Canon ZR65MC MiniDV Digital Camcorder
By: Canon Average Rating: 3.0 Total Reviews: 27
More Information
 On: 2005-07-02
My canon zr65 suddenly went black (No image detected). From what I found on the web (a lot of people have the same problem), the CCD may be the cause. It looks like there is a quality issue about this part. To replace a CCD is very costly. Take your chance.
 On: 2004-11-29
(correction: i just noticed 12/3 i actually have a zr50mc..duhh...) guess i bought it around 3/2002 since my first tape is dated 3/18/02. (online for $580 or something like that...cant remember.) ive shot 12 90minute tapes since that time (60mins set at SP for 90min recording). like i said, i thought it was a great camera for video until recently. my main reason for getting it was to record my new kids, one now 4yo and one 2.5yo, becaue my vhsc panasonic camcorder began recording very warbly audio (video was/is still good) and i wanted to capture their early talking, etc. the zr65mc problems started recently while ive been converting those tapes to dvd to share selected clips with the grandparents, aunts, friends, etc. (i found uleads products very good for this, by the way, after first using windows movie maker to import to dv-avi format. had to buy a new 120g hardisk though to add to my 60g since each imported tape took up to 19gigs each. i always wondered why people needed such big harddisks - now i know.) anyway on importing about the 7th tape, while rewinding, it jammed. i was able to eject the tape and used a pencil to wiggle and extricate the caught tape inside but it was chewed up pretty good and about 6inches was hanging out. after some scary tinkering with the cassette since i didnt want to loose the rest of the tape i was able to figure out that you you can manually rewind the tape. if the window side is up, operate the latch to open the tape cover on the right bottom. by using a hairpin or something small to depress the little latch on the bottom back middle and use the eraser of a lead pensil to either rewind or forward past the chewed up tape. sometimes i had to rewind or forward a bit more if it wouldnt work again after the first reloading. but i was able to convert all the tapes with only a few seconds of lost video. the problem is i thought it was only with the rewind, but yesterday (11/27/04) on a bart outing to the metreon with 12 of my family, after working at home, at the bart station i pulled it out to continue shooting on the same tape and it gave me the dreaded red eject tape message on the lcd blue screen of death. i put it back in the car and used my old reliable casio qv2300 digital camera the rest of the day. let me just say, i am a video, digital camera, computer and internet sorta guy...the rest of the family luvs it but the wife often hates it.
now, im researching the problem and found many postings for the zr10 of this problem. i suspect all these zr models are the same camera and canon just changes the model number each year...theyre up to what zr95 or something and its still probably the zr10 inside. if i figure out a non expensive solution, ill post it. at least it can be used still as a analog-digital av converte, since that doesnt require a tape...and i did use it with my panasonic to convert 18 vhsc tapes to dvd. all very time consuming tho.
by the way, i had another problem with a canon product before - a digital camera a70, that i bought for my workgroup in cupertino, early 2003 i think. out of the box new, one week later it stopped functioning completely! i sent it back east somewhere and two months later it came back working. but i didnt like that that camera didnt have the ability to choose whether you wanted to have the date stamp on the picture. when i called canon they said to use exifer for that. how lame i thought (after being used to the casio)! also the battery life indicator didnt work right. [thats why i like my casio (plus the swivel lens) and the casio software].
im thinking i shudda bought this tiny sony (forgot model) like i wanted to at the time, but i didnt like the $1k+ price then and the mic wasnt in a good spot. this one beat out the jvcs too for some reason i cant remember now. but its a whole new ballgame now with all the different stuff out there. maybe have to start the headache of trying to choose a replacement if i cant fix this one, and i doubt it worth paying to fix so....
anyway bottom line is im kinda thinking im not gonna buy cannon anymore or recommend it to people who ask me, and recently prior to this, i did recommend cannons to at least 4 of my friends.
On: 2004-11-28
(correction: i just noticed 12/3 i actually have a zr50mc..duhh...) guess i bought it around 3/2002 since my first tape is dated 3/18/02. (online for $580 or something like that...cant remember.) ive shot 12 90minute tapes since that time (60mins set at SP for 90min recording). like i said, i thought it was a great camera for video until recently. my main reason for getting it was to record my new kids, one now 4yo and one 2.5yo, becaue my vhsc panasonic camcorder began recording very warbly audio (video was/is still good) and i wanted to capture their early talking, etc. the zr65mc problems started recently while ive been converting those tapes to dvd to share selected clips with the grandparents, aunts, friends, etc. (i found uleads products very good for this, by the way, after first using windows movie maker to import to dv-avi format. had to buy a new 120g hardisk though to add to my 60g since each imported tape took up to 19gigs each. i always wondered why people needed such big harddisks - now i know.) anyway on importing about the 7th tape, while rewinding, it jammed. i was able to eject the tape and used a pencil to wiggle and extricate the caught tape inside but it was chewed up pretty good and about 6inches was hanging out. after some scary tinkering with the cassette since i didnt want to loose the rest of the tape i was able to figure out that you you can manually rewind the tape. if the window side is up, operate the latch to open the tape cover on the right bottom. by using a hairpin or something small to depress the little latch on the bottom back middle and use the eraser of a lead pensil to either rewind or forward past the chewed up tape. sometimes i had to rewind or forward a bit more if it wouldnt work again after the first reloading. but i was able to convert all the tapes with only a few seconds of lost video. the problem is i thought it was only with the rewind, but yesterday (11/27/04) on a bart outing to the metreon with 12 of my family, after working at home, at the bart station i pulled it out to continue shooting on the same tape and it gave me the dreaded red eject tape message on the lcd blue screen of death. i put it back in the car and used my old reliable casio qv2300 digital camera the rest of the day. let me just say, i am a video, digital camera, computer and internet sorta guy...the rest of the family luvs it but the wife often hates it.
now, im researching the problem and found many postings for the zr10 of this problem. i suspect all these zr models are the same camera and canon just changes the model number each year...theyre up to what zr95 or something and its still probably the zr10 inside. if i figure out a non expensive solution, ill post it. at least it can be used still as a analog-digital av converte, since that doesnt require a tape...and i did use it with my panasonic to convert 18 vhsc tapes to dvd. all very time consuming tho.
by the way, i had another problem with a canon product before - a digital camera a70, that i bought for my workgroup in cupertino, early 2003 i think. out of the box new, one week later it stopped functioning completely! i sent it back east somewhere and two months later it came back working. but i didnt like that that camera didnt have the ability to choose whether you wanted to have the date stamp on the picture. when i called canon they said to use exifer for that. how lame i thought (after being used to the casio)! also the battery life indicator didnt work right. [thats why i like my casio (plus the swivel lens) and the casio software].
im thinking i shudda bought this tiny sony (forgot model) like i wanted to at the time, but i didnt like the $1k+ price then and the mic wasnt in a good spot. this one beat out the jvcs too for some reason i cant remember now. but its a whole new ballgame now with all the different stuff out there. maybe have to start the headache of trying to choose a replacement if i cant fix this one, and i doubt it worth paying to fix so....
anyway bottom line is im kinda thinking im not gonna buy cannon anymore or recommend it to people who ask me, and recently prior to this, i did recommend cannons to at least 4 of my friends.
 On: 2004-08-25
I shot a feature film on this little baby. Works best under low light. For those who had problems with the camera, maybe youre just too dumb to make it work. Maybe you should go to film school like I did. No problemo. Great camera for the price. Only, i paid full price for it and now see Amazon.com had a much better deal! Ahhhh!
 On: 2004-06-18
I used this camera to take close-up pictures easily at the US Grand Prix Pit Walkabout today and I found it outstanding. Even from distances as far as 100 feet, you can zoom in far enough to see very detailed parts of the cars, like small wires used for telemetry. I highly recommend it, although the battery life is incredibly short and there is next to no space (8MB) on the card I got with it. But this is to be expected.
 On: 2004-06-15
As stated many times before by many people this camera does not do well in low light. Knowing that the camera does very well in well lighted situations. Even turning on extra indoor light will produce acceptable results. I have had no problems with motor noise or audio/video problems. What makes this camera attractive is the features it has for the price. The digital effects, the chroma keying with the SD card pictures and best of all the digital to analog and analog to digital converter. The price of this camera puts it in the range of dedicated digital to analog and analog to digital converter. This allows you to transfer old VHS or VHS-C tapes to DV. Cable boxes or TiVos with RCA outputs can also be used. Once on DV they can be transferred to the computer for editing and then burned to CD or DVD. Since it has the onboard converter it can also be used to edit video on a TV screen if your video editor supports it. The camera also acts as a digital camera but even on the best camcorders the output is not on par with stand-alone digital cameras and is added as an after thought. If you can live with the cameras low light problems then this camera will do well. If not save your pennies and get a better camera. If your need to get old footage in to your computer to put on DVD then consider this camera. With a Mac it will also work as a web camera without any addition software. If you are shooting a lot of low light footage this is not the camera for you.
On: 2004-03-11
I really love this camera, it has just the right amount of auto functions mixed with user-defined functions. I like the little extras that come with the camera (including the special effects, various transitions, ability to easily customize the video, etc.) I am a film student at NYU and I bought this camera to shoot the many films that we are required to create (unfortunately there arent always enough school owned cameras to go around,) and it has worked for me just fine... As for the indoor shooting issues that many have complained about, Ive found it to be perfectly fine for me (although I do have the use of lighting equipment that could make any place well lighted,) I suggest propping up a desk lamp and reflecting the light off a white wall or centering the light slightly to the side of the subject (this technique is good for just about all cameras and lighting situations; as long as you dont use too powerful a light and get too close, this creates shadows.) Ive not only used this camera for my films, but also for personal uses (like my little brothers birthday party) and it worked perfectly for me. Personally, I really am satisfied with this camera and its great handling and shooting!
On: 2004-03-04
This camcorder has a lot going for it: its small and lightweight and very easy to use. It has one of the best digitial zooms of any camcorder on the market (20X) and is loaded with lots of special effects. The quality of the video in good lighting conditions or outdoor filming is excellent...very clear and sharp. It also converts analog to digital which is a major plus. And the price is pretty reasonable for all that you get. That being said, I have to mention the cons: the qulaity of the video in low light situations is very poor...the video is fuzzy and blurrry (just like most of the reviews say). And using the "night mode" or "low light mode" does brighten the picture a bit but the quality is still not acceptable. And there is a constant motor noise when you turn the camcorder on. However, when I play the video back on my TV you do NOT hear the motor noise (so I can overlook that). Overall, its a good camcorder for the price and I would recommend it. It has a lot more pros than cons. Just dont buy it if most of your recording will be in low light.
by: Anonymous On: 2004-02-21
I knew little about camcorders when I bought this. It got mixed reviews, but Ive been extremely happy with it. Its simple to use and the video quality is very good. The 20x zoom is a nice feature, as well as the ability to store video on the MiniDV or a SmartCard. I would recommend it to anyone.
On: 2004-02-04
I was very excited to receive this camera a few months ago for my Birthday. I have to say though the features are fun and it is very easy to use the low light video and still is horrible. Absolutely terrible. My very old digital camera is of better quality. I mean you cant take a good picture with the light attachment when its cloudy out. Really do your research and spend the extra money for something youll be happy with.
On: 2004-01-31
I bought a ZR40 soon after my son was born, and filming most of my sons video in the house during day time or night time. It is a simple camera and zoom is good. However, the video quality is very grainy in door, and slightly better out-door. It is much worse than the parasonic my father in-law brough about 2 years ago. I read a lot of reviews on circuit-city, and find out the same problem still exist for the ZR65.
Tommorrow is my sons first year birthday, and I just got a Sony TR38. Although it is a one year late, I hope to have all the good video memory from now on.
On: 2004-01-17
Compact and a proved model of Canon technology, allows you to take digital photos in the Multimedia Card and record video in a mini DV cassette. The memory has a low capacity 8Mb aproximately 12 or 13 photos in good quality. Good Price. Free software. and the very important Firewire conexion. (bv2p)
On: 2004-01-15
To its credit, this camera has alot of neat bells and whistles - the most exciting of which is the 20x optical zoom. Its easy and intuitive to use without having to spend much time in the manual, and ergonomically feels pretty good to hold and shoot. Outdoors, this camera takes video of phenomenal quality. If an outdoor mid-range single CCD camcorder is what youre in the market for, the Canon is not a bad choice.Unfortunately, despite its deceptively low 1.4 lux rating, this camera completely disappoints in anything but the very brightest of conditions (> 100 lux). I literally had to shoot within 2 or 3 feet of a 300W incandescent light source to get any kind of acceptable image. Even in modest indoor lighting conditions (i.e. a living room with 2 or 3 60W incandescent lights), the images are extremely grainy and washed out. There are a number of tricks that some have applied (adjusting exposure, changing the shooting mode to low light, limiting zoom, disabling image stabilization, and so forth) - and while these did improve the image quality somewhat, the improvement was marginal at best. The image stablization and auto focus capabilities of this camera leave something to be desired as well - even at minimal zoom. Youll be disappointed at the slow response and jittery motion as you zoom in and out on your subject. Again, I think much of this can be attributed to the cameras low light response. I found I frequently had to set a zoom and manually focus the unit to get any kind of acceptable picture while filming indoors. The refresh on the low light modes is also very low and renders it almost impractical for anything but tripod use. After a fair bit of research, the limitation of this camera seems to stem from its 640K 1/6" CCD. The smaller CCD (which seems to be more prevalent in the newer cameras) are much less sensitive to light (and cheaper to manufacture). Inevitably, I traded my ZR65 in for a Sony TRV22 with a 1/4" CCD. While I lament not having 20x zoom, the light sensitivity of the TRV22 to the ZR65 is night and day (or day and night as the case would be). The autofocus is far more responsive, the pictures are not grainy - indoor or out - and the night shot mode on the sony actually takes a pretty decent B&W image in the near absence of any light. You can (and should expect) better in quality indoor shooting from your digital camcorder - and these products do exist, but do your homework in advance. This camera is lacking in the basics and will disappoint those users who simply want to videotape their family, children, and day-to-day social events.
by: Anonymous On: 2003-11-18
I didnt listen to the other reviewers - but I should have. I liked the size of the camera, the price, the plugins - but the picture was REALLY grainy without natural light. Outdoors was picture perfect, and indoors in the kitchen in the daytime is great - but if you dont have natural light you wont be happy. Also, software is relatively useless. Im taking it back and trying the SONY TRV...
On: 2003-10-01
I got this as a wedding present, and opened it right away. It takes great low light pictures and the image and sound have no hiss or noise. The playback mode is great. It takes good pictures on the move. The microphone is omni-directional, so it does not pick up conversation in noisy situations well, such as at a reception.
by: Anonymous On: 2003-09-28
I questioned the concerns people had expressed here about the picture quality of the Canon ZR65MC. I bought this camera and was completely disappointed. The reviews were 100% correct. I took it back and purchased a (different brand). It was more expensive, but when I brought it home, the picture was PERFECT! My advice from personal experience...spend a little more and avoid the Canon. You will be disappointed with the Canon - believe it.
On: 2003-09-16
the zr65 is in the middle of canons zr series. upgrades over the zr60 include a more powerful optical zoom (20x vs 18x) and still photo capability of 1 megapixel, USB port, and direct printing capability.pros:
- powerful 20x zoom. while less powerful than its sibling (22x for zr70), 20x zoom is still better than most (sonys typically have 10x zoom).
- miniDV media is widely supported.
- generally good video quality in well lit situations.
- pass-through analog-digital conversion.
- many optional accessories using the accessory shoe.
- great connectivity options: firewire, USB, S-video, headphone, mic input, etc.
- 1 megapixel still photo capability.
- direct printing capability.
- low price, okay value. cons:
- the deal breaker for me is poor low light performance - expect very grainy video unless the room is well lit.
- the accessory shoe is not a hot shoe; this means that while you can get a third party video light, the camcorder will have absolutely zero interaction with the light. contrast this with sony, which has some video lights that will even adjust light intensity automatically depending on inputs from the camcorder.
- colors a bit washed out in videos.
- included battery life could be better.
- bottom loading cassette - cant remove tape while camcorder is on a tripod.
- motor noise can be heard when recording a quiet room.
- the supplied 8MB SD card is inadequate - be prepared to shell out a few more bucks for more memory.
- while easy to hold, this camcorder is a little bigger than its competition: 2.3"W x 5.8"D x 4.1"H, weighing 18.5 oz. for its feature set, it is hard to beat the price of the zr65, but you get what you pay for. if you shoot mainly in well lit situations, this may work for you. for low light situations, you can also use a video light. but for outdoor shoots with low light, video lights wont help much either. check out the panasonic gs70 and sony trv33 as alternatives (more expensive though). i hope this helps your buying decision. peace.
On: 2003-07-27
I have owned a number of analog video camcorders over the years and have been very impressed by the Sonys I have used however thanks to the excellent canon digial camera I have I decided to try a Cannon for my second MiniDV camera.
My first venture into MiniDV was a disaster with a faulty JVC that managed to lose an entire vacation by corrupting the data to a point even JVC could not recover! After this I was far more careful with my second attempt some 12 months later.
Initially I was impressed by the ZR65MC, it feels good in the hand and has a load of features for the price. The zoom is fantastic and the software it comes with is solid and worked well to connect to the PC.
The video quality was good and the photos to SD card worked okay (about the standard of a 4 year old digital camera, okay for family snap shots)
Where things went wrong was over the next week testing the camera on vacation, the startup time for the unit is far too slow (approaching 6 seconds!). The first time you miss a "magic" moment waiting for the camera to startup you are very likely to reconsider your choice. Couple this with the annoying "binging" it goes through when you leave it on (to avoid the startup time) and you have a serious niggle that will make you wish you had looked elsewhere. I have returned the camera and am trying out the Panasonic DV203D as I really cant afford the Sony TRV33 that offers similar features. If the Panasonic works out, great, if not I will have to return to Hi8 and save up some more money before venturing back into the world of MiniDV :-(HTH
On: 2003-07-01
I just dont understand the reviews for this camera. Ive had the camera for over a month and I find the picture quality to be good in all situations, including indoor shots. I was a little disappointed in the image stabilizer.Ive used cameras that are good at image stabilization and this one isnt one of them. I shopped around a bit and found the zr65... so I really cant complain. I have had a very good experience with tech support. I was having a problem connecting with the firewire card and I called to make certain I was doing everything right with the camera. Turns out I needed to update the driver for my video card.The tech walked me thru this and I now have video on my computer. The optical zoom is great. The display is bright and clear. The supplied software works fine. Even my wife can use it,and she cant work the toaster. It may not give professional quality results, but you know what,Im not a pro.This camera is exactly what I hoped it would be.
On: 2003-06-02
Pros: Easy to operate; generally good video quality; strong home-video feature set.Cons: Constant low-level noise; middling low-light performance; no control over auto power-off. Summary: As noted many times before, the indoor lighting is not very good..but I expected this much from reading other reviews. But what has really bummed me out is that 3 months after purchasing the camera (with little use in that time) the camera eject refused to open. So now my cassette is stuck inside the camera. We have provided the maximum power to the camera by using the power from the wall outlet and still no tape eject. My wife contacted Canon support. They told her there are only 2 places in the country that fix Video Cameras..(yeah, ok)..and that we would have to ship back to them. According to their tech support, it sounds like an alignment problem. Sounds like Im taking my car to the mechanic. They said they would have to get it back to the factory to re-align it. Give me a break. If you do not plan on using this camera for alot of indoor footage..and if you are lucky enough to avoid getting a CANON LEMON, such as mine..you may be okay. But my Canon experience has been horrible .regardless of whether or not the problem is covered under warranty (which it better be) Im disappointed with my decision to choose this product.
by: Anonymous On: 2003-05-13
The only good thing about this entry-level camcorder is its low cost. However, the poor quality should be of a great concern:1. It takes the camera too long to re-focus when you zoom in/out.
2. The digital zoom is virtually useless although the 20X optical zoom is reasonable.
3. There is an audio/video synchronization issue. The video appears to have a fraction second of delay.
4. When a recording involves some quick motions, say playing a violin, the motion will become blurry. I have never experienced this even in the first generation Sony MiniDV camcorder.
5. The playback sound is poor, stemming from the low-quality speaker. I am very disappointed at this camcorder. Canon offers good digital cameras, but this product line is light years behind other brands.
by: Anonymous On: 2003-05-01
I purchased this last week and returned it. The picture (compared to Sony TRV22 in the same lighting) was TERRIBLE! So grainy it looked like a digital effect. I tried all the settings, different tapes and alternate lighting and couldnt get a decent picture. The motor noise is loud compared to 2 other DV camcorders I have owned. So loud it picked up on the mic and transferred to VHS. Not impressed with this, ... If you get this camcorder, save your receipt until youve tested it!!!
by: Anonymous On: 2003-04-07
If you are interested in a camcorder [in this price range] I would recommend the Canon ZR65. I would also recommend reading the reviews...if you are at all uncertain about what you want. In most cases people will be comparing the ZR65 with the Sony TRV19 so Ill include my personal findings for both in this review.
Pros:
The Canon ZR65 is currently selling at most major retailers for the same price as the Sony TRV19. The Canon ZR65 offers a 20x lens compared with a 10x for the Sony also the Canon beats Sony in Digital Zoom with a 400x vs. 120x. The GretagMacbeth ColorChecker posted on dvspot indicated the ZR65 had slightly better color rendition than the Sony, though I found the color on the ZR65 to be slightly washed out in snow and bright light. The Canon ZR65 has a excellent stabilization system, and offers very solid performance while recording, except at full zoom. The menu is button and toggle driven verses the touch LCD of the Sony. The only draw-back to Sonys touch LCD is that I worried about screen damage due to scratching and smudges during routine use. Additionally some reviews stated that the menu was not very intuitive, both camcorders have very similar menu contents. The Canon also comes with a SD memory which the Sony TRV19 does not, this integrates very nicely with the software package, utilizing the USB interface. The ZR65 also has a color view finder while the Sony TRV19 is black/white.
The software package is very nice, it installed on W2K easily and following the instructions, which were also very clear, I was able to be playing around with stills from the memory card in about 30 minutes.
If you wanted to stick with Sony, and they are a very good manufacturer, I would pay the extra [money] and get the TRV22.
Cons:
We ended up returning our first ZR65 when we found it had extremely loud motor noise, we offered to try another before exchanging it for the TRV22. The second one was fine, no motor noise at all. This may be related to an issue with the Canon motors.
by: ihjaevasquez On: 2003-04-03
I have use the ZR45 and ZR65. I like the ZR45 that I bought. The only problem was within the 24hours that I had it. It want you to eject the tape and would not do nothing else. It was return to the store the next day. Their were no more in stock and they were not going to be back in stock. So I bought the ZR65 the replacement to the ZR45. Their was some added bells that are fun like tide, ball, and cube)but I found that the night and low light features are just not very good at all. I tried taking pictures of my kids at the Oregon Museum of science center. The shots that were taking there had a fair amount of light because of the windows and gave good pictures. When we more to a floor that did not have the windows to help out on the lighting the pictures looked under exposed and dull. I tried using the AE shift and MF bottons on the shot around the house. Our house has large living room windows that bring alot of glare to our TV because sun coming in the the room is not dark but not bright either. The pictures turn out at points a bit fuzzy and alway dull. I was so disapointed. If you thing you will get great shots of your kids birthday cake with the candles and light low forget it. I have taking the ZR65 back to the store and and waiting for the out of stock ZR70. The ZR70 has super night mode will see how good super really is. On the up side I love the size and all the neat features. It comes with the USB cable to download stills. The ZR60 does not have the stills pitures taking option. The ZR45 I fell in love with because I was playing with the camera durring a planeturium show and it recorded it wonderfully. We were suprise to see that. I wish I would have flim the whole thing. not less that five mintunes. My husband loves the color viewer as that is the only was he will flim. I like the opion to use the LDC screen. The ZR65 is great it you have good lighting other wize for get it. It is a very quite motor to problem there.
by: Anonymous On: 2003-03-29
I bought this camera to replace my Sony TRV-140 but am returning it due to very grainy, washed out indoor imaging. The Sony blows it away in picture quality even though the Canon is supposed to be better because of the Mini DV format. Other than the picture quality, I really liked the camera. Oh well, at least Best Buy lets me take it back.
by: Anonymous On: 2003-03-23
It is very light and easy to hold. Great colors, ease of use much better than what I have read. As with all digital camcorders, make sure you black stripe the tapes before using for video editing. Take the camcorder in a dark quiet room, put the blank tape in, lens cap on. Press record and let it do its thing. What you have is a predetermined timeline on the tape that will be there for your DV software to use. Much easier to deal with video edits in this format. ...
On: 2003-03-18
The first time I saw this camera Ive said "Wow... its so tiny!!!"... It fitted great in my hand and the controls are quite pleasant to use... Ive browsed through all features in couple of hours and they looked great... With some imagination I will make very fun movies...
The construction also seems to be very good... Good plastic, few moving parts and robust design... I think it will last for a few years...The stills looked far too grainy... It will make very bad prints, but they are ok to be sent through email... The first time Ive used the ZR as a VCR to watch my videos on my TV Ive said "Wow... DVD quality!", but my first impressions downloading the movies to my computer its not that good at all... Its far behind DVD quality, I dont know if Ive done everything right (downloaded the movies thru fire-wire with the U-Lead MediaStudio 6.5). Anyway, Ive just tried it once and downloaded a couple of minutes of indoor videos... This is my first 5 min impression... The low light resources doesnt work as Id like to... I rather the IR solution used on Sony products... In the ZR 65 the FPS drops too much and the videos loses somes frames... Also, the image is too dark and you cant see things as with the IR solution from Sony (Night Vision)... Ive read a lot of reviews here at amazon and I didnt hear any motor noise from the camera that the ZR 40, 45, 50 seemed to have... The audio is very good, but sometimes the wind makes a very irritating noise... Ill try the wind shield next time... Well... to sum up... Its a good entry level camera... It has lots of resources, its small, the controls are user-friendly and the design is nice and robust... The cons are the bad video quality indoors (grainy), the low-light resources (sony stuff works much better) and the low quality stills... ...
On: 2003-03-17
I have been researching entry-level digital video cameras for quite some time now. The consensus of the reviews seemed to be that the Canon ZR range of cameras was excellent value for money but that some people were disappointed with the level of motor noise captured.I decided to take advantage of Amazons 30-day money-back guarantee and try the ZR-65 out. I am extremely impressed - the video quality is great. It has lots of great features that I wont repeat here. The most important thing was that the motor-noise captured was no issue at all. The motor noise seems prominent when played back through the camera itself but was barely detectable (Im tempted to say *un*detectable) when played back through a TV/VCR. Im speculating that this is due to a number of possible reasons : (1) The response of the built-in speaker is such that it amplifies the motor noise
(2) Some sort of audio filter is applied when playing the tape through the A/V out ports (3) The motor noise seems worse when playing through the camera itself because you can hear the noise of the tape motor as it *plays* the tape Whatever the reason, the motor noise is not the issue that some others have suggested it is. If you are not sure I would recommend trying it out and being sure to play the tape out through a TV/VCR. Ive tried the video pass-through and tested that I can capture video input from my VCR into Mini-DV format. The other main criticism I have seen is that some digital camcorders have problems with low-light conditions (especially indoors). Some preliminary tests here also indicate that this isnt an issue, although it does require some manual manipulation of white-balance. The special low-light mode helps but at the expense of shutter-speed so you get noticeable jerkiness when panning. The battery life of the standard battery supplied with the camera isnt great, but that came as no surprise to me having read other reviews. Overall my initial impressions are that this is a fantastic camera for the price. I am looking forward to trying out the Firewire capabilities of the camera when I buy a desktop for non-linear video editing!
|
|
