On 13 Jun 2001 03:52:03 -0700, simon.neil@etl.ericsson.se (Simon N) wrote:

>I'm thinking about upgrading to a 3-ccd machine from my TRV20. Does
>anyone have the frequency response specs and the like for the TRV900?
>In the UK, Camcorder User magazine run tests and post some useful
>technical data. Unfortunately the only mag review I have is from a
>less technical magazine.
>The TRV20 has some excellent results- for the most, even better than
>the new Panasonic MX300! I'd be fascinated to know how the older
>TRV900 compares.
>Here's the info I have for the TRV20, if anyone can fill in the blanks
>for the 900, I'd be very grateful.
>
>Frequency response:
>2Mhz -1.55db
>3Mhz -3.96db
>3.5Mhz -4.54db
>4Mhz -7.21db
>
>Signal to noise ratio:
>Active line -44db
>Quiet line -52.6db
>
>Chroma (AM) -47.39db
>Chroma (PM) -45.98db
>Chroma crosstalk -48.21

Better, I think, than such specs is looking at comparative
frame grabs (with motion-video descriptions) shot with the
various camcorders under the same conditions (variations in
exterior lighting can confuse the issues...). This gives a
better idea of color bias and saturation, resolution,
negative picture artifacts, etc. than response and noise
figures. The PC100/110/TRV20 is not included in my reviews at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm ,
but the TRV-900 is. This Japanese site does compare the
PC100/110/TRV20 with the TRV-900, but the exterior shots
are made under varying lighting conditions. It is a very
useful comparative site, though, at:
http://www4.big.or.jp/~a_haru/index.html
What matters is the appearance of the motion-video - and
camcorders vary quite noticeably in this...