On Fri, 3 May 2002 11:40:11 -0700 (PDT), bigrocketman3@webtv.net (Steve McDonald) wrote:

> I don't think the VX3 would be bad regarding low light and color.
>You know we both have a high regard for our single-CCD TR700 models,
>that came out about the same time as the VX3.
>The CCDs are similar, if not almost the same in the two models, except
>for the VX3 having three of them. The TR700 does very well in low
>light, down to a certain limit and the color is well-saturated, although
>maybe a little too rich in some reds, as many Sony cameras tend to be.

I was assuming the VX3 CCDs and set-up were similar to the VX-1000 it was based on (but this may have
been a poor
assumption...;-). The TRV900 easily beat the VX-1000 in
low-light range, and the VX-2000 VERY easily beats the
TRV900 in low-light range, so all of the early cameras
I'm used to seem relatively poor in this respect to me...;-)

>If I had a VX3, I'd carry my Digital8 GV-D200 mini-VCR in a little
>shoulder bag as a stand-alone recorder for the direct S-Video camera
>output. This way, the loss of having an analog Hi-8 recording
>generation would be bypassed.

I was thinking in terms of a flat bar, with tripod screws
into both - with the tiny PC9 as a "bump" off to the
side...;-)

> With some practice, I might be able to trigger the record-mode
>dependably with my left hand and not mess up too much in this regard.
>Doing this with my 17-lb. ED-ßeta camcorder on my shoulder is an
>awkward and unpleasant labor, but with the little VX3, it would be no
>problem.
>
> If you had one of those rare Sony RM95 wired LANC controlers
>attached near the handgrip of the camera, a better command of the VCR in
>the bag could be established.

Watch out for heat build-up with this arrangement,
though - but this is better with recent cameras
than with the early ones... BTW, the RM-95 is available
and cheap directly from Sony, as was the RM-95 service
version (about $75, as I recall...). The cheapest
Sony tripod (UGH!!!) can be had for less, and the
remote removed for hand use (and the tripod given
away...).

>There are a lot of older analog
>camcorders with good camera function that could be combined with a
>stand-alone mini-Digital8 or mini-DV VCR in his way, for a low-budget
>setup that could deliver excellent digital video quality. It would be
>easy to work this combination if you were shooting from a fixed position
>off a tripod.

Or even hand-held, if the rig is not too heavy/big...
What interested me in this was the footage from
the BetaSP camera that was used as a reference in
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm.
The footage, though transferred to Mini-DV, was
smoother-looking, with less of the "jaggies" and
other nasties that are common in Mini-DV images.
I shoulda bought thet thar VX3, durn...! ;-)