On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:24:04 +0000, Moving Vision wrote:

>Just for the record. As wonderful as theses super duper compact DV's
>are, they can not provide the same quality, fidelity and shear
>excellence of picture as any, up to spec, 2/3rd incher with broadcast
>lens, whether that be Beta SP, DV (all types) Digi Beta etc.
>
>A lot of folk seem to be labouring, wishfully, under the impression that
>there is no reason for these $30,000 plus cameras to exist! Well be
>assured there very much is a reason.
>
>Understand this and have a viable perception of where these compacts can
>do a good job and where they simply don't make it.
>
>John Lubran

Good point. The best of the "mini" DV cameras are VERY good
relative to older compacts, and are even very good compared
with low-end BetaSP and larger SVHS, but for "all-out"
picture sharpness and freedom from irritating artifacting,
you can't beat (yet...;-) the 'spensive/bulky/heavy monsters
in the best formats... I will continue to shoot with my
VX-2000s, though, "bad" as they are, and even use a PC9,
PC100, or TRV30 fairly often, heavily-artifacted as the
pictures of these one-chippers are under some common
conditions... As my opponent in a recent "discussion" about
the relative merits of the VX2000/PD150 vs. the XL-1
correctly pointed out, variations in camcorder
characteristics can be of use (though all else being nearly
equal in price/size/weight/form, I will take the one with
the better picture...;-).