Sony has listened to the many here who stated they preferred
tiny one-chippers to the larger, better TRV900 at close to
the same price, quality differences be damned...;-) BTW, if
you put a collapsing rubber shade on the VX2000 instead of
the big rigid one supplied, and use NPF-750 batteries
instead of 960s, the 2000 isn't all that much bigger/heavier
than the 900, and it fits in a bag only a couple of inches
longer, if the VF is tilted up... (and the image quality is
noticeably better). The very short VCL-ES06 WA converter is
almost weightless, and gives good results with about .5X
magnification (it needs a 58mm->52mm step-down ring). Add a
RS (part no. 33-373A) windscreen for mic protection, and the
on-camera mic is also excellent for exterior ambient-sound
pickup, with little trouble from wind. The VX2000 is worth
its weight and size...;-)

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 07:24:50 -0700, "Paul Tauger" wrote:

>Thanks, I' looked at those comparison photos. Frankly, I'm discouraged. If
>conditions were truly comparable (as well as camera settings) the 950's low
>light performance is truly dismal. The VX-2000 simply isn't an option for
>me -- I need a camera for our foreign travel and the VX2000 is too big. It
>may have to be a TRV900 after all.
>
>What in the world is Sony thinking?

>"Neuman - Ruether" wrote in message
>news:3d790ba3.3646506@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
>> On Tue, 3 Sep 2002 12:46:00 -0500, "Paul Tauger"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm still waffling between trying to locate a TRV900, and simply getting
>the
>> >950. There are NO extra features on the 950 that are of interest -- who
>> >needs MPEG movies to memory stick, USB streaming and BlueTooth in a
>> >camcorder anyway? Smaller size and weight is nice, but I'm really
>concerned
>> >about low light performance and digital artifacting due to the higher
>> >density of pixels.
>> >
>> >Has anyone seen these two cameras perform side by side?

>> I haven't, but here are some comparisons (not
>> the best, and with obvious capture problems that
>> affect judgements of resolution and artifacting...)
>> at this URL:
>> www.bealecorner.com/trv900/trv950/images1.html.
>> For me, the low-light issue is a "deal-breaker"
>> for the 950 - for the price, the VX2000 appears
>> to remain the best buy for image quality in a
>> wide range of light levels and for greatest
>> low-light range...
>> David Ruether