Digital-MiniDV Reviews

I have worked with professional level Beta units, and prosumer DV cameras such as the Canon XL1. Although the Optura lacks some of their useful features, like zebra striping, it has fantastic image quality that rivals 3-CCD units, in a very compact package.

Having the flash is a must to make the still mode useful, if you ever want to use it. Exposure was good and image quality fairly good, considering it is only a 1.3 Mpx image.

I have larger hands but I found the camera very comfortable to hold. I have had problems with other Canon gear because I find they design for very small hands compared to Nikon.

I have not seen any of the rewinding problems reported in the other review of this product, after about 20 hours of use.

My only complaint is that low light performance can be weak. I would be concerned about trying to shoot good video in candlelight conditions (i.e. Thanksgiving Dinner) but those would be tough conditions for any camera. Nor would I ever consider using something like Sony NightShot -- I'm not interested in family video that looks like war footage.

A great camera, at a better price point than the comparable Sony PC-110.

I bought my Optura 100MC earlier this year. I looked at the Sony models but went with this one instead mostly because of optical image stabilization (rather than electronic) as the more elegant technical solution (and presumably better quality too). Except for some extra built-in effects in the Sony, the top consumer models are pretty much the same between the two companies. The Canon unit was worth the investment and I've already produced a number of feature length homevideos. The range of accessories is great (I have a wide angle lens, a directional microphone and a videolight that plugs into the accessory shoe and is powered by the camera battery). If you're new to digital video, as I was, don't underestimate the long slippery slope of follow-up purchases that you will inevitably get sucked into (I got a new PC at 2.4GHz speed, 1GB RAM and 80+120GB storage, with DVD burning capability and Adobe Premiere editing software to do it "right"). I've run the camera for 6 months now (with approx. 20 hrs. of raw footage, translating into maybe 5 times as much in terms of "tape operation" time) without running into any real problems, and specifically: no tape eating. (To be transparent, I also try to avoid recording over existing material). Only glitch was that the screws of the hand strap inside the tape door came loose and had to be fastened (I used a Swiss knife) and secured (glue). I love this camera.

After 6 months of researching digital camcorders, I finally settled on the Optura 100MC. I am glad that I did. It got some heavy use over the past month and I am extreamly pleased with its performance.

Highlights:
> Great video
> Easy to use (once you read the instruction booklet)
> Fits nicely in your hand
> Numerous manual options to control lighting, etc...
> Takes real good digital stills
> Fun to use
> Have not encountered any tape eating problems

Drawbacks:
> Instruction booklet is long so allow about 3 - 4 hours to read it in order to get the most out of your camcorder
> High price but you can find it cheaper by doing a little searching on the internet
> Cover on front of camera to protect DC adapter plug and S-Video port is attached by a cheap plastic connecter
> Audio pickup is not that good

I am extreamly happy with the Optura 100MC and it took me a long time and a lot of hours of research to locate the most bang for the buck. Definetly consider the Optura 100MC if you are purchasing a digital camcorder.

except the motor noise heard on the tape, its really annoying

I have purchased this product after checking no. of other makes and models like jvc,sony etc etc.Features I like the most are
1) 16x powerful optical zoom Sony has only 10x even in top models
2) 1/4 inch ccd, excellent indoor video quality.
3) Rock solid image stabilisation, no shaky videos.
4) Excellent point and shoot.
5) 1.33 megapixel still photos.
Features I do'nt like are
1) Little bigger and heavy, but good for stable video.
2) Motor noise is heard in recordings.
2) Video conferencing available only on windows xp.

I have been using the GL1 for nearly 3 years now. I take it out on shoots for a website I work on... sometimes I create QuickTime Movies, sometimes I take stills from footage and convert the stills to .JPG files.

The 30-lux capacity means you can walk into a subdued lighting environment such as a dining room lit by a single candle and get very good, balanced exposure. It is not like an infrared camera or anything, however... there must be SOME non infrared light, or you get nothing.

The 30x zoom can't be beat. You can be 50 yards away from a person and zoom in and get a shot of their nose... in many ways, it must be seen to be appreciated.

Considering the features, the unit is light-weight, but newer digital camcorders of similar strengths are now on the market for far less and weigh half as much. Still, the GL1 is easy to hold with one hand while using the eye piece or the LCD panel.

I only have a few criticisms. For one, the unit does not ship with a firewire cable. If you are ordering this item for its firewire compatibility, you will need to order a 6-to-4 pin firewire cable separately. (6-pin for your Mac, 4-pin for the GL1).

Also, the GL1 has a tendency to eat tapes. For a while, I thought I was just getting deffective tapes, but a co-worker got a DV deck and the deck was able to view and use the tapes without difficulty. Just viewing the tapes on the DV deck seemed to "fix" whatever the GL1 perceive was wrong with the tapes. On occasion I will get an all red "WARNING: EJECT TAPE" display on the LCD panel... I then eject the tape, rewind it a bit on the DV deck and then I can use it fine for several weeks w/ the GL1. This has been a problem from day one and I have head-cleaning tapes.

The unit has a tripod screw mount on the bottom and a hot shoe on top, so it's a good piece of hardware for professionals.

The battery that ships with the unit will only run for about 30 minutes on a full charge... but that's 30 minutes of actual recording, rewinding, etc. I highly recommend getting an additional 2 hour battery as back-up, especially if you're stuck somewhere and don't have the luxury of having an AC wall socket nearby. You can run the camera straight off AC power, but it is awkward... you must run the cord from the GL1 to the charger and the charger is then plugged into the wall. This extra cord does not come with the unit and you must buy it separately. It would have been nice if they had included this cord as well as a DC charger for the car.

Back when I was ordering this item, I spoke with Canon directly to ask them information about the firewire capabilities, etc. Afer speaking to a customer service rep. for over 1 hour, it was obvious that the folks answering the phones for Canon absolutely know NOTHING about their own products or terminology used in photography or videography... if the answers are not in the little book in front of them, they are worse than uninformed... they tell you the wrong information. If you want more information about the features of this camera, seriously examine the specs featured here on Amazon and read all of the reviews.

I bought this camera about 10 months back, and at the time made a compromise in choosing it because I couldn't afford the XL1S. What I've learned though after using it for so long now is that Canon didn't compromise on this camera. The GL1 has essentially every feature the aspiring film maker or video professional needs to get underway quickly and easily.

My favorite feature of this camera is the frame mode ability that allows you to shoot non-interlaced video, with results that are very similar in appearance to film rather than video. After shooting in frame mode and seeing the results, I've yet to shoot interlaced video again.

The one thing that this camera lacks is any ability to manually control the audio levels for the internal or external mics, which can sometimes give you less than optimal results in situations where the noise volume fluctuates noticably, or where you are trying to achieve a specific audio effect.

Summary - Excellent camera worth the price tag. Across the board, far more features and better quality than all competitors in its class. Probabaly the only camera that can top the GL1 in this class is the GL2.

First, the visceral. The image quality is stunning, and the creative license and possibilities afforded through DV are staggering. With a GL1 and a good NLE like Premiere, the only limit is your creativity. Effects that just a few years ago started at tens of thousands of dollars on film can now be rendered realtime.

Now the practical. I spent a fair bit of time looking through the market at the 'low pro' end. Canon's GL1 and XL1 were clearly in the running, as were several Sony products. What finally sold me on the GL1 was the flourite lens, which to my eye has a noticeably brighter image, as well as the optical image stabilization, which provides a more natural looking view also. I have to say that I find the manual zoom feature useless as it's a servo controlled focus rate, and very difficult to 'stop' in a slow focus. I've found that using the 'automatic/manual' focus switch to allow the camera to bring the subject into focus, then switching immediately to 'manual' to lock the focus is very effective as a workaround. The only time this doesn't work well is at the limit of either the optical focus or the digital focus when the subject is poorly defined versus its background. In these situations, the rangefinding system seems to 'hunt', giving a nauseating soft in/out blur. Truthfully, using the camera under these cirucumstances is rare, and this is the only criticism I've got for the system. An often overlooked feature of DV is that the audio quality is about the same as CD, and is digital. This means that even your home movies now have DAT audio quality! Despite many comments to the contrary, I've been very favourably impressed with the quality of the audio, including the stereo separation.

I also mentioned the XL1, but the only difference I could see was perhaps better audio, and for the considerable extra expense and size, it wasn't a good tradeoff for me.

We purchased the Elura 65 for our new baby who is due in one month. This camera is small and sleek with a very nice look to it. We just received it a few days ago and have done several tests in different lighting. The quality is BEAUTIFUL outdoors and indoors with the lights on or with the natural sunlight coming in. However, the picture was very dark and grainy when we filmed at a wedding the other night. Keep in mind that the lighting in the place was very dim...there was little to no light. I've done a lot of research on Mini DV camcorders recently and I've yet to see one that takes good pictures in low light areas. I'm wondering if there is an external light that I can purchase for my new camera. This is not reason enough to return the camera, since the reviews on all the other brands and models state the same problem. I just think it's something that needs to be fine-tuned on ALL mini DV cameras in general.

The 16x optical zoom is fabulous on this camera and there is NO motor noise (or at least none that we can hear) as the Canon ZR models claim to have.

One drawback which MAY be a problem is that since this camera is so small (smaller in height than the Canon ZR models), it seems like it can be hard to hold steady...but I'm hoping that's where the image stabilization will come in.

Overall, it's a great little camera!

I bought my Elura 40MC 1.5 years ago. For the first year it worked fine. However, after the warranty ran out I began to have the notorious "tape eating problem" that everyone is talking about. I would steer clear of this product since Canon is reluctant to do anything about it.

I bought this camcorder for a trip to Europe and I love it. I could store it in my jacket pocket when not using it and didn't have to drag around a huge bag with a bunch of useless equipment. This is my first camcorder (and first camera since an old Olympus 35mm), so I'm clearly an amateur. It's got more features than I'll use in 2 lifetimes, so there should be enough to satisfy almost everyone.

Video--is excellent, especially outdoors. Weather doesn't matter, as long as it's outside. It was cloudy all but one day and the video is awesome. Indoor is grainy if the light is too low, but reading reviews of other camcorders, I couldn't find one which said "great video quality indoors." All are grainy indoors. Live with it. You buy this for the size.

Still Pix--are not great. But are you buying a camcorder or camera? If all you care about are still pix, save yourself a few hundred bucks and buy a still-camera. No small camcorder offers a 4 or 5 megapixel resolution with stills. Even the Sony MicroDV only offers 2MP still resolution. With the exposure set to "super fine" I was pleased with the resolution, but I've seen pictures from a 4 MP still camera, and the images don't compare. The pix are not bad, but not excellent. But then, I care about video...not pictures--it's a camcorder afterall.

Sound--I think is great. Yea, there is the motor whine when it's quiet. But guess what, after a few seconds, you tune it out and forget about it. It is not very annoying at all. It does tend to amplify the voice of whomever is doing the recording. But what microphone doesn't amplify the sound closest to it?

SD/MMC card--is only tested by Canon to 64MB (per customer service) which is bad. They recommend not using anything higher than 64.

Battery--doesn't last too long, especially the smaller one. I forked over the money to buy the larger battery and it is well worth it. This way, when it runs down, you pop in the small one and you have another 30-50min of filming.

Ease of Use--I had filmed some items and was watching it on TV within 20 minutes of taking it out of the box. I had the still camera and fader/digital effects figured out within another 20 minutes or so. You must read the manual. It's real easy.

Buttons--are not small considering the size of the camcorder. If you need bigger buttons, buy a bigger camcorder. Remember, you buy this for the size.

Overall--it is great. Fantastic outdoor video and sound pickup with unbelievable portability and ease of use. This is not a "professional" camcorder. It should be used for "hobby" filming and as a great travel-size camcorder. If you need more bells and whistles (external mic mount, attached light) you need a bigger camera. As far as the "save yourself the trouble and buy a Sony" crowd, I've owned many Sony products and find they don't perform any better than anything else. But Sony always seems to want a few hundred more of your hard earned dollars to make you think their product is better. Ask someone about software compatability with their MicroDV camcorder...then watch 'em squirm.

Armed with lots of research and my wife's two criteria for selecting a camcorder (it had to be small and easy to use) we bought the Elura MC 40 for its list of features in a very small and very cool package -- plus the canon quality. This one has all the features of a full-sized DV cam, but fits into a small, padded waist pack with a couple of tapes, batteries, and the charger without a problem. This was key as we are expecting our first child and didn't want to add too much to the extra baggage we'll be carrying.

This one doesn't have megapixel stills at 1020x960, but it's still tons better than 640x480 on most compact cams, and we have a 35mm for the serious photography anyway. Lots of great on-camera editing and shooting features, and some basic photo and movie editing software included. If you're going to do some serious movie editing, I'd recommend purchasing a better software package or taking advantage of one of Canon's mail-in rebate deals.

Mac users, you'll love this one. We had a pre-USB Powerbook running OS 8.6 and bought USB and Firewire PCMCIA cards for it. It runs just great without spending the extra cash upgrading the OS like the card manufacturers say to. Also, I wouldn't spend the extra cash on the expensive firewire cards that a Mac specific. I picked up an inexpensive IBM card [$$] at the local computer store, plugged it in, downloaded the supporting drivers from Apple, and it fired right up.

You will have a lot of fun with this cam. We took it out for the first time on July 4th, and everyone was amazed by it. Plugged it into the S-video on the nearest TV, and we had a great time watching the day's events!

Sending mine back-- liked the small profile and features. Shot a few minutes of video on a new tape. Brought it home to watch it and ate the tape up when I tried to rewind it. I'm glad I was only trying it out, I'd hate to have the tape of something important get eaten by the machine.

This camcorder combines ease of use, picture quality and convenience in a very small package. It has a wide variety of features, most of which I have not even begun to play around with.

For travel purposes, I can't imagine going anywhere without this compact yet powerful camcorder -- you can throw it in a fanny pack and hardly even notice it's there (but be sure to buy the 2 hr extended battery if you plan on shooting footage for more than 1/2 an hour). It also doubles as a digital camera, but take note that the digital photos it takes on the multi-media card are not suitable for print-quality photos; rather, it's a handy way to take pics and send them over email or post them to a website with decent picture quality without having to go and buy a digital camera (or travel with both).

It's also great for capturing high-speed action with the digital scan mode. Tape a golf swing, hockey game or skiing action and replay it in slow-motion.

I have no complaints to level against this product, and I have no reservations recommending this if you're looking for a high-quality camcorder that you can take just about anywhere and not have to worry about weight and bulk.

This is absolutely the best camcorder I have ever seen. We went to several electronic stores looking at different digital camcorders. I was impressed, but felt they were still too big to take along everywhere I needed to go. I went on-line and searched for camcorders seeing if there was anything smaller. The Canon popped up and I got it on that basis.

Little did I imagine the power and features of this little device. A few highlights:

1. The size is absolutely perfect. It fits easily into a front pants pocket, where it can be forgotten until needed.

2. The quality of the resultant output is wonderful. The auto-focus and auto-exposure is usually dead on. The resultant output looks more like DVD rather than the VHS-like quality of the older analog systems.

3. The firewire interface allows you to capture scans to your PC. Add an editing package like Adobe Premiere and you can make really professional movies. While it's true, as one reviewer says that it doesn't come with the firewire cable, mine came with my PC card.

4. The total effect of this camera, small size, quality and PC interface results in a whole new animal. Digital cameras and image software have given users complete control of a digital darkroom. This Canon brings the same result to movies.

A few minor complaints:

5. Battery life is quite short. You will want to pick up at least one extra battery, two if you're doing extended filming.

6. The Zoom seems backward, pushing forward should zoom in, not zoom out.

7. The still camera is handy for embedding still shots in your films, but the resolution is probably not good enough for printing to paper. On the plus side, I got a larger memory card that can hold over 500 shots on one card.

Overall though, i couldn't be happier with this camera. A wonderful tool for preserving memories and producing first-class movies.

I originally did extensive research on the "vertical palm size" mini-DV camcorders and narrowed my decision down to the Sony DCR-PC9, the Canon Elura 20MC and the JVC GR-DVM75. Let me tell you that this was an extremely difficult evaluation because all three cameras have their strengths and weaknesses and there was no clear choice. To make a long story short, I ended up purchasing all 3 camcorders and performed side by side comparisons which was the only effective way to full assess the cameras.

Although you can make arguments that one camera had slightly sharper images or another one handled colors well, all three cameras produced crisp, accurate colored images in outdoor sunlight settings. Cannon claims about 400 lines of resolution, Sony states up to 500 and JVC claims 520 lines. Unless you are viewing on a high definition TV or computer monitors, you could not distinguish between the resolutions and even then, the differences are subtle. Under outdoor overcast conditions, the colors for all 3 cameras were on the dull side but the video still was of decent quality. All three camcorders did not perform well under low light conditions. The low light video taping was indoors at night with single or double lamp lighting with light bulbs between 60 and 100 watts. The Cannon Elura produced the poorest quality video (even with the low light setting) - very dark and grainy. The Sony and JVC with standard auto-shutter settings produced about the same level of video quality which was less grainy but still on the dark side. The lower shutter speed settings on the JVC and Sony improves the image but the video becomes very choppy. As stated in other reviews, the Sony Night Shot (IR based) feature is impressive and works relatively well under "no light" conditions but creates the greenish monotone image. FYI, I find the Lux rating of each camera to be somewhat meaningless since there is no standard for this specification.

Sound quality is good on all 3 cameras but I do agree with the other reviewers who have commented on the problems associated with having the microphone located on the top of the camera. All the camcorders pick up some motor noise but the noise seemed to be more prevalent on the Canon. I also thought the sound was a little muffled on the Canon when compared to the other two camcorders. The Canon and JVC have wind screen options but I found them to be of limited value.

Not surprisingly, the digital stills from all 3 cameras were extremely poor. Even with the XGA resolution and built-in flash, the JVC stills were only marginally better than that of the other cameras. The best field stills (captured from video) came from the Canon and then the JVC. If you want to produce "print quality" digital stills, my recommendation is to purchase a separate dedicated digital camera instead of spending extra money on a higher CCD count.

You can read about specific features and functions in other reviews for the 3 camcorders but here is a summary of my side by side comparison:

For the Canon Elura 20MC
Pros: Quality Video, Progressive Scan, extended Recording Modes, good ergonomics and design, well constructed, the smallest of the 3 camcorders, manual exposure and shutter speed settings
Cons: Poor low light quality, short battery life, too small for large hands, microphone picks up the most motor noise of the 3 cameras, poor stills, no software, requires an attachment for external microphone and head phone, no USB support, the least features/functions of the 3 cameras

For the Sony DCR-PC9
Pros: Quality Video, NightShot, the most features/functions of the 3 cameras, battery life was about 30% better than the other camcorders, lens ring for manual focus, 30 mm lens - a little easier to find filters and attachments
Cons: Construction feels cheap, Poor Ergonomics, poor stills, cumbersome menu system, uses Sony's proprietary memory stick, limited remote controller functions

For the JVC GR-DVM75
Pros: Quality Video, High Band Processor emulates progressive scan, Built In Flash, well designed remote controller, good number of features/settings
Cons: Construction feels cheap, Poor stills, short battery life, poor viewfinder resolution, requires a docking station for USB connection,

Here are a couple of general observations for purchasing a camcorder. Most sales people only know the specs of each camera but have limited (if any) "actual use" experience outside the store. The image quality on the LCD screen is not a good indicator of the actual quality of the recorded video - you really need to view the video image on a TV screen. Finally, you cannot fully assess the quality of a camcorder within the confines of a store.

Because I enjoy the special functions and am planning to do quite a bit of indoor video taping I decided to keep the Sony. I really hated to give up the Canon progressive scan. I originally thought I would keep the Canon but the poor quality video in low light eventually prompted me to evaluate the Sony. Based on other reviews, I also had some concerns with the quality of the JVC hardware but the construction seemed to be on par with that of the Sony camcorder. The bottom line is that each camcorder is an excellent product and the best camera for you is dependent on your needs. If you are on a budget, the JVC offers the best overall value, performance, and features for your money. If you are primarily video taping under good lighting conditions and want to capture stills from video, then I would recommend the Cannon. The Elura was also the most compact, most comfortable and best designed. If you need a camera with many digital effects, options and special functions and are video taping in lower light/night conditions then I would purchase the Sony. Good luck!

I bought a Canon Elura 20MC this weekend.

My recent interest in DV camcorders sprang to life when I started working with Apple's Final Cut Pro. It's such a beautifully engineered piece of software, with incredible capabilities. With these kinds of tools available, the idea of making movies becomes much more attractive. (I think no one is truly interested in seeing even ten minutes of anyone's vacation, kids, what-have-you, if it's just the raw video.) With these tools at my disposal, I became very interested in getting a camcorder again.

I'd been hemming and hawing for a couple weeks, lusting over the Canon XL-1, the GL-1, other 3-chip cameras around 2 grand. I usually veer towards professional grade products and as I mention below, I'm glad I'm not lugging an XL-1 around now.

My only problem with them is the "look" of video. I started shopping for a video camera, but what I really wanted was one that pretended to be a movie camera. I wanted non-interlaced frames. If you know what that means, then you know what I mean. I have read great things on the web about the Canon XL-1/GL-1's abilities to create a single, non-interlaced frame and smartly duplicate it into both fields. Apparently, the elura does a similar trick, but I'm not sure how. The X(G)L-1 cameras have three chips, and they use the green channel to construct the other lines and copy the frame into the other field: it ends up looking like a single frame. The Elura only has one chip, so I don't know how they do it, but there's some stuff around the web about how the Elura is lumped into the same category as the other two (much more expensive) cameras when it comes to this feature. One thing though is certain about the progressive scan/frame mode/digital motor drive etc.. No matter what you call it, or which camera does it, the duration of the shutter can be no less than 1/60th of a second, so you end up with footage that looks like film running at 30 frames per second, but with a very high, crisp shutter speed. Everything tends to looks a little bit like the battle sequences in Saving Private Ryan, especially if it moves fast. Anyways, I'd still rather have than not have it, and the footage looks remarkably "filmy" and gritty compared to the other, standard video look. In general I like it, though it's harsher than I'd hoped for. So that's a nice feature of the Elura. From what I've read on the web about Sony's progressive scanning, it's 15 frames per second intended for pulling sharp still frames, and many people have found it very disappointing. It's amazing how "Progressive Scan" is such a touted feature for camcorders, but everybody seems to have a different idea of what it's for and how to implement it.

Another claimed feature of the Elura is an "RGB Primary color Filter" I'm not sure exactly what this means. I know it's an excellent idea to split light into three primary components and have a separate CCD chip for each color: Professional cameras and a few prosumer cameras have three chips, and the image quality (especially the color fideity) is superb because of it. What's this filter then? Is it thousands of RGB spots all lined up exactly coincident with CCD pixels? Is is some kind of special dichroic prism? I don't know. I wish it was something that gave 3 chip cameras a run for their money. I wish Canon would elaborate. The color on my new camera is very nice, but I have a sneaking suspicion it doesn't hold a candle to a 3-chip camera.

When you shop for camera, you have all these ideas about what important, but when you actually take one home, all that goes out the window, and a bunch of other, totally different priorities come into focus. Yes, the whole progressive scan thing is still important to me, and I've been using it all the time, but the best thing about this camera is the size. It's tiny. you can fit it into you pants pocket. You can turn off the beeps and lights so no one knows you're taping, and because of that, coupled with the small size, you're there with it, taping away. The Canon GL-1 or Sony TVR900 seem massive compared to it. Which would you take: decent footage from a single chip, tiny camera, or nothing at all from a machine you're too afraid to pull out bacause it's too obtrusive? It's incredible how compact this camera is.

I have to admit, the Elura is very cool-looking. It has a feeling a quality in the metallic, silver finish and a pleasing weight. It has a nice array of manual overrides that work wonderfully: the focus/exposure locks are placed smartly where you can switch them intuitively while taping. That's fast become one of my favorite things about the Elura. It has an attention to detail in the engineering and miniaturization that make the Sonys look prehistoric: the size and thoughtful placement of buttons, the size of the LCD screen, the implementation of features and the menu system design are all very well done. Nothing is wasted, which is a good idea in such a small device. The supplied battery is a bit anemic, so a spare, larger battery would be a recommended accessory. Another neat thing it comes with is a little docking unit that screws into the base of the camera. It has Mic inputs, headphone outputs and S-video outputs. The lens is fine, and I've just been shutting off the digital zoom feature. Going into the digital portion of the zoom results in abysmal image quality. I think the Optura has higher density CCD, so the digital zoom there might be something worth using, but on the Elura, it's truly a waste of time. The memory card feature is something I'll never use either: at 640 X 480, the still images are something I'd rather not have it at all, so I might as well have just bought the Elura 10: which appears to be less expensive and identical in all respects except the card feature.

All in all, highly recommended.

The first thing I asked myself before my purchase was "How will I want to use the camera?" My main use will be for travel photography and for family video. Size and weight is an important consideration. As a woman, I have smaller hands and the Canon fits very nicely in one hand with easy access to most of the features. I think with more use I will find I can maneuver even more easily through the various buttons and on screen menus.

When traveling, it is most important to have a camera that can easily be concealed and this little gem fits nicely into a pocket that is easily guarded. It is far too easy for a strap or bag to bag to be cut. Also, filming is very unobtrusive and with the 10X optical zoom I can stay far enough from a subject to film comfortably.

The camera does have some drawbacks, but they were not of primary importance to me. Low light photography left something to be desired and the 640 x 480 stills were not of the same quality as the stills with my standard digital camera. Since I do have that camera, and can use it for much higher resolutions as well, the two cameras should compliment each other nicely.

I have only just tried some of the additional features, but all seemed to work well and I may, perhaps oneday want to combine a photo with a frame or blue screen. For me, these were just nice little extras I probably can live without.

When I bought my camera I was able to compare video screen images with other similar cameras and found the in store images to be excellent in comparison with comparable JVC and Sony cameras in the same price range.

I purchased a 2nd small battery rather than the larger one since I wanted to keep the size and weight low. I also purchased an extended warranty which included a yearly cleaning of the camera. That alone, I believe, made it a good value. Having had experiences with video cameras costing more than their value for repairs, this seemed quite expedient.

So far I have found this to be a very enjoyable camera to use and I think I shall have many great years of pleasure from it.