"Tony Morgan" wrote in message
...

I don't think I did enough research when I bought my cam, OTOH I had a
Pentium II 300MHz when I bought it, so desktop editing was not on my
list,
and in-camera features seemed attractive!

Your comments Jake, seem to raise a number of issues.

I would imagine that more than 95% of camcorder purchasers are of the
"video snapper" category, interested in shooting family/friends and
perhaps holidays. Much like the "instamatics" of the pre-video days.
Camcorder manufactures are obviously well aware of this, so seek to
increase their sales/market share by adding (and publicising) "gismo
features".

Maybe 20% of these camcorder buyers start (or seriously consider) video
editing, since a lot of folk who can afford a camcorder will have a
computer capable of video editing. However, I would think that the
proportion who get serious about video is much smaller - maybe less than
5% of camcorder buyers..

No doubt the camcorder manufactures are well aware of this, and invest
more in developing camcorders for the masses, rather than the
enthusiasts.

As a result, the top end of the consumer camcorder product lines are
still laden with features that the serious enthusiasts quickly learn are
not really needed (and in some cases can reduce the end-quality of
finished movies).

So at the end of the day, Jake, I think that we're going to have to live
with the gizmos :-)
--

'Tis true. Mass markets are where the money is and do not cater for
discerning individuals, and when I was in the market for a camera I was not
a discerning individual. I needed something small enough to carry about
anywhere on our "once in a lifetime holiday" honeymoon, and the Sony PC
range of cameras fitted the bill perfectly. I'd set a budget, and the PC120
fell within it, so it's the one I bought. Simple bit of logic, really.

Having said that, I'm more than happy with the quality from the camera.
It's perfectly suitable for my needs, i.e. camera - PC - DVD - TV screen
for friends and family.

Jake

"Tony Morgan" wrote in message
...
In message , Dave R
writes
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:05:38 GMT, "Jerry."
allegedly wrote:

uk.rec.video.camcorders

I just checked, there is no camcorder group... in any hierarchy that my
news server carries. :-P

It isn't listed at: http://www.usenet.org.uk/ either.

I never said there was one, but it does sounds like a good idea !

Anyone into RFD's ?....

"SjT" wrote in message ...
Baron Von "Jake" sayed:

If you're referring to the ongoing thread I think you're referring to
("What
is so bad about Digital-8?") then I would think that got off topic long
ago,
with all the discussion about professional kit and broadcasting
standards.
Is this NG called uk.rec.video.digital or uk.pro.video.digital? No
criticism, as I'm finding the thread quite interesting, just an
observation.

To be honest the thread is discussing why the DV/MiniDV format's
can/cannot be used in broadcasting, so it is on topic.

But is broadcasting a recreational activity or a professional one? (I guess
if it's recreational then we're dealing with pirate television!)

That's a rhetorical question, and I'm not bothered if it's on or off topic
as I'm still following it with interest!

Keep it up :-)

Jake

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:42:29 -0000, "Jake" wrote:

But is broadcasting a recreational activity or a professional one?

Both.

The television industry is one of the few jobs where you can get paid for doing
something that you enjoy.

regards

Stuart

www.mckears.com

"SjT" wrote in message ...

No, not at all, i find the thought of me being able to have something
broadcast that i have made as a hobby quite exciting, i think the two
go together like that.

I guess that would be the pinnacle of your hobbyist career - no pun
intended!

Jake