On Sun, 2 Dec 2001 00:55:14 -0500, "JD" wrote:
>"Neuman - Ruether" wrote in message
>news:3c0ebf08.36653811@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...

>> The last is nonsense...
>> The two cameras have comparable sharpness, but the 900
>> has noticeably better low-light ability, and on moving
>> contrasty edges, artifacting is less annoying...

>I *really* agree with you 100%. The only thing that really worries
>me in these 'suggestions' is that it is sometimes easy for us
>hyper-hobbiests or the serious professionals to have standards
>that are much higher than needed for home movies.
[...]

I agree with this. I was answering a specific question
about two cameras for a specific function... If you
read many of my posts, I have recommended the Sony
TRV11/17-PC5/9 to many as having the best compromise
among price/size/weight/sharpness/color-quality,
though these are generally at the bottom end of the
four basic Sony camcorder image-quality divisions of
models - and I sometimes use the PC9 and TRV30/PC100
for fun and even work, though their image quality
is inferior to that of my TRV900 and VX2000s...