape) viewing). However, this was not the biggest disapointment, as it was documented to be half the resolution in the manual you can download from http://www.canondv.com .
The biggest disapointment was the digital movie format the video is saved in. When the product specifications said MPEG4, I was expecting standard MPEG4 -- no, not the case! Instead of strict standard MPEG4, you get the Microsoft proprietary ASF format! Great if all you want to do is play back the clip in Windows Media Player. If you want to edit, you will need to get software. I use Apple iMovie, and that does not recognize ASF movie files. Apple iMovie supports MPEG4 though.
Best yet, if the file format were AVI or standard MPEG4 I would actually be able to use the movie clip in Linux - which was my original hope.
Look on the internet for Freeware file convertors and other movie tools, and you will see a lot for AVI and MPEG4, but not ASF (This is available in Shareware apps - but you must buy to get higher quality conversion beyond MPEG1). I have the canon Powershot S200 which records video in AVI. I can import it into iMovie or Windows Movie Maker, and even save it on CD-R and play it back on my Philips DVD 724 DVD player (downfall is that canon powershot s200 records ony 4 seconds in 640x480, 2MP (They had a bad idea that all movie clips should fit on a floppy disk! - argh!)). Why did Canon not keep using AVI, or basic MPEG4? Storage is not an issue since these days you can purchase 1GB SD Cards - and they will be getting cheaper and bigger in the next year. (of course xD-picture cards would have been nice instead of SD cards) Concerning the digital video, however, you can record a lot of that ASF formatted movie video on Memory Cards (200MB for 60 minutes of video). You'll need to pay $100 for Pinacle Studio or some other software if you want to actually do something with the footage you took. Additional Advice:
You will want extra batteries. Look at Lenmar (www.lenmar.com) Batteries, to get equal quality and guaranteed compatibility for less than half the cost. (also look here for battery chargers)
You do not need the higher speed Ultra SD cards (higher speed) to record the highest resolution ASF video - so better to stick with less expensive regular speed (non-Ultra) SD Cards (unless you want Ultra just to transfer faster to Win/Mac/Linux).
Rating:
Summary: Last review is irrelevant!!!
Review: Okay, although I haven't purchased the Optura 300 (yet) I have to set a few things straight. The last poster was obviously a SONY lover, you have to watch for biased reviews!! I am split between the SONY's and Canon but let's at least use the facts. First of all back in 10/03 there was a price difference but as of today (3/8/04) I can actually find the Optura 300 cheaper than the PC-105 and only $100 more than the gs-70. ANd is he saying that you don't need another battery with the SONY's? Yeah right!! BUT THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE THE POSTER FORGOT TO MENTION OR DIDN"T STRESS IS THAT THE 300 has TWICE the RESOLUTION of the PC105 - how could you compare the two when fundamentally the Optura 300 has a better resolution - and now they're the same price. As always do your own research and don't rely on reviews like this one!!! Happy hunting!
Rating:
Summary: Last review is irrelevant!!!
Review: the optura 300's selling points are its small size and ability to capture 2MP stills. but in my opinion, there are two hundred reasons ($$) to look elsewhere. pros:
- ultra compact design (2.0 x 4.6 x 4.0 inches), very light weight at 15.9 oz.
- 10x optical zoom.
- very good video performance when you have enough light.
- analog-to-digital conversion.
- 2MP stills.
- ability to capture MPEG4 movies directly into SD card.
- allows a good deal of manual control.
- supports add-on lenses and lots of optional accessories.
- miniDV media is widely supported.
- great connectivity options: firewire, USB, S-video, headphone, mic input, etc.
- very silent motor operation - you can't hear anything even in a quiet environment.
- built-in pop-up flash and AF assist lamp for taking stills.
- continuous shooting mode at 30 VGA images at 3 fps.
- bright LCD.
- as with most canon products, the printed manual is very good. cons:
- high price, especially compared to sony's pc-105 and panasonic's gs-70.
- below average low light performance.
- no accessory shoe (it's really puzzling to me why canon didn't incorporate a hot shoe).
- lots of controls in the rear part of the camcorder - this will take getting used to.
- image stabilization could be better.
- below average battery life with included battery.
- video is pretty useless (very choppy) with low light modes, even with built-in LED lamp.
- this camcorder loads from the rear; depending on your tripod, you may or may not be able to replace your tape while mounted on a tripod.
- viewfinder does not extend.
- as with the Elura 50, mic placement is on top of camcorder (most vertical camcorders do) which means it picks up the videographer's voice more readily.
- higher capacity batteries are bigger than what was supplied (BP-407) and WILL protrude sideways from this camcorder's body, making holding this unit a bit awkward.
- even with 2MP stills on this camcorder, you can still do better with a stand-alone digital camera.
- it would have been nice to get a bigger 3.5" LCD.
- 8MB SD card provided is inadequate so add $$ to your budget to buy more memory.
- you'll definitely want to buy a spare battery so add a few more $$ to your budget. the optura 300 is a solid camcorder when you have sufficient lighting with the hook of 2MP stills. but i believe that you can do better. if you want a matchbox style ultra-compact camcorder, you would be better off with sony's pc-105. or, you can get panasonic's gs-70 and move up to 3CCD video performance. either way, you'll end up with a camcorder with similar features as the optura 300 (except for the 2MP still capability) and have a couple of hundred bucks left over for more electronic toys! i hope this helps you with your buying decision. peace
|
