On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 01:22:08 -0700 (PDT), bigrocketman3@webtv.net (Steve McDonald) wrote:

> Advice: Turn the EIS off, as it's worse than no stabilization on
>such models. Someone just claimed that they like EIS better than OIS,
>which is hard for me to imagine. I guess it takes all kinds to make a
>world. I just was given a 10-year old Canon A-1 Digital with only 2
>hours of use. It has no stabilizer, but its beautiful picture and
>unbelievable low-light ability, put these new mini-models to shame.
>Digital recording isn't of much use in a camcorder, if the front-end
>hasn't any quality to send to the recorder.

"Somebody" here...;-)
If you bothered to compare these, as I have (see my
camcorder comparison reviews on my web page, listed
under the "I babble" index...), it becomes clear that
the best DIS systems work quite well (in bright light,
since they do rob almost a stop of gain, giving a worse
picture in low light when engaged); and some OIS systems
show rather bad negative characteristics (these are
not inherent in the system types - the good and bad
performance characteristics of each appear to be more
a matter of how the DIS and OIS are implemented).
The DIS in my Sony PC-1 and TRV-9, for instance, are
superior in their operation to the OIS in my VX-2000
(bright light only, of course - but vibration and
"twitches" in the image motion are nicely damped
without introducing the "ball bouncing off the wall"
and "swimming" I have seen in some OIS systems [and
even with the OIS engaged, I find it difficult to get
a steady picture with my VX-2000 with the zoom toward
the long end...]). It is also true, as you point out,
that camcorders that are easy to hold (like my
Panasonic AG-EZ30U) work quite well with no
stabilizer used... As for image quality of the
mini Mini-DV camcorders, I have successfully mixed
PC-1 and TRV-9 footage shot in moderate interior
light levels with even the top-quality output of
the VX-2000 (it does take some adjustment in post
of sharpness, contrast, color balance, and color
saturation, but if the range of light values is
limited in the shooting location, the resulting
image from these otherwise lowly image-makers
can be quite good).
BTW, it is better to speak from experience than
theory/belief/opinion, and, perhaps, to believe
those who report from experience...;-)