wrote:

>"Neuman - Ruether" wrote in message
>news:3b4f41c5.12416824@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
>> On 12 Jul 2001 15:29:09 -0700, Paul Rubin
>> wrote:

>> >David,
>> >
>> >I keep seeing repeated user reports that the TRV20 works better in low
>> >light than the TRV11/17. Logically that's somewhat surprising, since
>> >the CCD pixels are smaller, but it's hard to argue with actual
>> >observed experience.
>> >
>> >Any idea what's going on? Any comment?

>> Assuming the imaging is the same on the PC100, PC110,
>> and TRV-20 (I'm fairly sure that is true), then the
>> above is not correct, though one could be misled...
[rest below...]

>I spent a good hour a/bing (actually a/b/cing) a TRV11, TRV20 and TRV900 in
>low light with output to a good video monitor. The TRV11 had decidedly
>poorer lowlight capability -- a fair amount of chroma noise and a harsh
>unnatural, almost orange image. The TRV900 had the best performance, no
>chroma noise that I could see, with a clean, well-balanced image. The TRV20
>was quite similar to the TRV900, except that it had some chroma noise,
>though I doubt whether it would be noticeable to a casual consumer.
>
>The differences between the 11 and the 20 were quite dramatic (note, too,
>that the 20 has superior optics to the 11, as well as a larger lens). I
>don't know whether these differences would carry over to TRV17 -- I don't
>know anything about it. I also have no idea what system is used in the
>PC-series. However, as I say, the TRV20 produces a markedly better image
>in low light than the TRV11.

As I tried to point out (but maybe not successfully...),
if you are talking about best "quality" of image at the
lowest-level point of the PC100/PC110/TRV20 specifically,
this occurs at +15db for the PC100(etc.). At that same
light level, the TRV11/TRV17/PC5 picture is not as good
in color (All these were with stabilizer *off* - were they
all either off or on when you did your checks? It does make
a difference.) Once you drop below that point, though, the
PC100 color immediately disappears, but the TRV11 color
continues to be acceptable (and correctable in post), As
the light level reaches the lowest level for the TRV11, it
has past the lowest light level for the PC100, and the
picture is darker, with less recoverable information.
Therefore, I would consider the TRV11 to have better
low light extension - though at one specific light level,
the picture of the PC100 would be better...

>> I have shot the PC100, PC-1, and TRV-11 side-by-side
>> in the same few low-light situations (all with
>> stabilizers off), since I am looking for the best
>> small Sony one-chipper tiny camera for use on a mic
>> stand or pole for shooting close-in at wedding
>> ceremonies (which are often held in rather dim
>> locations...;-). (I may put frame-grabs from these
>> tests in a review article on my web page at some
>> point.) The PC100 color holds up well until +15db,
>> then suddenly dies as the camera goes toward +18,
>> where it is essentially monochrome; the color of
>> the TRV-11 gets a little weird around +15db, but
>> remains acceptable even at +18db ("grain" for
>> both is surprisingly minimal even at +18db); the
>> sensitivity of the TRV-11 is a bit higher than
>> that of the PC-100, and side-by-side, there is more
>> "detail-in-the-murk" with the TRV-11 when these
>> are shot in levels below their limits, and more
>> info can be recovered from the TRV-11 image with
>> filtering for both color and detail; when the
>> light level just rises to the +15db gain point for
>> the PC100, its image looks a bit better than the
>> TRV-11 image... Thus, the confusion...;-)
>> The PC-1 produces an acceptable (though "grainy")
>> image at a light level lower than the PC-100
>> (which I bought to replace it - and then found it
>> was not useable in a chapel I often shoot in, and
>> in which the PC-1 produces a decent picture - and
>> the TRV-11 maybe a little bit better picture
>> [smoother, but a little less sharp - it is all
>> trade-offs with camcorders, with little outright
>> "gravy", alas...]). Sony rates the TRV-11 for
>> 5-lux minimum, the PC-100 for 7, as I recall, and
>> this is not too far from what I found, relatively
>> speaking... 'Course, the TRV-900 runs rings around
>> these in low light (every where else, too...), and
>> in turn, the VX-2000 runs rings around the TRV-900.
>> But, even so, the pictures from all these cameras
>> can be mixed after adjusting color/contrast/brightness
>> in post, assuming that none was used below its
>> decent-color point...