On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 12:05:10 GMT, "Doug"
<doug.schuler@verizon.net> wrote:
> I just purchased a Snoy DCR-TRV25. So far, I'm very
satisfied. Works well
>in low light, and has night shot which allows you to
record in very low
>light (0 lux). I don't have any experience with
Panasonic, but I did have a
>JVC unit for a few days... wasn't very happy with it. It
was a GR-D90u. It
>seemed to have trouble with focus & dealing with low
light levels.
>
>From my experience, Sony has the majority of the market
for "consumer" level
>products. Canon has it for high end professional
devices. Prior to my recent
>purchase, I had a sony CCD-TRV21, which has performed
flawlessly since its
>purchase in 1996. It's still going strong.
Actually, it is the other way around - Canon sells their
low-end camcorders EVERYWHERE, and cheaper than Sony,
so......; and Canon makes no Pro-level cameras, but Sony
does... (as for "prosumer", only recently has
Canon
introduced a 3-CCD camcorder that is real competition for
the Sony models in terms of picture quality...).
>I had compared the two (trv25 & trv50) side by side
in the store. Had the
>clerk connect them to two tv's for side by side
comparison. recorded a few
>minutes video on each & played back. no real
differences between the two
>from what I could see.
They are different, but you may not see the differences
until you get near the low-light limit, until there is
motion with contrasty edges, or until you compare smooth
bright-colored areas even in good light (*good* 27" TV
may be needed to see most differences, though...). (But
if you like the TRV50, I have the similar-but-better TRV30
FS...;-).
>For my purposes of basic home recording, I didn't feel
the need to go with
>the trv50. While the blue tooth had a "neat"
factor, I have no other devices
>in which it could communicate with. The several hundred
dollar difference
>wasn't worth it to me. I'm sure there are other reasons
to choose one over
>another - hopefully others will comment as well. As for
me, I'm sticking
>with Sony.
>
>Good Luck,
>Doug