On Mon, 10 Jan 2000 09:35:42 GMT, up_your_ass@usa.net (Harry Dick) wrote:

>>Hi-8, directly viewed (without the generation losses
>>resulting from editing), can look quite good, but if
>>you want to edit, the choice is easy (and Hi-8 is a
>>waste of time and money...).

>Hey buy those are fighting words. I shoot hi-8 (pro gear) and it will
>blow the doors off ANY consumer DV shit. (I have that stuff too)

Ah, someone with no opinion to express...! ;-)
I was referring to the general run of Hi-8 camcorders,
which often do have a good picture, but with generation
losses, do generally look worse than good mini-DV once
edited (unless horribly-expensive editing gear is used...).
Use top-end Hi-8 gear, with top-end editing gear, and the
results can be good, but for far less money the results
can be about as good using mini-DV - and one doesn't have
to put up with drop-outs... I will accept the DV artifacts
along with the excellent sharpness and practical editing
as a good trade for drop-outs, generation losses, and a
sometimes smoother-looking image.

> BTW, if you are looking
>>for a top-quality Hi-8, I have a Canon A1-Digital in
>>nice shape;

>Piece of shit, electrolytic capacitors on all the PCBoards go leaky
>and you end up with a door stop

Mine works fine, thank you...;-)