On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:24:35 GMT, "Karen Smith"
>My circa 1993 analog Sony camcorder bit the dust last month after (nobly)
>capturing as its last video my 7 year old daughter's flamenco class
>performance. The prices seem right to think about a digital upgrade. I
>would still need a camcorder for family things (I figure just about any of
>them would do) but would also like to play around with it while star gazing.
>I have a 6" dobsonian reflector and a 4" refractor. I'm not looking for
>images that are great quality--I just want to experience the "I made that"
>feeling : )
>
>I have read about people having great success using (very cheap)
>surveillance cameras for astrophotography, but that's not really the
>direction I want to go. FYI, I also have a Nikon Coolpix 950 still digital
>camera, so the camcorder's ability to take stills is not of paramount
>importance.
>
>So far I have looked at the following camcorders:
>
>*Sony TRV900
>*Sony TRV17 and 30
>*Canon Optura Pi
>
>I like the progressive scan feature of the Sony TRV900 and the Canon Optura
>Pi. And the 900 has the added advantage of being able to accept the Compact
>Flash card that the Nikon uses (no other Sony, I think, can use anything but
>the proprietary Memory Stick). What makes me nervous about the 900 is how
>long it has been on the market (3+ years?). And I wonder how long Canon is
>going to keep making the Optura Pi. They seem to have gone in other
>directions with the Elura and the ZR series. I also don't know how these
>cameras will perform in low light. (I guess the only reason I would be
>concerned about either of these cameras being discontinued is that they
>would probably drop in price!)
>
>The TRV17 and 30 are of course state of the art, but I would love to hear
>from someone who has used them with a telescope. Or from someone who has
>used any other digital camcorder with a telescope.
>
>I have spent some time reading John Beale's excellent Sony TRV900 pages, but
>he has only one link to someone who is using this camera for
>astrophotography, and I was hoping to get some other opinions. With this
>3CCD camera now available in the $1600 price range, it sure seems like a
>good option. But, in saying that, I don't really know if the 3 ccds make a
>difference for grabbing frames of the moon, stars, and planets! If anyone
>out there can offer an opinion, please do so. Thanks in advance for any
>advice . . .
The 3-chip camcorders have a much longer "run" time in
the marketplace than the 1-chippers, that are replaced
yearly, mostly for marketing reasons - a good camera is
a good camera (and the TRV-900 is a good camera...), and
you may wait a couple more years for its replacement...
The TRV-900 will have the best low-light ability of the
above cameras, combined with the greatest resolution
capability of all but the TRV30 in your list, and the best
ability to differentiate color and detail in the tonal-range
extremes (the one-chippers will render all the brightest
items in the image as the same white, without detail;
the best 3-chippers give you the best chance of seeing
detail and color in bright and dark areas of the
image). (BTW, $1600 may not be a realistic price... - buy
from a reputable dealer, and one listed on Sony's dealer
list, at:
http://www.sel.sony.com/cgi-bin/SEL/consumer/ss5/cgi/aid_list.pl)
With all the above, the TRV-900 often shows misconvergence
of colors, with a red-green fringe on bright, contrasty
items in the image in some parts of the image (in judging this,
look at captured stills on a computer monitor instead
of TV images, since this problem is VERY common in TVs...).
If you buy from a dealer that gracefully accepts exchanges,
you can select for low color fringing. Of the one-chippers
you list, I would consider only the TRV30 (or consider
the TRV20/PC100/PC110 as alternatives, since they are also
high-resolution for one-chippers [a tad less sharp than
the TRV-900]).