"Mardon" <mgb72***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SPidna8Zgs2J1OLfRVn-uQ@rogers.com...
>
> "C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote...
> <*snip*>
>> The TRV900 ... are the standard I'm setting
>
> I've owned a TRV900 for over 5 years.  It's an excellent camera with 2
> exceptions.  The TRV900 has a reputation for "crinkling" tapes.  I've had
> my camera serviced twice under warranty for this problem but it still
> continues to do it.  John Beale runs an excellent FAQ on the TRV900 at
> http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/index.html
>
> I suggest that you visit his website and perform a search of his site for
> the word "crinkle".  You'll find lots to read.  The other 'issue' is not
> really a problem, it just surprised me when I first bought the camera.
> It's not particularly good in low light situations.  It likes a lot of
> light in order to deliver a good picture.  I've just recently started
> editing 16:9 widescreen footage from my camera.  I'd been shooting all 4:3
> until we bought a new widescreen TV and I wanted to try 16:9.  You can see
> 57 seconds of the first 16:9 clip that I shot with TRV900 by going to:
> http://www.justus.ca/misc/index.htm
>
> and selecting item 7, "Outer Cove Beach".   Remember, however, this
> Windows Media clip is highly compressed, so the quality is poor. I also
> was only testing 16:9, so I hand-held the camera and the cinematography
> leaves a lot to be desired.  Anyway, it was taken with my TRV900, so I
> thought you might want to see it.
>
>

"Malcolm Knight." <my2initials@spam-trap.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3ebruaF29ecjU1@individual.net...
> "C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote in message
> news:z4ednXgOjtkri-DfRVn-vA@rogers.com...
>> Wierd! Saw these things on eBay.
>>
>>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=20333&item=7511750687&rd=1
>>
>> http://catalogs.infocommiq.com/AVCAT/images/documents/pdfs/dsrseries.pdf
>>
>> Anyone use these cameras? How's low-light and overall capability compared
> to
>> the PD150/VX2000? According to the brochure, these are the same vintage
>> as
>> the VX-1000.
>
> The DSR-PD100 is the DVCAM version of the TRV900. Like the 900 it has
> 3CCDs
> and was rated as among the best small camcorder at the time of
> introduction.
> The PD100 bundled some extra features over the 900, notably a decent wide
> angle adapter and single channel XLR input.
>
> The PD1 was an earlier DVCAM modified version of a single CCD domestic
> camcorder and probably best avoided.
>
> Unlike later DVCAM models, neither of these can record in DV mode.
> --
> Malcolm
>
>

"C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote in message
news:oNGdnXhDi-GKWB3fRVn-pw@rogers.com...
> AH! Excellent - thanks for the input on this. I was leaning toward
avoiding
> the little PD1 but would never have guessed there was a connection between
> the PD100 and TRV900. Thanks!
>
> C.
>
>
> "Malcolm Knight." <my2initials@spam-trap.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:3ebruaF29ecjU1@individual.net...
> > "C.J.Patten" <cjpatten@KNOWSPAMrogers.com> wrote in message
> > news:z4ednXgOjtkri-DfRVn-vA@rogers.com...
> >> Wierd! Saw these things on eBay.
> >>
> >>
> >

> >>
> >> Anyone use these cameras? How's low-light and overall capability
compared
> > to
> >> the PD150/VX2000? According to the brochure, these are the same vintage
> >> as
> >> the VX-1000.
> >
> > The DSR-PD100 is the DVCAM version of the TRV900. Like the 900 it has
> > 3CCDs
> > and was rated as among the best small camcorder at the time of
> > introduction.
> > The PD100 bundled some extra features over the 900, notably a decent
wide
> > angle adapter and single channel XLR input.
> >
> > The PD1 was an earlier DVCAM modified version of a single CCD domestic
> > camcorder and probably best avoided.
> >
> > Unlike later DVCAM models, neither of these can record in DV mode.
> > --
> > Malcolm
> >
> >
>
>