I fell for the Canon hype in my Hi-8 days (as many do
today, in Mini-DV...;-), and having owned the L1 with
two lenses, the A1-Digital, a smaller older Canon Hi-8,
and an ES5000, it was "an eye-opener" to discover what
kind of image quality a Sony TR700, and even a lowly
TR200, could provide (not to mention the VX3...;-).
Not that the image quality of the Canons was bad - but
the Sony image quality, even at the low end at a
fraction of the price of the L1, was simply better.
I regretted not looking at Sony earlier...

On 23 Aug 2001 11:12:30 -0700, bill@billmecca.com (Bill Mecca) wrote:

>I'd second the VX-3,,, I have used one and have one on the way for an
>incredible price... sorry only one. I also have a Cannon es4000,
>gives a real nice picture. the current models are really watered down
>versions, with few if any manual controls and some don't even have
>external mic or headphone jacks...being frugal and not liking to get
>caught up in the hype, like to stay a step or so behind the "bleeding
>edge" and am saddened to see a good quality format being killed off by
>the manufacturers.
>
>
>David, care to expand upon your negative experiences with Canon? My
>only complaint withthe 4000 is the ccd has developed a couple dead
>pixels.
>
>
>d_ruether@hotmail.com (Neuman - Ruether) wrote in message
news:<3b88185a.4649119@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>...
>> On 23 Aug 2001 07:18:16 -0700, dterrors@hotmail.com (mrbog)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >If you were going to buy an old hi-8 camera, which would you buy? I'm
>> >looking for cameras with the best image quality.
>>
>> At the "consumer" level, I would not buy a Canon (I've
>> owned several..., and I still have an A1-Digital to
>> sell, cheap...;-) for best picture - look for a Sony
>> TR700 or TR101 in one-chip, or especially the 3-chip VX3...