Panasonic VDR-M53 Camcorder Review

Comparisons
Panasonic VDR-M55, VDR-M75, and VDR-M95
As the VDR-M53 is the least advanced of the Panasonic line, it is expected that the VDR-M55, VDR-M75, and VDR-M95 are all more advanced. But how advanced, you ask, and at what cost. Well, let’s just say that if you buy the VDR-M75 or VDR-M55 you’ll receive the absent USB, remote controller, and included software of the VDR-M53. The big difference between the VDR-M55 and the VDR-M75 is that the VDR-M55 keeps the same imager as the VDR-M53, while the VDR-M75 upgrades to a 1.33 MP CCD (690K for video, 1.1 MP for stills). Also, the VDR-M55 maintains the VDR-M53’s 24x optical zoom, while the VDR-M75 drops to a 10x. The VDR-M75 captures stills at 1280 x 960 while the VDR-M55 maintains the VDR-M53’s mediocre 640 x 480.

And how does the VDR-M95 fit into all of this? Well, it upgrades the imager further to a 2.12 MP CCD (1.23 MP for video, 1.92 MP for stills), captures stills at 1600 x 1200, and has a 10x optical zoom. As far as pricing goes, the VDR-M75 is about two hundred dollars more than the VDR-M53, with the VDR-M95 over two hundred dollars more than that.

Sony DCR-DVD92
While this year’s Panasonic DVD camcorders haven’t undergone the drastic cosmetic changes that Sony’s entire line (except the DVD301) has, it has basically the same hardware and specs as the DCR-DVD92, Sony’s comparably-priced, lowest-end DVD camcorder. Both camcorders are armed with a similar CCD (680K), lack USB ports, and have 2.5” LCD screens. The Sony has the company’s touch screen technology which doesn’t really add too much to the camcorder’s functionality. The VDR-M53 has a 24x optical zoom while the Sony has a 20x optical. The salient difference here is the fact that the Sony records to DVD-RW/+RW, while the Panasonic records to DVD-RAM (both record to DVD-R). This gives the Sony a bit more versatility, especially when on-computer manipulation is concerned, as both camcorders lack USB interfaces. Another big difference is that the Panasonic can record stills to SD/MM card, while the Sony can only record them to disc. On a superficial note, the Sony looks a lot cooler, as it features the taser-esque design of its siblings.

Who It’s For
Point-and-Shooters (7.0)
With little and cumbersome manual control, this camcorder is definitely for point-and-shooters, though perhaps not as easy to use as some of the Sony DVD camcorders.

Budget Consumers(9.0)
As far as DVD camcorders go, this is the cheapest.

Still Photo / Video Camera Hybrid(6.5)
This guy captures stills at 640 x 480, and that’s it. It can take a bundle of stills to disc though and gives you the option of recording to card. The still quality is a pretty awesome though.

Gadget Freaks(2.0)
Aside from the DVD factor, this guy is pretty devoid of all gadgets.

Manual Control Freaks(2.0)
Not a manual control camcorder at all. Look to those Panasonic MiniDV camcorders for that. You can probably get a pretty good one for around the same price.

Pros/ Serious Hobbyists(2.0)
No, DVD camcorders are for point-and-shooters on family vacations, looking for convenient, gimmicky compatibility.

Conclusion
At this point, I’m really interested to see how the DCR-DVD92 performs. Sony’s DCR-DVD403 performed unbelievably, and while it has a vastly superior imager to the DCR-DVD92—indeed, the DCR-DVD92 has the same image as some of Sony’s horrendously performing DVD camcorders of last year—if Sony’s improvement can improve from last year, the DCR-DVD92 might be able to show the VDR-M53 some competition.

As the cheapest DVD camcorder aside from the DCR-DVD92, the VDR-M53 should be popular even though it lacks some compatibility features. If its video performance proves better than the DCR-DVD92’s (and it very well could), it could become one of the better DVD buys this year. That said, Sony has made some compatibility advancements (DVD+RW available), while Panasonic has remained static when they should have at least made the camcorder DVD-RW accessible. Anyway, we’ll see; if the Sony’s performance stays the same, the VDR-M53 might not have to worry too much about compatibility.

One of the main downsides to this camcorder is its bad low light performance; however, considering the lack of manual control on this thing, buyers will probably be buying this machine for its bright light, point-and-shoot capabilities, and with such good bright light performance, it’s hard not to call this a good buy already.