Going back to your original post --
;The [PC100] is performing finethe video quality is good.
;Only there is burning sometimes in the light parts, ;especially with sun and shadow.
This is true for the TRV30 (PC120) also, and
is a failing of one-chippers compared with three...
My impression is that the PC100 contrast is slightly
higher than it is for the PC120, but this does not
affect much the loss of information in deep shadows
or bright highlights...
;Sony PC120 i think the stabilizer is better.
I don't think so - it is excellent in all the Sony
one-chippers... (but it does rob gain, noticeable in
low light).
;digital zoom is more usable
Not a useful feature, for best quality...
;the zoom control is better.
I prefer the PC100 zoom control to the TRV30,
but the PC120's is different...
;all in compare to the PC100
;My questions are.
;With the PC120, is it true that the video quality is ;better.
;Or can you find back the increase in pixels of the ccd chip ;only at stills
I would say, only subtly better generally - and some
specific things may still look better with the PC100...
The stills for both look best at 640x480.
Answering the below, the TRV900 is not fragile and
is about the price of the PC120 - and the image is
smoother and the low-light range better (but it is
considerably bigger and heavier for travel...).
I don't expect *much* better one-chip images, unless
signal-processing gets better, or a new CCD device is
used - the compromises used now to push sharpness
and low-light range with megapixel CCDs are becoming
all too obvious in picture problems. It may yet be
that a long-rumored (with ***NO*** basis in fact...)
mini 3-chipper may appear, but one could wait a LONG
time...;-) For you, I would say if you like the
PC100, why not continue to use it until there is a
specific need for an alternative...?
On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 17:23:46 +0100, "peter nederveld"
>Hai David
>Thanks enormously for your reply.
>It's of great value to me.
>and i'm studiing it over and over.
>After some weeks i will go on travel again for filming.
>This time it will be Cambodia.
>I'm going by motor bike through the country
>a 3 ccd in my opinion is too fragile.
>The pc 100 was allways a good company.
>The present pc100 is used so much untill now.
>so probably i'm buying the pc120 or i take the risk
>Do you know anything about future camera's
>What kind of novities will be available in the near future.
>It could be that it is better to wait a bit.
>because there seems to be not really much difference between the pc100 and
>the pc100
>
>Now i'm going back to the url to compare all the pictures with the things
>you've said in your mail.
>Thanks !
>"Neuman - Ruether"
>news:3c3a1a35.15906140@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
>>
>> None of the frame-grabs of the five current Sony
>> Mini-DV imaging types shows great variation in the
>> daylight frame-grabs, even though two of the
>> imaging types are 3-chip (and the TRV30 can be
>> corrected to resemble the VX2000 image - see:
>> www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm),
>> but if you look carefully, there are contrast and
>> saturation differences (and color-balance in the
>> case of the PC100, and sharpness in the case of the
>> PC9 - and better image "smoothness" with motion
>> with the two 3-chippers [not visible in the
>> stills] - and differing low-light handling...).
>> I currently own both the PC100 and TRV30, and I like
>> the images from both (when motion with contrasty
>> edges don't spoil them, and there is enough light
>> to get a good image), and deciding which to sell
>> has been not easy...;-)