Decent camcorder for the frugal crowd

This was my first digital camcorder. Let me admit, I'm frugal, perhaps cheap, yet also quality minded. I continued to use my JVC VHS-C camcorder right up until this summer (2008!). I was definitely not enamoured with the low resolution of the VHS-C format, but the quality of the JVC optics and the strong build of the camcorder (and the high prices of digital camcorders) balanced that out. I must say the old camcorder did perform well, within the limits of the VHS format.

So, I had JVC in mind when I went looking for a new camcorder. Hmmm....High-Def camcorders were still too pricey in my area. Standard-definition digital camcorders were just right, price wise. What to go with? Mini-DVD...no...the disks are too vulnerable to damage and don't have a lot of recording time at the best quality setting. Flash or Hard-drive? Nice, random access video and USB, but a little pricier and in order to fit more video on them they use a more aggressive video compression method.

So...that leaves MiniDV. Yes they are still making a few cameras in this format for the consumer. MiniDV was once the king of the hill, and is still quite widely used by consumers and pros. A lot of independent documentaries are done on MiniDV. It's reliable, the media is cheap, provides DVD resolution and has the least aggressive video compression algorithm of all of the current Standard Definition formats. It's not cutting edge anymore (no random access, real-time video transfer) but it's a proven and reliable technology...and the end result (the video) looks just as good as any other Standard-Def format out there.

In the price range I was considering it was a toss up between the JVC GR-D850 and the Canon ZR900. Both have similar features. The Canon has the addition of an eye-piece viewfinder. The JVC did not have the eye-piece. The Canon had an external microphone input, while the JVC did not. However, the JVC had a built-in LED light (for filming in the dark), superior low-light performance (according to the specs) and felt more solid. The thing that snagged it for me was when the JVC went on sale in my local store for almost $60 less than the Canon! I can live with the lack of an eyepiece because the fold-out screen is very good. The microphone jack I will miss, however the built-in microphone is very sensitive. If I do need to close-mic something (like a musical performance) I can always separately record the location audio with my minidisc recorder and merge the two later in software (in imitation of the pros!).

I am pretty pleased with the JVC GR750. It performs well for the cost. A big plus about this camcorder is that it CAN record true 16:9 aspect ratio video (using the full CCD....no fake letterboxing). This is an absolute must, seeing as all TVs are going that way.

The video quality is definitely better than my old VHS camera. Frankly, I was a little underwhelmed with the difference. I was expecting, in the changeover from analogue to digital, to be totally blown away by the difference. In reality, the image IS better, but on my analogue 27" CRT TV it's not stunningly so. On something sharp like a computer monitor, the difference is slightly more apparent. There's also a little less video artefacting around the edges of shapes (where the contrast is great, etc.) than with the VHS. I suppose, though, that if I really wanted to be blown away, I should have spent more on a higher end semi-pro DV cam or a Hi-Def cam with a higher quality CCD. I think most people will be pleased with the quality of this camera's output. It's definitely fine for home videos and even lower-end (student) independent films on a tight budget.

The GR-850 is equipped with a Minolta/Konica lens.  That's nice to hear, especially when you consider that this is a camera in the lower price bracket.  The lens really shines when the zoom function is used.  The zoom is outstanding, I must admit.  The JVC has a decent level of optical zoom, and then a digital zoom up to 800x (sounds a bit crazy, doesn't it?).  Normally, "digital" and "zoom" are a pair of dirty words when used together.  On my old VHS camcorder, I just shut this "fake" zoom off (as it just enlarges pixels and makes things look blocky).  However, on the GR-850 it's actually amazingly useful.  I don't know how they do it, but it works.  I've enabled my camera to zoom digitally up to 32x (I think 1-16x is the optical zoom limit).  The result at maximum zoom is an image that stays vibrant and fairly crisp!  JVC has also made some amazing improvements to the anti-shake algorithm.  High zoom would normally be useless when doing hand-held filming due to the amplification of shaking.  My old JVC VHS-C camcorder had an anti-shake feature, but it tended to reduce the resolution of the picture and didn't work all that well.  Not so on the JVC GR-850.  The picture doesn't suffer from noticeably reduced resolution and "normal" hand shaking is quite effectively dealt with!

Although I've only had it for two weeks, there are a few minor quibbles that I must point out about the video quality. In low light (in my house in the evening with only lamp light) the image leans towards orangeish/red hues. This is in contrast with my old JVC VHS cam, which was able to automatically get true colour hues in the evening. However, I suspect that playing with the GR-D850's white balance settings might help in this regard.

EDIT: I have played with the manual white balance setting (you hold a white piece of paper in front of the camera and it calibrates itself to that).  It does get rid of the reddish hue.  It also stores this setting in memory (supposedly) so it's not lost on shut-down.  So that's great.  If you plan to use to automatic mode, though, the camera adjusts the white balance itself, and the reddish hue is present.

Another thing I've noticed (perhaps because this camera has a slightly smaller lens than my old JVC VHS-C camcorder) is that the extreme corners of the picture in 16:9 mode appear slightly smeared. I suspect this has something to do with the camera having to accommodate a wider picture area than the old 4:3 camera while using a slightly smaller lens. This is only apparent when "wide angle" shots are taken. When I zoom in on something, or use the macro mode, this seems to go away (macro mode IS stunningly sharp, by the way).

Perhaps I am unfairly expecting pro-quality from a low-end consumer camcorder. These nitpicks probably apply to any camcorder in this price range. Overall, I must say that for $239 CAD, this camera definitely does deliver.

Things I like:

- small size
- solid build quality
- bright 16:9 fold-out colour LCD
- quick and easy menu access
- abundant settings
- real 16:9 mode (also does 4:3)
- 640x480 still image capture to tape (not really that useful)
- Easy hookup and transfer of video to a PC via Firewire (real-time transfer though)
- video can be dumped BACK to the camera (to be recorded on MiniDV tape) through Firewire.
- regular analogue video/audio output (1/8" to RCA cable)
- small, long lasting battery.
- uses proven, reliable, cheap MiniDV tape media.
- provides an automatic mode for those who are all-thumbs
- built in LED spotlight
- good quality microphone
- lots of settings to adjust back light, exposure, white balance
- built in effects (some people like these, I don't use them)

Things I don't like:

- no eyepiece viewfinder (are you going to miss this)?
- no microphone in
- camera motor noise is apparent on low audio level recordings.
- low-light video leans toward reddish-orange hues (I need to play with this more and see if it is correctable)
- you cannot record video with the fold-out view-screen in "closed" position (the camera shuts itself off when the screen is folded in).