Ok, I've received my DCR-SR100. I haven't had much time to play around with it, but here are some first impressions, particularly in comparison to the JVC Everio MG-77.

I have not had a chance to analyze each in detail on my television, but I have some first impressions from reviewing recorded content via each camcorder's viewscreens. Some of the differences could be due to variances in screen quality.:

Low light:
Sony was better at pulling in more light, details, and color in outside sunset conditions. Low light indoors, the Sony again pulled in more light, and seemed to produce more details than the JVC the further you got out. 1-7 feet the two were very close, but the JVC a bit granier. Past 8 feet, the JVC started to taper off in terms of details. In the dark driving (I had a helper), the Sony captured details much further down the road, and captured lettering on the signs much better. It is hard to compare the two in short distance 0LUX situations because JVC really doesn't have anything. JVC does attempt to have a low light setting, but it is pretty useless because it is extremely sensitive to movement-both by the operator, and the subject. Hands-down, Sony's Nightshot mode is awesome if this is a factor for you. With this unit they continue to offer the great infrared picture quality.

Autofocus:
The Sony seemed to handle transitions much more quickly and accurately. In one test, we were in the car filming out an open window, panned to viewing through the windshield, then to a person inside the car. The Sony seemed to handle this effortlessly. The JVC seemed to struggle with the view through the windshield-going from short focus to outside, then locking outside. It is up the reader's interpretation as to what should be expected under these conditions, but the end result is throughout the pan, JVC had noticeable out of focus moments and the Sony didn't.

Anti-shake:
Sony seemed to handle shaking, jars better when filming from the car--though the JVC wasn't too far behind. The Sony seemed to also handle motion better when zoomed in while standing still free-handed. Though I have to say the JVC seems to do pretty well, particularly considering it is considerably smaller and lighter than the Sony.

Ergonomics:
The Sony is considerably larger (~25%) than the JVC. It is also considerably heavier. Both are pretty easy to hold though, and I actually kind of like having a more solid feeling camcorder in my hands--it does seem to help in stablizing the shooting in free-hand shooting. Though, I can see that one could tire sooner when using the Sony. Both have effective record button. Sony is a little cumbersom in switching from On-camcorder-phot-play. It is not so easy to do with the thumb--particularly switching it on. Though it is not too bad. It certainly is better than the JVC, which requires you to turn it on on the left side of the unit with your other hand--and the JVC has a hard switch, rather than a toggle-rocker, which I believe is a little more cumbersome. I would have to give JVC the nod in terms of portability and comfort in the hand. It's just smaller and more compact and easier to tote around. The Sony is a bit smaller than their HD model, the HC3. It feels more solid than the JVC, but it is less portable. If I didn't have the JVC to compare to though I probably wouldn't have any problem with its size. It still packs a whole lot into a relatively small package.

Sound quality:
I haven't had much time to judge sound quality, though the Sony seemed to have a bit richer bass.

Lenscap:
Believe it it not, the lens protection system actually became a decisionmaking factor for me after having the JVC for a period of time. I really have become a bit frustrated with JVC's lenscap It is tapered to avoid snagging, but this also makes it hard to grasp to put on and take off. Also, the JVC lenscap is a bit small and hard to manipulate--and I consider myself to be rather dextrous. I think Sony's approach is much better with the auto lenscap. Not having to worry about it every time I want to start the camera, and stop the camera, and not having a dangling lens cap when recording is actually very nice. As well, you don't have to deal with the JVC lenscap warning every time you start up the unit.

Menu and content manipulation:
I think JVC has a good menu interface. I don't mind the little joystick, it seems to work pretty good. It's primary and sub-menu methods of scrolling up and down for the primary menu, then clicking to the left or right to go back and forth to the sub-menu works well. It is also well laid out and clear to read. The sony has a similar interface, but you do it on the touchscreen. It isn't bad, but the little icons can be distracting, and the lettering a bit distracting as well. I would have to say the JVC menu system is considerably better. Both units are about the same in terms of video playback interface. Not many differences there.

Conclusions after my very brief first comparisons:

1) Sony video picture quality appears noticeably better than the JVC
2) Sony low light appears noticeably better than the JVC
3) Both pretty close in terms of anti-shake
4) Sony handles auto-focus noticeably better
5) JVC is very portable, light and feels better in the hand, but as a result sacrifices overall impression of build quality and durability.
6) Too early to conclude on sound quality
7) JVC lenscap annoying--Sony auto lenscap great
8) JVC has a better menu system, but neither quite hit the mark in terms of ease of manipulation

I'm torn. But, I think all factors considered, even though the Sony is larger and heavier, it is still pretty portable and I still think I will be happier in the long run if I choose the Sony over the JVC.

Adjudicator