"amer" <seymoria@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7d1e8174.0307170848.365c1ce0@posting.google.com...

[...]

> Let me explain my objective. I intend to use this camcorder for

> something similar to an investigative operation. In this regard,

> as you might expect, the only features I am going to use are

> Resolution, zoom and compactness.

Low-light range, also? Or will you be shooting only in good light?

> Resolution, would mean getting sharp details on closeups of facial

> features.

> High Zoom, would be able to record while maintaining a large (& safe)

> distance.

While most cameras have a 10-12X zoom range (with the long end

about 500mm equivalent in 35mm-lens terms), some have longer

ranges, though these may not be as sharp at the long end, and it is very

difficult to hold these steady at the long end, even with the stabilizer.

Also, some long range zooms have noticeably reduced maximum

apertures at the long end, limiting their low-light usefulness...

> And finally, compactness will facilitate concealment while carrying it

> on the body.

> Thus I would only go for image functions which enhance detail of

> facial features from distance. I have to recognize faces during

> playback.

> Thus, image quality and aesthetics (e.g. color, tone, etc. are at the

> best, secondary for me. While Image sharpness/crispiness are most

> desirable and

> graininess, noise and blurr avoidable at all costs.

> For compactness, I really like the small size of the Sony PC101, which

> you have recommended.

This may be a good camera in fairly good light, though the zoom range

is not the widest. Resolution and noise characteristics (and color)

are good, but low-light shooting "is not its thing"... The PC9 can

go to lower light levels, but it is not quite so sharp and smooth in good

light.

> Finally, I would love to have a camera with excellant nightshot

> features also. How sharp is an IR nightshot? I hope its as good as in

> daylight except for the

> sacrifice of colours.

The "nightshot" in the Sony cameras looks good (with B&W mode used

to lose the "toothpaste green" color) - and the image is as sharp as the

color image, with less noise (the CCD is more sensitive with the IR-blocking

filter removed). The built-in IR illuminator is not WA, and will not

illuminate out very far - accessory IR lights are available that at least

extend the range, if not the angle...

> Please also shed some light on the Micro-MV format, and how does it

> compare with DV, resolution-wise, a I am also considering an

> ultra-compact model, the

> DCR-IP5 which uses Micro-MV.

It is potentially an orphan format with hard-to-find tape, and the signal

on the tape is in a form that is not easy to edit - I would avoid this unless

smallest possible size is the most important...

> In the light of above, I would welcome to recieve any new advice, if

> you would like to emphasize something that has not been covered in the

> previous email.

>

> With Best Regards,

> Amer

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com

Hey, take a gander at www.visitithaca.com, too...!