Customer Reviews

Canon ZR65MC MiniDV Digital Camcorder

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

I have been researching entry-level digital video cameras for quite some time now. The consensus of the reviews seemed to be that the Canon ZR range of cameras was excellent value for money but that some people were disappointed with the level of motor noise captured.

I decided to take advantage of Amazon's 30-day money-back guarantee and try the ZR-65 out.

I am extremely impressed - the video quality is great. It has lots of great features that I won't repeat here. The most important thing was that the motor-noise captured was no issue at all. The motor noise seems prominent when played back through the camera itself but was barely detectable (I'm tempted to say *un*detectable) when played back through a TV/VCR.

I'm speculating that this is due to a number of possible reasons :

(1) The response of the built-in speaker is such that it amplifies the motor noise

(2) Some sort of audio filter is applied when playing the tape through the A/V out ports

(3) The motor noise seems worse when playing through the camera itself because you can hear the noise of the tape motor as it *plays* the tape

Whatever the reason, the motor noise is not the issue that some others have suggested it is. If you are not sure I would recommend trying it out and being sure to play the tape out through a TV/VCR.

I've tried the video pass-through and tested that I can capture video input from my VCR into Mini-DV format.

The other main criticism I have seen is that some digital camcorders have problems with low-light conditions (especially indoors). Some preliminary tests here also indicate that this isn't an issue, although it does require some manual manipulation of white-balance. The special low-light mode helps but at the expense of shutter-speed so you get noticeable jerkiness when panning.

The battery life of the standard battery supplied with the camera isn't great, but that came as no surprise to me having read other reviews.

Overall my initial impressions are that this is a fantastic camera for the price. I am looking forward to trying out the Firewire capabilities of the camera when I buy a desktop for non-linear video editing!

If you are interested in a camcorder [in this price range] I would recommend the Canon ZR65. I would also recommend reading the reviews...if you are at all uncertain about what you want. In most cases people will be comparing the ZR65 with the Sony TRV19 so I'll include my personal findings for both in this review.
Pros:
The Canon ZR65 is currently selling at most major retailers for the same price as the Sony TRV19. The Canon ZR65 offers a 20x lens compared with a 10x for the Sony also the Canon beats Sony in Digital Zoom with a 400x vs. 120x. The GretagMacbeth ColorChecker posted on dvspot indicated the ZR65 had slightly better color rendition than the Sony, though I found the color on the ZR65 to be slightly washed out in snow and bright light. The Canon ZR65 has a excellent stabilization system, and offers very solid performance while recording, except at full zoom. The menu is button and toggle driven verses the touch LCD of the Sony. The only draw-back to Sonys touch LCD is that I worried about screen damage due to scratching and smudges during routine use. Additionally some reviews stated that the menu was not very intuitive, both camcorders have very similar menu contents. The Canon also comes with a SD memory which the Sony TRV19 does not, this integrates very nicely with the software package, utilizing the USB interface. The ZR65 also has a color view finder while the Sony TRV19 is black/white.
The software package is very nice, it installed on W2K easily and following the instructions, which were also very clear, I was able to be playing around with stills from the memory card in about 30 minutes.
If you wanted to stick with Sony, and they are a very good manufacturer, I would pay the extra [money] and get the TRV22.
Cons:
We ended up returning our first ZR65 when we found it had extremely loud motor noise, we offered to try another before exchanging it for the TRV22. The second one was fine, no motor noise at all. This may be related to an issue with the Canon motors.

I just don't understand the reviews for this camera. I've had the camera for over a month and I find the picture quality to be good in all situations, including indoor shots. I was a little disappointed in the image stabilizer.I've used cameras that are good at image stabilization and this one isn't one of them. I shopped around a bit and found the zr65... so I really can't complain. I have had a very good experience with tech support. I was having a problem connecting with the firewire card and I called to make certain I was doing everything right with the camera. Turns out I needed to update the driver for my video card.The tech walked me thru this and I now have video on my computer. The optical zoom is great. The display is bright and clear. The supplied software works fine. Even my wife can use it,and she can't work the toaster. It may not give professional quality results, but you know what,I'm not a pro.This camera is exactly what I hoped it would be.

the zr65 is in the middle of canon's zr series. upgrades over the zr60 include a more powerful optical zoom (20x vs 18x) and still photo capability of 1 megapixel, USB port, and direct printing capability.

pros:
- powerful 20x zoom. while less powerful than its sibling (22x for zr70), 20x zoom is still better than most (sonys typically have 10x zoom).
- miniDV media is widely supported.
- generally good video quality in well lit situations.
- pass-through analog-digital conversion.
- many optional accessories using the accessory shoe.
- great connectivity options: firewire, USB, S-video, headphone, mic input, etc.
- 1 megapixel still photo capability.
- direct printing capability.
- low price, okay value.

cons:
- the deal breaker for me is poor low light performance - expect very grainy video unless the room is well lit.
- the accessory shoe is not a hot shoe; this means that while you can get a third party video light, the camcorder will have absolutely zero interaction with the light. contrast this with sony, which has some video lights that will even adjust light intensity automatically depending on inputs from the camcorder.
- colors a bit washed out in videos.
- included battery life could be better.
- bottom loading cassette - can't remove tape while camcorder is on a tripod.
- motor noise can be heard when recording a quiet room.
- the supplied 8MB SD card is inadequate - be prepared to shell out a few more bucks for more memory.
- while easy to hold, this camcorder is a little bigger than its competition: 2.3"W x 5.8"D x 4.1"H, weighing 18.5 oz.

for its feature set, it is hard to beat the price of the zr65, but you get what you pay for. if you shoot mainly in well lit situations, this may work for you. for low light situations, you can also use a video light. but for outdoor shoots with low light, video lights won't help much either. check out the panasonic gs70 and sony trv33 as alternatives (more expensive though). i hope this helps your buying decision. peace.

The first time I saw this camera I've said "Wow... it's so tiny!!!"... It fitted great in my hand and the controls are quite pleasant to use... I've browsed through all features in couple of hours and they looked great... With some imagination I will make very fun movies...
The construction also seems to be very good... Good plastic, few moving parts and robust design... I think it will last for a few years...

The stills looked far too grainy... It will make very bad prints, but they are ok to be sent through email...

The first time I've used the ZR as a VCR to watch my videos on my TV I've said "Wow... DVD quality!", but my first impressions downloading the movies to my computer it's not that good at all... It's far behind DVD quality, I don't know if I've done everything right (downloaded the movies thru fire-wire with the U-Lead MediaStudio 6.5). Anyway, I've just tried it once and downloaded a couple of minutes of indoor videos... This is my first 5 min impression...

The low light resources doesn't work as I'd like to... I rather the IR solution used on Sony products... In the ZR 65 the FPS drops too much and the videos loses somes frames... Also, the image is too dark and you can't see things as with the IR solution from Sony (Night Vision)...

I've read a lot of reviews here at amazon and I didn't hear any motor noise from the camera that the ZR 40, 45, 50 seemed to have... The audio is very good, but sometimes the wind makes a very irritating noise... I'll try the wind shield next time...

Well... to sum up... It's a good entry level camera... It has lot's of resources, it's small, the controls are user-friendly and the design is nice and robust... The cons are the bad video quality indoors (grainy), the low-light resources (sony stuff works much better) and the low quality stills...

...

The only good thing about this entry-level camcorder is its low cost. However, the poor quality should be of a great concern:

1. It takes the camera too long to re-focus when you zoom in/out.
2. The digital zoom is virtually useless although the 20X optical zoom is reasonable.
3. There is an audio/video synchronization issue. The video appears to have a fraction second of delay.
4. When a recording involves some quick motions, say playing a violin, the motion will become blurry. I have never experienced this even in the first generation Sony MiniDV camcorder.
5. The playback sound is poor, stemming from the low-quality speaker.

I am very disappointed at this camcorder. Canon offers good digital cameras, but this product line is light years behind other brands.

I got this as a wedding present, and opened it right away. It takes great low light pictures and the image and sound have no hiss or noise. The playback mode is great. It takes good pictures on the move. The microphone is omni-directional, so it does not pick up conversation in noisy situations well, such as at a reception.

I have owned a number of analog video camcorders over the years and have been very impressed by the Sonys I have used however thanks to the excellent canon digial camera I have I decided to try a Cannon for my second MiniDV camera.
My first venture into MiniDV was a disaster with a faulty JVC that managed to lose an entire vacation by corrupting the data to a point even JVC could not recover! After this I was far more careful with my second attempt some 12 months later.
Initially I was impressed by the ZR65MC, it feels good in the hand and has a load of features for the price. The zoom is fantastic and the software it comes with is solid and worked well to connect to the PC.
The video quality was good and the photos to SD card worked okay (about the standard of a 4 year old digital camera, okay for family snap shots)
Where things went wrong was over the next week testing the camera on vacation, the startup time for the unit is far too slow (approaching 6 seconds!). The first time you miss a "magic" moment waiting for the camera to startup you are very likely to reconsider your choice. Couple this with the annoying "binging" it goes through when you leave it on (to avoid the startup time) and you have a serious niggle that will make you wish you had looked elsewhere. I have returned the camera and am trying out the Panasonic DV203D as I really can't afford the Sony TRV33 that offers similar features. If the Panasonic works out, great, if not I will have to return to Hi8 and save up some more money before venturing back into the world of MiniDV :-(

HTH

My canon zr65 suddenly went black (No image detected). From what I found on the web (a lot of people have the same problem), the CCD may be the cause. It looks like there is a quality issue about this part. To replace a CCD is very costly. Take your chance.

To it's credit, this camera has alot of neat bells and whistles - the most exciting of which is the 20x optical zoom. It's easy and intuitive to use without having to spend much time in the manual, and ergonomically feels pretty good to hold and shoot. Outdoors, this camera takes video of phenomenal quality. If an outdoor mid-range single CCD camcorder is what you're in the market for, the Canon is not a bad choice.

Unfortunately, despite its deceptively low 1.4 lux rating, this camera completely disappoints in anything but the very brightest of conditions (> 100 lux). I literally had to shoot within 2 or 3 feet of a 300W incandescent light source to get any kind of acceptable image. Even in modest indoor lighting conditions (i.e. a living room with 2 or 3 60W incandescent lights), the images are extremely grainy and washed out. There are a number of tricks that some have applied (adjusting exposure, changing the shooting mode to 'low light', limiting zoom, disabling image stabilization, and so forth) - and while these did improve the image quality somewhat, the improvement was marginal at best. The image stablization and auto focus capabilities of this camera leave something to be desired as well - even at minimal zoom. You'll be disappointed at the slow response and jittery motion as you zoom in and out on your subject. Again, I think much of this can be attributed to the camera's low light response. I found I frequently had to set a zoom and manually focus the unit to get any kind of acceptable picture while filming indoors. The refresh on the low light modes is also very low and renders it almost impractical for anything but tripod use.

After a fair bit of research, the limitation of this camera seems to stem from it's 640K 1/6" CCD. The smaller CCD (which seems to be more prevalent in the newer cameras) are much less sensitive to light (and cheaper to manufacture). Inevitably, I traded my ZR65 in for a Sony TRV22 with a 1/4" CCD. While I lament not having 20x zoom, the light sensitivity of the TRV22 to the ZR65 is night and day (or day and night as the case would be). The autofocus is far more responsive, the pictures are not grainy - indoor or out - and the night shot mode on the sony actually takes a pretty decent B&W image in the near absence of any light. You can (and should expect) better in quality indoor shooting from your digital camcorder - and these products do exist, but do your homework in advance. This camera is lacking in the basics and will disappoint those users who simply want to videotape their family, children, and day-to-day social events.