On 04 Apr 2003 18:39:14 GMT, suziedelapaz@aol.com (SuzieDeLaPaz) wrote:

[assuming that this is not a "troll"...]

>I need a camera to shoot events. Birthdays, Weddings and the occasional Theater

>event.

>

>I have been reading hundreds of posts about all the different cameras out there

>and it seems it comes down to resolution. That seems to be the defining line

>for how good a camera is. That and low light performance. Is this correct?

And sound quality (audio fidelity, stereo-separation,

noise-level, and freedom from camcorder-noise pickup...).

As for picture quality, contrast (and highlight/shadow

detail rendering ability), color (saturation, purity, and

bias), etc. are also important (see:

www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/vid_pict_characts.htm).

>I have also seen the camera info from Eric James Niemi at

>

>http://filmit.scriptmania.com/cam.html

Not exactly condidered a reliable or recommended site

just now...;-)

>If I understand this correctly why would I want to buy a Digital 8 or Mini-DV

>camera when I could just buy an old Sony TR700 for a hundred bucks on e-bay?

If it will do for you, this one-of-best-of-1-CCD-Hi-8s

may be all you need...

>I won't see a difference when I dub to VHS. I will have better resolution than

>a lot of cameras out there and I will be able to shoot for two hours on a tape,

>instead of one hour. And I would save a bundle of money.

Yes. Though you can record 2 hours in LP-mode on 80-minute

tape on Mini-DV, at higher resolution, with better color

(in good light) and less color-bleed, with better sound,

and you can make perfect copies or transfers to computer

with a good Mini-DV camcorder... And you may see the difference on a straight VHS dub - and you WILL see the difference if the Hi-8 is edited by analogue copying.

You will also see FAR fewer dropouts...

>I am confused. If the Hi-8mm TR700 Eric refers to has alittle over 400 lines of

>resolution why does Sony then come out with "new" and "better" digital models

>that can't reach this resolution.

Why do you assume they can't...?

Even the $800 list-price TRV33 can hit about 500 lines.

>Or if they do you are talking about spending

>thousands for a high end Sony 3-CCD unit.

See above... There are many models near the "low"

end that hit over 450 lines - and keep them while

the footage is edited or copied, unlike Hi-8...

>And why has low light performance dropped also?

People want "small and light" over most other

features at the low end. This results in lowered

sensitivity (as does increased resolution). But

almost all 1-CCD Mini-DV cameras are MUCH smaller

than the TRV700...

>Why do I know have to choose between a used Hi-8 TR700 that gives a solid 400

>lines of resolution and great low light perfomace plus a two hour tape run or

>step up and pay thousands more for a VX2000 or VX5000 something!

You don't. Buy a $600 (list, cheaper "street")

Sony TRV19 and have all the TRV700 offers, plus

more...

>Can someone explain what is going? Are we moving backwards?

Remember that the TRV700 was a top-end 1-CCD camcorder

in its day, and cost about $1300 new - for $1300 now,

you get (mostly...;-) much more... Or, buy my also-good

Canon A-1 "Digital" Hi-8 for $275 with LOTS of extras...

(See: www.nikonlinks.com/ruether/fs-misc-video-audio.htm,

where there are also some nice checked-out Mini-DV cameras

FS...;-)