On Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:53:30 +1000, "Rich" wrote:

>> >For a bit less biased information, check out www.dvinfo.net. Be wary of

>> - A) this is primarily (and originally) a "Canon" site
>> - B) a 2-part review of the VX2000 on this site is, Ta-DAH, by me...;-)
>David Ruether

>Yep... you're on there. Despite it being a Canon site in its early stages,
>Chris has added alot of other pages to it - including the Sony section (with
>a link to David's site). What's good about this sort of site, he doesn't
>trivialize camera choices (as do some would-be reviewers). Since there are
>always more than one side to a story, why not tell them all? The good and
>the bad.

I believe I did just that, in my comparative reviews
of Sony, Canon, and Panasonic camcorders, at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm
(Chris Hurd uses part of the VX2000 review from the
article at this URL on his web page, so I assume
he thought it was a good [and fair] review...;-)
Perhaps you would like to read (and see) what I base
my conclusions on, when I write here, instead of
just dismissing them as bias...?;-) It isn't "empty
opinion" - I made some attempt to compare these
cameras in meaningful ways, and I do point out both
the advantages and disadvantages of each (none is
perfect, none is terrible). One can come to
conclusions, though, about some camcorders being,
overall and for general use, better buys and/or
better performers than others... My opinions, stated
in these NGs, cannot have all the support material
attached (for practical reasons), so I generally
also refer people to the URL above so that readers
can see what I base my conclusions on. My "short"
answers here may appear to some to be "biased", but
I invite them in my posts to read carefully what
I have written in the articles on my web page, and
to look carefully at the material offered with the
articles, and also at the URLs referenced there...