On Sun, 7 Jul 2002 17:58:15 +0800, "Gary Pollard" wrote:
>"John Beale" wrote in message
>news:B2TV8.13206$T_.276958@iad-read.news.verio.net...

>> The TRV950 has smaller CCD chips and the rumour is they do not perform as
>> well in dim light even as the TRV900, let alone the 1/3" CCD VX2000. In
>> bright light apparently the 950 is very good.

>I'd have to say though that so far I've only heard that rumour from people
>who haven't actually had their hands on one, and it's usually based on
>extrapolations from CCD size. [...]

It is also based on Sony's low-light specs, which have been
reasonably accurate for comparing other Sony models, and
which place the TRV950 at the level of the worst low-light
1-CCD Mini-DV camcorders offered to date, which, if true,
would make it rather poorer than most other 3-chippers
for low-light range - and if all *that* is true, the TRV950
would prove inadequate for wedding use without supplemental
lighting (UGH!!!). The VX2000 low light range is easily
adequate for wedding work; the TRV900 range is barely
adequate; less range would make much of this kind of
work impossible to do "available-light"...
But, the proof is in actual hands-on comparison trials -
anyone want to lend me a TRV950...?;-)