"Brad" <bsnyder@rochesterdotrr.com> wrote in message

news:88jVa.134774$EQ5.59410@twister.nyroc.rr.com...

> My previous post asking about 3 ccd camcorders pretty much told me my budget

> will limit me to a single ccd model, as the only sub $1000 3 ccd is the

> Panasonic GS 70, and I guess that isn't rated so well. (Someone mentioned a

> Sony model I might get for $1000 used but I want to purchase new, not a used

> camcorder.)

Depends on the seller... I check all gear I sell more thoroughly than most

people check gear at all (new should be checked for faults, too...) - and

I just happen to have a nice, checked TRV900 for about your budget...;-)

> Do some single ccd camcorders take better looking video than others?

YES!!! ;-)

Even within one camera maker's line, there are differences - and

between lines there are differences. (See:

www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm).

>What should I look for?

Image sharpness and contrast, color bias and saturation, relative

freedom from motion-artifacting, low-light range, etc. See:

www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/vid_pict_characts.htm for image effects.

Look also for sound quality and relative freedom from pickup of

camera motor noises...

>I see many have a 1/6" ccd while others have a 1/4"ccd.

> Does this make a big difference?

Lens "speed" and CCD type can somewhat offset the size

difference, but *in general*, the larger the CCD, the better...

>I have 2 family weddings coming up and I

> just want to be able to get the best video quality I can afford. I don't

> care about any whiz bang cool features like night shot or 500X digital zoom

> that I'll never use.

Digital zoom is useless, but "nightshot" (when used with B&W

mode, to lose the "greens") can be useful for getting good low-light

images with 1-CCD models...

>I'm just looking for better video quality than I have

> right now with my Sony DCR-TRV 130 digital 8 model. If there's nothing much

> better that I can afford I stay with it for now, otherwise I'd like to

> upgrade and I'll hand that down to my nephew. He of course is praying I'll

> upgrade! Thanks for any and all input.

For "cheaps", look at the Sony TRV19/22 (same picture as the PC9

in the comparison above) - it goes to fairly low light levels with moderate

"grain", and has an overall "pleasant" picture that can be bettered in

particulars with other models, but at the expense of having other problems.

The TRV33/38 is very good in good light, for instance, but will not

shoot in as low a light level... The used TRV900 is overall a noticeably

better solution, with the VX2000 better yet...

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

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