MV500i contradictions



In the What Camcorder reviews the Canon MV500i gets quite a glowing review especially about the actual quality of the picture. However, in other net review sites, they say it's not up to scratch, criticising the 'effective pixel' rate of 340,000 as being the problem. They even finish the reviews saying you'll be disappointed by the picture quality and not to expect much. How can two reviews disagree so massively? And if the MV500i isn't particularly good, can anyone recommend a decent enough DVin camera between £500-£600?



The 500i is a very good camera for the price. I bought mine 4 months ago and am very happy with it. There has been some talk of the mic being noisy but it hasn't bothered me. The picture quality is excellent for video but I haven't even tried the stills - not enough pixels. HTH


Hmm - I've had the same problem and only today posted a new question about these contradictions. I was about to buy the MV500i (on the strength of the Waht Camcorder May 02 review) and what I saw of it in the shop. Then this weeks Which report gave it a very low rating on picture quality. I tried looking at the Canon vs a Sony TRV25 at a retail outlet in comparison. the Sony appeared to be clearer, but how much is that due to the clarity of the LCD screen? I should like to know how they appear on the actual footage. The problem is that I wanted DV IN and the MV500i gives it for £150 less than the equivalent in the Sony range (which is the TRV25).

The latest video from AVForums

AVForums Movies Podcast: Which is the best decade for horror movies?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom