Modern equivalent of the old Sony TRV 900 ?

rec.video

12 Feb 2006 1:27 PM

Heather

Hello everybody,

I am looking for a new digital video camera to replace my trustry Sony
TRV900.
Is there anything about the same size (maybe a little smaller), same
format,
3CCD, better capabilities ? It doesn't necessarily have to be a Sony
device, I
am happy to consider Panasonic, Canon or whoever. .

thank you very much,

Heather

12 Feb 2006 4:35 PM

PTravel

"Heather" <heather.fra***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1139750829.065167.86270@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hello everybody,
>
> I am looking for a new digital video camera to replace my trustry Sony
> TRV900.
> Is there anything about the same size (maybe a little smaller), same
> format,
> 3CCD, better capabilities ? It doesn't necessarily have to be a Sony
> device, I
> am happy to consider Panasonic, Canon or whoever. .

Unfortunately, no. Sony's replacement for the 900 was the TRV950, which had
significantly poorer low-light performance and a lot of useless and gimmicky
"features." Panasonic's low-priced 3-ccd machines similarly have poor
low-light performance and a somewhat degraded image.

Sony's VX2100 is produced spectacular video and has wonderful low-light
performance. It is, however, larger and heavier than the TRV900. It's
predecessor, the VX2000, was my choice after I waited too long to pick up a
TRV900 and wanted something with comparable or better performance.

Show quoteHide quote

>
> thank you very much,
>
> Heather
>

Are all your drivers up to date? click for free checkup

14 Feb 2006 4:04 AM

Heather

Thank you very much for the reply, 'PTravel',

I looked at the VX2000 in the past but it seemed quite bulky - I do
a lot of travel photograhy & video, including action work (rock
climbing
& skiing) so form factor is important. I presume you also do a lot
of travel work judging by your site and website. Is the VX2000 not
cumbersome and weighty?

Thank you again,

heather

PTravel wrote:
Show quoteHide quote

> "Heather" <heather.fra***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1139750829.065167.86270@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Hello everybody,
> >
> > I am looking for a new digital video camera to replace my trustry Sony
> > TRV900.
> > Is there anything about the same size (maybe a little smaller), same
> > format,
> > 3CCD, better capabilities ? It doesn't necessarily have to be a Sony
> > device, I
> > am happy to consider Panasonic, Canon or whoever. .
>
> Unfortunately, no. Sony's replacement for the 900 was the TRV950, which had
> significantly poorer low-light performance and a lot of useless and gimmicky
> "features." Panasonic's low-priced 3-ccd machines similarly have poor
> low-light performance and a somewhat degraded image.
>
> Sony's VX2100 is produced spectacular video and has wonderful low-light
> performance. It is, however, larger and heavier than the TRV900. It's
> predecessor, the VX2000, was my choice after I waited too long to pick up a
> TRV900 and wanted something with comparable or better performance.

14 Feb 2006 4:47 AM

PTravel

"Heather" <heather.fra***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1139889872.384068.267300@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Thank you very much for the reply, 'PTravel',
>
> I looked at the VX2000 in the past but it seemed quite bulky - I do
> a lot of travel photograhy & video, including action work (rock
> climbing
> & skiing) so form factor is important. I presume you also do a lot
> of travel work judging by your site and website. Is the VX2000 not
> cumbersome and weighty?

I use it excusively for travel. I find I've gotten used to it. Note, too,
that I also carry a Canon 10D, a not-particularly-light digital SLR. The
extra weight of the VX2000 helps keep the shot steadier, though it's taken
me a couple of years to work out a reliable technique.

To make carrying it easier, I got a longer strap than the one supplied by
Sony. I keep it slung over my shoulder, which makes it easy to swing in
front of my body, held between my stomach and chest. This puts the camera
slightly above my center-of-gravity, a very stable position for the camera
that results in nice steady shots (unfortunately, my website video was shot
before I discovered this technique).

The bottom line is that I'd prefer something smaller and lighter, but my
priority is high-quality video and there's simply nothing else out there
that comes close in that price range (and, indeed, anything else that's
comparable would cose twice as much and be even heavier). I've carried the
VX2000 through Europe and Asia and it's done great (and I can use the
exercise).

Note that I do _not_ rock climb or anything similar (though I've used the
VX2000 on a bicycle a number of times).

Show quoteHide quote

>
> Thank you again,
>
> heather
>
>
> PTravel wrote:
> > "Heather" <heather.fra***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1139750829.065167.86270@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > > Hello everybody,
> > >
> > > I am looking for a new digital video camera to replace my trustry Sony
> > > TRV900.
> > > Is there anything about the same size (maybe a little smaller), same
> > > format,
> > > 3CCD, better capabilities ? It doesn't necessarily have to be a Sony
> > > device, I
> > > am happy to consider Panasonic, Canon or whoever. .
> >
> > Unfortunately, no. Sony's replacement for the 900 was the TRV950, which
had
> > significantly poorer low-light performance and a lot of useless and
gimmicky
> > "features." Panasonic's low-priced 3-ccd machines similarly have poor
> > low-light performance and a somewhat degraded image.
> >
> > Sony's VX2100 is produced spectacular video and has wonderful low-light
> > performance. It is, however, larger and heavier than the TRV900. It's
> > predecessor, the VX2000, was my choice after I waited too long to pick
up a
> > TRV900 and wanted something with comparable or better performance.
>

14 Feb 2006 2:54 PM

Kent Clarke

In article <1139889872.384068.267***@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Show quoteHide quote

"Heather" <heather.fra***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you very much for the reply, 'PTravel',
>
> I looked at the VX2000 in the past but it seemed quite bulky - I do
> a lot of travel photograhy & video, including action work (rock
> climbing
> & skiing) so form factor is important. I presume you also do a lot
> of travel work judging by your site and website. Is the VX2000 not
> cumbersome and weighty?
>
> Thank you again,
>
> heather
>
>
> PTravel wrote:
> > "Heather" <heather.fra***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1139750829.065167.86270@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > > Hello everybody,
> > >
> > > I am looking for a new digital video camera to replace my trustry Sony
> > > TRV900.
> > > Is there anything about the same size (maybe a little smaller), same
> > > format,
> > > 3CCD, better capabilities ? It doesn't necessarily have to be a Sony
> > > device, I
> > > am happy to consider Panasonic, Canon or whoever. .
> >
> > Unfortunately, no. Sony's replacement for the 900 was the TRV950, which had
> > significantly poorer low-light performance and a lot of useless and gimmicky
> > "features." Panasonic's low-priced 3-ccd machines similarly have poor
> > low-light performance and a somewhat degraded image.
> >
> > Sony's VX2100 is produced spectacular video and has wonderful low-light
> > performance. It is, however, larger and heavier than the TRV900. It's
> > predecessor, the VX2000, was my choice after I waited too long to pick up a
> > TRV900 and wanted something with comparable or better performance.

The VX2000-2100 is substantially larger than the typical consumer
camcorder, no question. Whether or not it's too big for your needs
depends on whether you're a skier/climber shooting some tape along the
way, or a videographer specialising in action shoots :)

The Sony specialty is good low-light images, which might be handy during
travel to museums, galleries, evening crowds in the Square, etc., but
probably isn't pertinent to the typically well-illuminated outdoor
recreation scene. In fact, you have to turn on the ND filter on the
VX2000 outside on a sunny day, to cut down on diffraction blur. Perhaps
one of the Panasonic 3-chip cams would be more suitable--comparable
daylight images, less bulky, with a good control layout. Try
http://www.pana3ccduser.com/index.php if you want to talk to owners
doing travel/sports shooting.