On 1 Sep 2001 07:09:40 -0700, nimbus01@bigpond.com (Steve Mountstephen) wrote:

>G-day Folks,

'Day! ;-)

>Yesterday, after work I headed off to the camera shop to negotiate the
>best price poosible for a Sony TRV-30 to replace my old Sony CCD-700
>HI8. I had researched the Sony range off the net and according to
>www.sonystyle.com the TRV-30 had a larger lens than the TRV17 and more
>claimed horizontal lines. I thought this must mean the TRV30
>potentially has a better picture quality. The price in Australia for
>the TRV17 is $2300 and the TRV30 is $3215, thats a big premium (for
>$us just halve our dollar number and that is close enough). The
>person in the shop tells me that the only difference between the TRV17
>and TRV30 is the improved still photo capability and a pop up flash.
>He was convinced the picture quality is the same between the two.
>Thanks for the information I said and left the shop claiming that the
>parking meter was about to expire. I was now undeceided again on what
>to buy.
>I dont really need a still capability in a video camera but video
>resolution is paramount. If only Sony had a 3CCD model like the
>TRV-900 with no still capability and just a view finder, it might be
>reasonably priced! The TRV900 is $4100AU.
>Question: Is it worth going ahead and getting the TRV30, hoping the
>extras to be useful. Any others out there who would like to share an
>opinion on this issue?

Sony has "cleverly" split up its Mini-DV camcorder
line into segments, and subdivided some of those into
"compact upright" and "conventional horizontal" body
types, trying to catch/satisfy all of us buyers...;-)
At the "bottom" end are the D8s (with a couple of
"higher end" megapixel versions), then the TRV17/PC9
level (with good, smooth, nice-color, pleasant
motion-video picture, but poor stills), then the
"megapixel" TRV30/PC120 models (with a sharper
motion-video picture, but with some color error and
other negative picture artifacts evident as the
price for the greater sharpness - and with noticeable
color noise in the megapixel stills [but with very
good 640x480 stills]), then the TRV900 3-chipper
(with a motion-video picture that is better than the
one-chippers in color, tonality, relative freedom
from artifacts, and low light range - and decent
640x480 stills), and, in the consumer line, finally
the VX2000 (with excellent motion-video picture - and
excellent 640x480 stills). The size of each increases
with price, and that is also a consideration. The
TRV17/PC9 have a motion-video picture that satisfies
me for some uses (and the packages are compact) - but
the picture quality and low-light reach of the VX2000
are clearly better (in a considerably larger and
heavier package). You make your choice, but the
more expensive model is not necessarily the best
for your needs/wants...
BTW, several Mini-DV camcorders are (critically)
reviewed on my web page, at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm
(maybe one of these days I will add the TRV11,
PC9, PC100, and some others...).