Sony sr 200 &amp; sr 300 ? Could that be worth the extra $ 300.00 ????
1791317
If you go to cnet, they have a more detailed comparison between the two. I'll try a link here... http://www.cnet.com.au/camcorders/0,239035877,339272971,00.htm
1518250
I'd prefer the 330 HS -- because I don't trust touchscreens.However, I don't own either at the moment. I'm shopping for a replacement for a damaged 300 HS, and the 330 HS appears to be a similar camera with some nice upgrades.The differences in megapixels and zoom range are really minor. It's doubtful that you'd notice any significant diffs.
1786216
For the D50 and D90 I'm partial to the 28-200. Got three from Tamron and one from Sigma and all were under $100 on Ebay. They AF quickly and are razorsharp. Most were bought attached to a cheapo camera like an N60 or a N2020.
515400
I don't have the 100 or the 300. My last one was the 500HS. It is smaller now and lighter. The night picture without the flash are all nice. I took lots of them during the Holiday lights event, and they all very clear. Also it has anti shaking mode, it snaps and processing very quick so much less blurry when moving. I think that is a major difference for this camera. Battery life is very short that is the only draw back to me. I like it overal all but be sure to get extra battery.
84901
I have the same question! I'm having the same experience with the Sonys and that's why I'm thinking of purchasing these. Did you find out anything?
166897
I have the same sentiment. This will be my first foray into digital SLR. I want one camera for nice photos and also for HD video. This sony was the only one I could find that has continuous autofocus in video mode so that's why I'm opting for it over the rebel.
1673297
I just bought the A570IS a few days ago without seeing this alternative, so I hope I'm not wasting my money by not getting a better camera for pennies more! We shall see, I guess. Sometime next week I'll let u know if I was impressed with the A570IS.. (all of my friends have told me it's great, btw).
2185024
Sony website just had the 350 for $150 yesterday, not having any fancy hookups (just using the sony front speakers) I can't justify the difference in cost. However, I appreciate the simple and clear reply given to the original question and will refer back to it when choosing a new BD player and sound setup. Espcially if trying to get more life out of our old (sony) receiver.From what I understand of the answer, if the setup is more modern, it would not make any difference which player.
1717394
Definitely go with the 300. Our 11y/o has been using it for one year. Our 9 y/o is no longer happy with the 200 and wants the 300, he says he can't keep up with his brother..
759099
it all depends on how much money you have .... most of the top brands are great Polk, Rockford, Kenwood, my favorite is focal but way $$$$$$ alpine makes a nice one for under 200 Pioneer has one for 300 ish but you can spend 1000's ..... I like to match so I would go with Polk they pad4000 or d2000 are not much
1362387
200 is more versatile. Nothing at all wrong with thee 100, but the 200 does provide more options.
155653
The Sony is a LITTLE better lens, but a lot more expensive. Neither is crazy sharp. Both are sharp enough for most people in most circumstances.
150329
Stay with the 200. Vignette is minimal to none and the clarity of the 18-200 is very impressive. Clear and sharp edge to edge(this impressed me the most.) You wont miss the 300 and you can take the money savings and apply to another lens.
73532
I don't have the SR100 or SR200, for outdoors, the SR300 gets an 8 (it really is good outdoors), indoors I give it a 6. It's a bit unfair to include an HD unit in the scale, so 8 might be a bit much, but I'm going to say it's fair.
1348881
I literally just ordered a KDL-W3000 52 inch television 1 hour ago. I did 3 months of research and although I am not sure how I'll fell when I get the television, I can say that I went for the w3000. I looked at some seocnd tier brands first, but quickly moved on to the main brands.... settling in on the Sharp D64 or a Toshiba 167 or the Sony W3000. Of course the Sony was the most expensive of the brands I was looking at. As far as picture and blur: I can not even tell you if I could see any difference between the w3000 and the XBR, so I went for the XBR. I did see one scene in a movie where I saw a slight amount of motion blur, so I am sure it exists.. the quesiton is, "how bad does the blur appear to you and what is it worth for you to minimize the blur" ? For me... the answer was in my order.. I went with the W3000. The price was $2309 no tax, no delivery fee.
1071781
I could not justify spending extra for the 300hs. I have been using the 100hs for 3 weeks now with no complaints. I do not take much video but overall I am happy with my purchase. I was able to pick up the 100HS when Amazon had the one day sale on gray for 159 out the door.
2096572
The 18-200 has better specs across all ranges (read Thom Hogan) A 300 mm lense can be very handy, but check the weight of each lense.