JVC MG50 or JVC MC200??

[jmci9]

I am looking at getting a HD camcorder and like both the MG50 and the MC200!
I like the small size of the MC200 but the 1hr batt and the 60mins recording time on the microdrive means buying an additional of each!!
The 7hr recording time of the MG50 is a plus but the size it a litte bigger .... any recommendations?

[lurcher]

What do you intend the camcorder for ? General use , specific jobs, best pos picture quality ?
Is size is really important ?
Sometimes you have to compromise a little.
I"ve got the MG50 and really like its ability to record up to 7hrs- its quite lightweight but remember no viewfinder to compose footage.
Not a problem to me as all my shots are from a static mounted position.
If picture quality is paramount then consider a 3ccd mini dv camcorder for prob less than cost of the hard drive one.

[jmci9]

Hi Lurcher,
I want the camera for gerneral use, nothing professional. I will use it at friends weddings, holidays and general family stuff. I believe that the picture quality (on ultra high) is almost DVD quality ... this is what I am looking for. Also I want something that is easy to edit and reproduce on the PC.
Regards
Jmci9

[mattlittle]

Originally Posted by jmci9

Hi Lurcher,
I want the camera for gerneral use, nothing professional. I will use it at friends weddings, holidays and general family stuff. I believe that the picture quality (on ultra high) is almost DVD quality ... this is what I am looking for. Also I want something that is easy to edit and reproduce on the PC.
Regards
Jmci9

The MC200 which uses microdrives which, as you said, can only hold 60 mins. This was a real killer for me as microdrives are expensive.

[jmci9]

Yes I agree that microdrives are expensive, but you have to back to basics and ask the question 'how much footage and at what quality do you want'?
The footage for me is fine (with 2xmicrodrives) as I have never used a camera for longer than 2hrs anyway.
The quality of the footage will also be near DVD quality, the only thing that lets it down is the Still Image quality ... still not bad but the equivalent to most new mobile phones out there!!

[mattlittle]

Originally Posted by jmci9

Yes I agree that microdrives are expensive, but you have to back to basics and ask the question 'how much footage and at what quality do you want'?
The footage for me is fine (with 2xmicrodrives) as I have never used a camera for longer than 2hrs anyway.
The quality of the footage will also be near DVD quality, the only thing that lets it down is the Still Image quality ... still not bad but the equivalent to most new mobile phones out there!!

Fair call - thing is for decent quality still images, I will always take my still camera. Very few camcorders can match a decent still-only camera.