Sharp VL-WD255U

[revil]

How good is this? Is the quality better than vhs. I looked around and a website said this, "CCD Size (Actual/Effective): 460,000 Pixels"
I'm guessing that would almost be 1/2 of a megapixel. so nothing close to modern digital cams.

[aglio412]

yeah does anybody have this sharp camera? i was thinking about getting this JVC:

JVC-DVM90U
http://www.jvc.com/product.jsp?modelId=MODL006276&page=2&archive=true

i found it for about 600 dollars, but with this sharp cam coming in at 350 (and having a MMC slot)...i'm tempted

any input!?!?!

thanks

[revil]

Come on peeps! I know one of you out there know's how DV camcorders compares to VHS!

[aglio412]

this cam is way better than vhs....i didn't think that's what we were asking about here. i'm curious about this one stacking up to other DV cams. epinions doesn't have a review. anyone know of a decent review site for cams??

thanks!

[qmanchu]

If you check out Amazon's site for the VL-WD255U (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005KK2Q/gotapex/102-9061664-8294535), there are a few consumer reviews there. The longest one provides some pretty good information regarding the camcorder. Essentially, he says that this camcorder is definitely better than the analog camcorders but is towards the lower end for digital camcorders. This would justify the price we see there. Add in the fact that it essentially has a builtin digital camera and we're looking at a pretty good deal.

[spigidygak]

Its an entry level digital camera. So don't expect great quality pictures. But they will be better than most analog cameras (except for high end ones of course). If you're real serious, you may want to go into a store with a tape and record some stuff off of it to see the kind of picture it takes. I personally find the sharps to have somewhat of a cool picture similar to sony's. Also, don't expect much from the still feature since the ccd is not very big.