Mustek announces DV536 super gadget

How much would you pay for a music- and video-playing gadget that could also take 10 megapixel still photos with a 10x zoom, capture 30fps VGA movies, record your whimsical musings, function as a digital card reader, and even encode footage directly from your TV or DVD player? $1000? How about $750? Surely you'd shell out at least $500 for such an amazing product. Well you'll be shocked to learn that Mustek is practically giving away all this and more for under $200 with its new DV536 Digital Camcorder-PVR. Too good to be true, you say? Well, yes and no; you really do get all of those functions in this new super gadget, but the list of caveats is rather long: the 2.4-inch screen isn't the best for watching flicks, that 10 megapixel resolution is really achieved through interpolation from a 5 megapixel CMOS sensor, and the 10x zoom we mentioned is of the digital variety, as no optical zoom is included. Plus, there's no way to schedule recordings and you're only getting 32MB of internal memory, meaning that you'll need a pretty big SD card if you want to store all those movies, photos, video clips, and songs you'll be loading this up with. Still, $200 isn't too bad for all the features you're getting here, even if none of them hold a candle to dedicated devices performing the same tasks. [Warning: PDF link]

[scott @ Jun 23rd 2006 2:38PM]

theres an old musing of my fathers (probably not his though):

divide quality(Q) by features(F) + money(M)

Q
_____________
F + M

[scott @ Jun 23rd 2006 2:42PM]

damn, that was wrong:

(Q/F)+M

money makes things better... usually...

[Craig @ Jun 23rd 2006 2:55PM]

I'd be a bit suspicious of these. My school bought loads of Mustek cameras about a year ago, and they were all terrible. They were really cheaply made and had terrible recording quality, even on low settings.

[bermuDa @ Jun 23rd 2006 3:15PM]

yeah... call me when a manufacturer that doesn't suck starts making these.

[PixelBrat @ Jun 23rd 2006 4:26PM]

I agree that these are likely garbage. Face it, you get what you pay for... and in this case I think $200 is a bit pricey if the quality is anything like their previous products.

[Dj Moxy @ Jun 23rd 2006 4:39PM]

I got one of these 'all in one' style cameras, because I wanted the ability to record video directly to MP4.

Horrible low light stills and video, and no optical zoom- only digital. As you can tell, it's not nearly as usefull as I thought it would be. It was a $120 failure experiment.

The only ones worth getting are from companies with good brand names, ala Sony. Only problem is that you actually have to PAY for all these features- and the gadgets will get really pricy. I'm talking at least $500.

If you still think you wanna get one of these kinds of cameras- do yourself a favor and get the smallest one possible. It could be a good replacement for a bad cameraphone that doesn't do video. Otherwise... stay away.

[zhonghuarising @ Jun 23rd 2006 7:29PM]

Yep, be very, very wary of any all-in-one gadget that costs so little. I have had some experience with this particular manufacturer, and it wasn't that great -- as others have pointed out.

[dizky @ Jun 24th 2006 8:10AM]

so, can anyone recommend a device that is small, takes nice, high wuality pictures and has a camcorder function better than cameraphones with video function?
thanks

[Bo Gus @ Jun 24th 2006 9:51AM]

Coming soon to an informercial near you!
Or, coming soon to a shopping channel near you.
For 5 easy payments of $39.95! And it comes with a slicer/dicer!

[Earthling @ Jul 1st 2006 12:52AM]

Earth to Engadget, having to buy a large SD card is not a big deal these days now that the price for a high-speed 1GB card has come down to $40. That is the current price at Fry's, which usually leads other stores in price cuts by only a few weeks.