"Five" <Niko@fiveminutesof_blank.com> wrote in

message news:sQHdc.2193$rg5.9970@attbi_s52...

> In article <Rkqdc.74833$4B1.37705@twister.rdc-

> kc.rr.com>, bariona@mn.rr.com says...

> > Any opinions about the PANASONIC NV-MX3000 .

> > I would like to make a short movie with it.

> > Compared with the vx2000, or others?

> Don't listen to Dave, if it isn't Sony, he has nothing

> positive to say.

>

> The MX3000 is awesome! Few cameras can do what it can

> for the price, size etc.

> It is better than the vx2000 if you are comparing

> final footage show on screen.

>

> I have used many cameras and own both the PD-150

> and vx2000, and the MX3000, and often shoot on a Sony

> 390.

Opinions may differ, but it is generally agreed that, (as

I said in my response to the original poster), quote:

"Among 'small' 3-CCD Mini-DV cameras, the Sony

VX2000/2100 and Panasonic DVX100a remain the

top choices - though this does not mean that others

are not suitable for some purposes (though more

"allowances" must be made for their limitations)."

I guess "Five" did not read this very carefully before

responding with the above - or he would have realized

that his response was not accurate...;-) As for me, I find

the MX3000 picture excessively contrasty for general

use compared with the other two I mentioned - and

some bright colors have relatively little detail. The

low-light shortcomings are also very noticeable

compared with the other two (one of which *is* a

Panasonic, I guess I must point out to "Five", lest

he overlook that fact again...;-).

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com