>d_ruether@hotmail.com (Neuman - Ruether) wrote in message news:

<3e92da68.854480@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>...

>> See: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm.

>> While the TRV30 is not the same as the TRV33, the low-light

>> range is the same, and the effect on the low-light image

>> roughly the same as in this comparison with the PC9 (same

>> as the TRV19 image). The 19 will go lower with good color,

>> though the "grain" will be bigger (and it is more easily

>> corrected in an editor, keeping better color).

[...]

>> The images will look a bit sharper in good

>> light, with somewhat better color - the limitations

>> are in low light...

On 10 Apr 2003 06:53:17 -0700, cyberwebstuff@mail.com (Lee Fentress) wrote:

>Ok, well, I checked out the comparisons and the trv30 does have quite

>a bit sharper image than the PC9, but the PC9 does have better color

>in low light... So... I guess I'm just stuck with, do I want better

>image quality or better low light... but as far as the image quality

>and sharpness goes--is that going to show up very much difference on

>an ordinary TV? thanks :)

Yes, but I sometimes recommend the softer-imaged camera

for its fewer motion-artifacts. The TRV30 looks great

in soft light, with little motion, but in some situations

the picture is very "busy" with stairstepping, "flapping"

on scan-lines, Moire-patterning, etc. - and then one longs

for either a VX2000 or a low-end 1-chipper...;-) The TRV33

and similar are also a good compromise, unless you shoot

in low light or very contrasty light...