|  |
| | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review: ( 20 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
34 of 40 found the following review helpful:
 Great little camera!! Jun 10, 2010
By Michael Figlar
"family cameraman"
Wanted to replace my VHS-C camcorder with a more updated camera. After research, I picked the HDR-XR150. Loaded with features, but small enough to fit in pockets, fanny-packs,etc. Worked great for first communion and graduation footage. Battery runtime is great, would recommend upgrade for extended uses. Works well in low light, 25x zoom is awesome!! Need to learn all of the features yet, but easy enough for beginners to use. I also need to get a blu-ray player so I can take advantage of the HD. Easy to burn dvd's with either computer or Sony DVDirect. Would highly recommend to those looking for a good family movie quality camcorder.
6 of 6 found the following review helpful:
Great video, very compact, large memory Jan 16, 2011
By waterdog
I'm surprised at how strong of negative reivews this camera got on Amazon. I consider myself somewhat picky about electronics and have been very happy with this camera. I rarely charge the battery and it has never come close to running out on me, the storage for video's is massive, and the video picture quality is excellent. All this in such a compact camera. I have had it almost a year and my family and friends all have been impressed with the video quality as well. I have not taken still shots with this camera so I cannot comment on still shots. I'm sure if you do your research there are probably several cameras on the market that are as good as this one, perhaps even better(cant' be by much) in this price range, but I have been very happy and very impressed with this camera and would definantly recommend this camera.
Note: Since I wrote this review I did notice that outside/bright lighting the picture is amazing. However, indoors w/moderate lighting the picture is OK, not bad, but not nealry as sharp as outdoors. I still recommend doing your research but I am very happy and impressed with this camera.
55 of 73 found the following review helpful:
 I can't believe this is an 'HD' camcorder! Jul 12, 2010
By A Roxette fan
Sony XR-150 camcorder videos are mushy at the best, whatever the setting, be it in SD (640x480) or HD mode (1080/60i FX, FH)... I compared this camcorder's HD video output with my 4-year old Fuji F30 digicam's upscaled SD video (my Fuji digicam has only SD video resolution). Disappointingly, this camcorder produces mediocre HD videos that are soft and are only marginally better in resolution compared to the upscaled SD video of my Fuji digicam. The marginal improvement in resolution is offset by the oversmooth, soft, washed out appearance of this Sony XR-150 camcorder's video colors. Exposure-wise and color-wise, the Fuji F30's upscaled SD output looks sharper, and overall, much better despite the being much noisier.
Comparing Sony XR-150 camcorder's SD output with my Fuji F30's SD output, the F30 is a bit noisier but again, the color and exposure and sharpness and detail is way much better. I was expecting a really dramatic improvement considering the price of this camcorder and considering that we're talking about 640x480 resolution (Fuji) vs. 1080/60i (Sony `HD'[?!!!] camcorder)... What a disappointment... I had to return this camcorder and stick to my Fuji F30's SD video until I find a more deserving replacement. (I'm looking at the Canon Vixia HF100).
My advice: Don't buy this camcorder if you want to improve on your digicam's SD videos or the existing videos of your SD camcorders... The video quality improvement (if you'd call it that) is not worth the price of this `barely' HD and 'pretentiously' 'HD' camcorder.
---------
Update: August 8, 2010
I've just bought the Canon Vixia HF M300 and all I can say is... Wow!!! What a world of difference in sharpness and resolution! Now that is HD! This Sony has fixed auto settings with no manual controls whatsoever while the Canon is fully customizable with manual controls (aperture priority; shutter priority, gain control, etc.). While I do admit at the default point-and-shoot settings (program AE mode) the Canon output looks visibly noisier (horrible trailing noise) but more detailed compared to this Sony camcorder's program AE mode (clean, but oversmooth and mushy with little detail left not fit to be called 'HD'), the ability to customize the Canon and adjust manual settings set these two camcorders a world apart. With the correct manual/custom settings, the Canon at $110.18 cheaper ($438.82 for Canon vs. $549 for the Sony) leaves this Sony in the dust. With the Canon, you will see what HD is supposed to be (sharpness and resolution that rival blu-Ray movies and HD channels). If you don't want to learn and fiddle with manual controls however and just want to point and shoot, only then will I suggest this more expensive Sony because as much as I hate to admit it, the Sony's program AE settings does appear cleaner (but less detailed) in indoor lighting than the Canon's default program AE settings which I can describe as detailed but just too noisy for my taste. (I'm not talking about what the Canon is capable of achieving with the correct manual settings which is simply spectacular whether it be in the bright sunny outdoors or dim, low light indoors. [Check out my review for the Canon HF M300]).
-----------
Update: November 19, 2010
I would just like to add that for those wanting to use the Sony XR 150 as a backup tool to take photos in addition to videos (in case you forget to bring your digital camera), be forewarned that the 3 megapixel photos taken by this camcorder is plain noisy, mushy garbage as there's no built in flash. The 3 megapixel photo capture is actually just upscaled from a 1 megapixel capture so don't be misled into thinking this camcorder can serve as your emergency 'backup' photo capturing device in case you forget to bring a digital camera. You need at least 2.0 NATIVE megapixels (not 1 megapixel UPSCALED to 3 megapixels) for a decent 4"x6" photo print. In the same way, the 'HD' video of this camcorder is actually just an upscale of its native capture which is NOT TRULY 1080p (just upscaled to 1080p). For those who think this camcorder's 'HD' video quality is comparable to blu-ray discs or HD broadcasts, you should check your sitting distance and your screen size and resolution. Screen size should at least be 42" 1080p and sitting distance should be no more than 2x the screen size. Viewing much farther away will make even the best HD broadcasts look like ordinary DVD or SD. Also, if you have no plans buying a 42" or bigger screen in the future, or sitting at the appropriate 2x viewing distance, you shouldn't be buying an HD camcorder as you will only see MARGINAL video quality and resolution improvement at inappropriate viewing distances and small screen sizes. Do compare this camcorder's output to reference Blu-ray discs like 'Pirates of the Carribean' (Curse of the Black Pearl) first or other similar reference HD material so you can judge for yourself how good really is the `HD' video resolution and quality of this camcorder is. Do compare this camcorder first with other camcorder offerings from other brands which cost so much less and offer so much better HD video and photo quality and so much more value for the money before shelling out a `premium' price for this camcorder. Make no mistake about my negative review. I love my Sony 1080p LCD tv, my Sony blu ray player and my Sony DVD players. My HD camcorder would also have been a Sony (XR 150) if it only lived up to its price and `Full 1080p HD' tag.
For the price, I believe Sony could have done better: True 1080p HD capture, full manual controls and a hotshoe because the much cheaper offerings from other brands (like the Canon HF M300), perform so much better and have so much more to offer with built in flash, mini hotshoe and with very good TRUE 3 megapixel photo capture (not upscaled). I always liked Sony products but I wish Sony would stop exaggerating specs like claiming a 'FULL HD 1080p'camcorder in a product that actually captures lower than that (only upscales internally the video captured to 1080p), or bannering '3.2 megapixels' in its camcorder body when the actual photo capture really is only 1 megapixel and is just upscaled internally to 3 megapixels.
14 of 18 found the following review helpful:
Looks poor on a 1080p HDTV Jul 31, 2010
By justsomeguyinla
"justsomeguyinla"
This camera is actually a Consumer Reports Best Buy, so I went to my neighborhood Fry's Electronics to take a look at it in their showroom. To my surprise, they had already mounted this camera on a tripod and hooked it up to a 40" 1080p HDTV through an HDMI port. I played with the camera focusing on people at various locations throughout the store and checked out the results on the TV. The quality was such a disappointment. Edges were fuzzy and pixelated even on faces that the camera auto-focused on. Anything with sharp lines (like the edges of tiles in the ceiling) actually wiggled while the camera was motionless on the tripod. If I hadn't read the one-star review for this model on Amazon, I would have thought there was a problem with that particular camera.
I guess if you were just going to create low-resolution videos to upload to YouTube this camera would probably be just fine. Since I wanted something I could capture good quality home videos to display on my HDTV, I passed over this camera.
17 of 23 found the following review helpful:
Awesome! Mar 01, 2010
By Elijah's FURY
"Eli's coming, hide your hearts now!"
25 X Zoom in 1080p! Where else you get gonna get that? 300 X digital zoom! Now those ufo pics will be indisputable! Minus 1 star because no way to attach an infrared light or flash. :(
See all 20 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
| | |
log
