On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 21:23:35 +0100, Tony Morgan
>I went through the same selection process as you are doing. Insofar as
>your criticism of colour balance, and as has been pointed out, if
>you're going to do comparisons you *must* compare like-with-like. The
>differences in the sky colour associated with different times-of-year,
>time-of-day and weather conditions are not easily seen by the naked eye,
>but make image comparisons nonsense.
I agree. Even the appearance of sharpness is greatly
affected by weather condition and sun angle. But
odd-colored skies and neutrals (like concrete) are
noteworthy, regardless of the weather...
>The TRV30 (which I bought after much consideration) has been *very* well
>reviewed in the specialist magazines here in the UK - being given the
>accolade "What Camcorder - Best Buy). Note that 3 years ago the same
>magazine only rated the TRV900 "Recommended". 14 months ago the TRV200
>was rated "Recommended" by the same magazine.
I give very little weight to magazine reviews/ratings...
>There are clearly some additional factors that you perhaps haven't
>considered:
>
>1. The TRV900 is now more than three years old, and (so I'm
> told) its actual *production* has been halted - so if you
> buy one you're purchasing an obsolescent model (perhaps
> explains why your Sony dealer is pushing it).
Obsolescent in what way? It doesn't have a couple of recent
features, but the basic camera is still one of the
top-performers relative to other 3-chip entries - and the
discontinuance of the TRV900 has been a rumor for a very
long time...
>2. The TRV2000 is nearly two years old - and (to a lesser extent)
> you would be purchasing a model that is likely to be discontinued
> in the non-to-distant future).
VX2000? If so, look at the history of the VX1000 - and
Sony would be foolish to discontinue this best of all
camcorders, which is selling well. 3-chippers tend
to stay in production many years, unlike the one-chippers...
>3. The TRV30 is better specified that either the TRV900 or the TRV2000,
> especially lower-weight, with much better low-light performance.
??????
The TRV30 is smaller and lighter, but it is neither
specified for, nor does it have, better low-light ability
than the TRV900 (or especially the VX2000, if that is
what you mean - there is no TRV2000 model here...).
>In relation to (1) and (2) above, when a make/model is given (say) 8
>stars three years ago, its unlikely to attract more than 6 stars today
>when reviewed - since camcorders of all makes/models have improved in
>both features and quality of image.
Not necessarily... The VX1000 (replaced) is *still* a better
performer in terms of image and sound quality than virtually
all of the current competition. As is the TRV900...
Magazines are more into "new" than anything else...
>Also in relation to (1) and (2) above you might consider that once a
>model goes out of production, parts become increasingly expensive and
>repair costs escalate (especially at Sony Service Centres - since Sony
>want you to replace rather than repair).
?????
This seems unlikely, for a few years, anyway...
>FWIW I've had my TRV30 for nearly three months now, and I'm extremely
>pleased with it. I would recommend it to anyone.
Now that I may agree with, if I ever manage to get one...;-)
But I will also keep my TRV900 and two VX2000s...;-)