On Thu, 18 Jan 01 10:16:01 GMT, ansbro@n2.net (Michael Ansbro) wrote:

>I *was* looking at the image on a TV.
>It was only doing it on the outer 1/4 edge of the image, as i have seen on one
>of my 35mm SLR lenses.

Most likely this was the source of the color fringing...
(I find that it is best to buy the very TV one likes on
the sales floor - NOT a new, boxed one of the same model,
since set-ups vary so much...)

>The viewfinder and LCD are pretty low res and its hard to see much.
>My LCD computer monitor groes gradually darker from bottom to top.
>(and doesn't seem to have much color depth)
>The image was sharp.

BTW, I did just try some stills with the zoom near max,
and had no problem getting sharp hand-held still
images with the VX-2000 and memory-stick.

>I'd like to see more tests of glare, black /white borders, moving subjects.
>A *real* stress test.

I tend to dislike this kind of testing...
Besides being boring, it doesn't tell you as
much as experience in real-world situations,
I find. As I have pointed out, in virtually
every respect, in almost all situations, the
VX-2000 image is better than that of any other
Mini-DV camcorder of XL-1 size or smaller.
Period. I think you will also find few who
disagree with this who have used these various
camcorders. It is not without picture faults
(if you know what to look for...;-), but it
is best to just be happy something this good
is available at this price. At $2600 or so, the
VX-2000 picture easily beats anything available
short of $4-5000 or so, and short of 5-6 (or
many more) pounds. (Reviews at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm ).