On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 11:48:12 GMT, xyz@hotmail.com (xyz) wrote:

>I remember going to that site (I think it was that site) and the TRV17
>name was lumped in with a few other camcorders. I wasn't sure which
>camcorder the particular frame grab was from.

That's the point: Sony makes (for Mini-DV) 5 different
imaging types; these are compared at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm.
If you are looking for the TRV17, you will find its
imaging characteristics with the TRV11/17-PC5/9 group,
since these are all the same...

>With my current D8, under low-light conditions, you can see very
>noticeable grain or snow effect. With the TRV730, I don't notice this
>in record or play. I hear comments from some people who say that
>there is still noise artifacts (maybe if you capture a frame and view
>it as a still perhaps). Also, I'm comparing the TRV730's quality to
>other D8's and not to mini DV. I'm not too concerned with artifacts
>in this price range as long as it's not something I'll notice in
>playback (frame grab still, I'm ok with). Nothing can be as annoying
>as the older gen D8's when it comes to low-light noise and colour
>aliasing (streaks/spots of MOVING yellow and purple colours) which I
>do not notice on the later model, mega-pixel CCD TRV730 D8.

I have not tried the TRV730, but I suspect, from
general specs, that it is most similar to the Mini-DV
PC100/110-TRV20 group, but with a different lens...

>Just out of curiosity, I hopped on over to Robin Liss' camcorderinfo
>site. She seems to be the only one who has tried both camcorders and
>published a review for both as well. She wasn't impressed with the
>730 thinking that the "plastic" lens doesn't make the most of the
>TRV730's mega-pixel lens. Is the TRV730's lens really plastic??? Or
>is this just a case of mis-information?

I thought her reviews very "shalow" - not much above what one
can get from magazine reviews, ads, and mfgr. web pages,
and with some errors... BTW, some VERY high quality lenses
are made of "plastic" - but I suspect the camcorder lens
is made mostly from glass elements...

>She was impressed with the
>TRV17 and its low-light quality. Then again, she shows no example of
>this (although within the review itself she mentions a frame grab
>example - nowhere to be seen).

I show comparison samples of various camcorders in the
same two two low light environments, so you can see
relative noise, sharpness, and color balance...

>From what I read on her site in the
>early days, I wasn't impressed with the weak content (may have noticed
>quite a few inaccuracies and the weak content) but the content seems
>to have fleshed out a bit more now.

Maybe I should check the site again...;-)

>On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 04:29:17 GMT, d_ruether@hotmail.com (Neuman - Ruether)
>wrote:
>>On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 03:21:03 GMT, xyz@hotmail.com (xyz)
>>wrote:

>>>I know what the low-light TRV730 D8 video is like. Much, much less
>>>noise than earlier D8's. I may even consider getting a TRV17 mini DV
>>>if the low-light quality was comparable. Any TRV17 owners out there?
>>>very good low-light quality?

>>You can find the 5 Sony Mini-DV imaging types
>>compared in various light levels at:
>>www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm
>>While not wonderful in very low light levels,
>>the TRV11/TRV17/PC5/PC9 is acceptable.