Videomaker Magazine at DVinfo.net

Ken Tanaka · April 20th, 2003, 03:21 PM

The May, 2003 issue of Videomaker (on newstands as I write this) features a review of the PDX10. The first sentence in the review sums up their findings:

Quote:

The professional Sony DSR-PDX10 is, in every important way, identical to the consumer DCR-TRV950, which received a very positive review from us in the October, 2002 issue.

Frank Granovski · April 20th, 2003, 04:40 PM

In my opinion, if I may be so bold, Videomaker is crap. But the mag that's really garbage (in my opinion) is Camcorder & ComputerVideo---now that's a winer! I looked at the cover not too long ago, and it had a feature on the Streamcorder. Funny thing was, the picture was the 1 chip, GR-DV3000U. Then I went to the article, about the Streamcorder, and lo and behold, more pictures of the 1 chip GR-DV3000U! This is nothing new with this magazine, though. The writers seem like children re-hashing specs and making really dumb comments. For example: "Press in on the Menu dial and a colorful display of options pops up on the screen. (Note: The menu is only available in Manual mode.) This is your doorway to manual features...." Want more? Read this line from the same article: "NightAlive is the DVL920's answer to shooting in extreme low light. Basically, the camcorder shutter speed is automatically set to 30 times normal." WHAT???

I only read articles written by Dr. Peter Utz in that mag. So, if I see his name, I buy it.

Ken Tanaka · April 20th, 2003, 04:45 PM

Actually, I think Videomaker features many good tips for hobbyists. But to each his own, eh?

I've only seen Camcorder & Computer Video once, and agree that it's landfill waiting for the truck.

Frank Granovski · April 22nd, 2003, 03:33 AM

That was just my 2 cents. I've been reading Videomaker since it first came out, and then about 4 years ago, it went down the tubes by way of quality.

The other one, was always hot and cold, depending on who the writers were. It's still the same way. I highly recommend Peter Utz's articles. He's another Adam Wilt.

You should read some of those British publications...there's always a surprise.

Tom Hardwick · April 22nd, 2003, 05:14 AM

Britain's Camcorder User can be just as feeble. The review of the Sony TRV30 said it was a three chipper. They said it twice in the review, just to ram home the lie. The reviewer couldn't even be bothered to read the outside of the box it came in. The editor let it through. Would you have him edit your films?

tom.

K. Forman · April 22nd, 2003, 05:30 AM

I have my ups and downs with Videomaker, enough to not want a subscription. They occassionaly have a decent article, but then they blow it with something lame. For instance: Lighting article this month. They tell you about different types of kits and reflector, and show you pictures of this manufacturer and some prices.

What I would have liked, would be a comparison, filled with DETAILS about the lights. It would be like Motortrend mag having an SUV roundup like this- "Toyota and Chevy have some wonderful colors out this year. All models have four wheels.

They did have a decent article on using reflectors, and some decent reviews. Just not consistant from page to page.

April 20th, 2003, 04:45 PM	#3
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	Actually, I think Videomaker features many good tips for hobbyists. But to each his own, eh? I've only seen Camcorder & Computer Video once, and agree that it's landfill waiting for the truck. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

April 20th, 2003, 04:40 PM	#2
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	In my opinion, if I may be so bold, Videomaker is crap. But the mag that's really garbage (in my opinion) is Camcorder & ComputerVideo---now that's a winer! I looked at the cover not too long ago, and it had a feature on the Streamcorder. Funny thing was, the picture was the 1 chip, GR-DV3000U. Then I went to the article, about the Streamcorder, and lo and behold, more pictures of the 1 chip GR-DV3000U! This is nothing new with this magazine, though. The writers seem like children re-hashing specs and making really dumb comments. For example: "Press in on the Menu dial and a colorful display of options pops up on the screen. (Note: The menu is only available in Manual mode.) This is your doorway to manual features...." Want more? Read this line from the same article: "NightAlive is the DVL920's answer to shooting in extreme low light. Basically, the camcorder shutter speed is automatically set to 30 times normal." WHAT??? I only read articles written by Dr. Peter Utz in that mag. So, if I see his name, I buy it.

April 22nd, 2003, 03:33 AM	#4
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	That was just my 2 cents. I've been reading Videomaker since it first came out, and then about 4 years ago, it went down the tubes by way of quality. The other one, was always hot and cold, depending on who the writers were. It's still the same way. I highly recommend Peter Utz's articles. He's another Adam Wilt. You should read some of those British publications...there's always a surprise.

April 22nd, 2003, 05:14 AM	#5
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Britain's Camcorder User can be just as feeble. The review of the Sony TRV30 said it was a three chipper. They said it twice in the review, just to ram home the lie. The reviewer couldn't even be bothered to read the outside of the box it came in. The editor let it through. Would you have him edit your films? tom.

April 22nd, 2003, 05:30 AM	#6
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	I have my ups and downs with Videomaker, enough to not want a subscription. They occassionaly have a decent article, but then they blow it with something lame. For instance: Lighting article this month. They tell you about different types of kits and reflector, and show you pictures of this manufacturer and some prices. What I would have liked, would be a comparison, filled with DETAILS about the lights. It would be like Motortrend mag having an SUV roundup like this- "Toyota and Chevy have some wonderful colors out this year. All models have four wheels. They did have a decent article on using reflectors, and some decent reviews. Just not consistant from page to page.