MVX450 Vs V890

[Darkstar_surfer]

I am trying to get my head round he differences between these two models and the bigest seems to be the MVX450 can take still pictures. Am I missing something.

 

[redsox_mark]

In terms of features, the main differences (extra features on the MVX450) are:

- 1.33 MP vs. 0.8 MP (for better stills)
- Memory card slot and USB connection (for stills)
- Photo button and other stills features
- Built in video light
- Remote control

But the difference is more than features... the MVX450 has a physically bigger CCD, and produces better quality video than the MV890.

 

[Darkstar_surfer]

The mvx450 ability to take still pictures at 1.3MP is of little interest but its ability to take better video may be. But can it justify the £80 hike between the best price for either.

 

[redsox_mark]

can it justify the £80 hike between the best price for either.

Hard to answer. You can of course pay even more and get camcorders better than both of them. While there are some models which are better value than others, generally more money gets you better quality video. All you can do is decide on a budget and get the best you can for that budget.
Everyone has to draw the line at the point which is best for them. Personally I think it is worth the extra.

 

[Darkstar_surfer]

The camcorder is for the wife. She is a techno-phoebe but wants a new camcorder. She currently has an old Canon Hi-8 which weighs a ton and limits how much she can carry it about. She has a canon IXUS500 which I have to down load the picture and print for her. I just bought her a Sony Ericsson K750i which has a 2mp camera. As always money is tight. Do I buy her the best I can afford, MVX450, or the most practical giving her anticipated usage, MV890.

 

[ab1385]

If you've had a look around, where was the cheapest price you could find for these two?

Ta!