View Full Version : TRV900 -- various questions


Pages : 1 [2] 3

Mike Hanlon
November 12th, 2004, 05:42 PM
I have encountered a similar problem many times. The only solution I've found is to trash your FCE/FCP preferences.

Don't forget to reset your scratch disks after trashing the preferences.


Mike.

Joel Iwataki
November 12th, 2004, 05:55 PM
Just found it in Final Cut Express:
View (Menu) - Video - Firewire.
It's all good.
Thanks for being there.

Brad Mitchell
December 17th, 2004, 06:32 AM
hi, i am a new member and came here to get some info on TRV900s

i have pretty much decided on this camera for many reasons but still want to know as much about it s possable before i make a purchase.

how is the audio, lowlight and is there widscreen format?

thanks alot
brad

Boyd Ostroff
December 17th, 2004, 08:41 AM
The TRV-900 is an older camera which is the consumer version of the PD-100, like the TRV-950 is to the PDX-10. With 1/4" chips it won't be as good in low light as the VX-2000 but should be a little better than the TRV-950. It has a widescreen mode but it crops and stretches like the VX-2000 so you lose quality in that process. The TRV-950 has a little better widescreen mode and the PDX-10 is much better at that.

The TRV-900 has a loyal following however. John Beale has extensive TRV-900 resources on his website; have you seen them? http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/index.html

Tom Hardwick
December 18th, 2004, 10:03 AM
I presume you're talking about getting a second-hand TRV900 Brad. They were introduced in 1997 and quite a few of them suffered from internal microphone failure, so do check this out on the camera you have your eye on. Less well documented was the early versions ability to crinkle the tape. This only happened when you had filmed say 55 minutes of the 60 mins and then hit 'rewind', but it's a nasty noise to hear.

Other than those two things it is indeed a fine camera with lots of photographic control. Fully working 6 bladed iris, a switchable ND filter, progressive scan (at a reduced frame rate) and it takes the big NP-F batteries (as the VX2100 does). It's about 1.5 stops less sensitive than the VX2000, but overall it's a mighty fine camera.

tom.

Jeff Toogood
January 26th, 2005, 08:23 AM
I am looking at getting a backup/b-roll camera to my PD170.
My TRV38 just isn't cutting it.
It will mainly be used as a lock down shot for wedding ceromonies.

Will the TRV900 match up reasonably well with the PD170? With what I have seen on ebay, I think I can get a TRV900 for about $1000-1200 less than a VX2000.

Or should I just try and save some more $$$ and get the VX2000?

Thanks

Tommy Haupfear
January 26th, 2005, 11:14 AM
Budget aside I would want a camera that is closer in capabilities to the PD170. The VX2000 with its similar 1/3" 3CCD configuration will more closely match the PD170 in PQ and low light performance (as you know a wedding must).

Also, I believe the TRV900 has been discontinued a lot longer than the VX2000 and you run the risk of higher mileage.

Jeff Toogood
January 26th, 2005, 11:24 AM
Thanks

Unfortunately, budget is a big concern. I just spent all the money I had on the PD170.
I was hoping to sell the TRV38 for a few bucks and then buy a used TRV900 or PD100 to replace it.
I figure they have to be better than the 38 and I can also use one of them as my family camera since they have a similiar form factor as the TRV38.

Tommy Haupfear
January 26th, 2005, 01:17 PM
Budget always stops me dead in my tracks. I don't think you would have a problem matching up footage between the TRV900 and PD170 unless they are both taping the same low light ceremony.

I had trouble using a PDX10 with a wedding last year (along with my VX2000) but I believe the TRV900 handles better in dim lighting. The TRV900 has larger CCDs (1/4" vs 1/4.7") and fewer pixels per CCD (380k vs. 1070k).

Tom Hardwick
January 28th, 2005, 05:41 AM
There's good and bad things associated with your choice of a TRV900 as second back-up cam. First the good things, and this comes from personal experience. The 900 and PD footage will cut together seamlessly, and if you've not gone too far off the norm with the PD's custom preset it'll be hard to tell the footage apart.

The downside is the low light performance, though as Tommy says it's better than the PDX/950. The other thing is the age of the 900, though there are of course many good examples about.

Look out for failing in-built microphones and be aware that some 900's had a nasty habit of crinkling the tape when put into the rewind mode having filmed for 50 minutes plus. You can avoid this by rewinding in the PD or DSR-11, whatever.

But if I were you Jeff I'd go the distance and get a VX2k. It's had a much better reliability record than the 900, it'll see better in the gloom of the church, the presets can be set to match and the optics are exactly the same. Yes, that's the one I'd go for.

tom.

Steve Puttock
February 3rd, 2005, 06:59 AM
Being somewhat of an amateur after reading these posts,what would I,or anyone else for that matter,gain from going from the Sony TRV900/950 to the Canon XL2 ?
Would we see an immediate increae in quality/resolution/colour etc.
I have had good results with the TRV900 being a 3 CCD cam and am interested in a more expert view.

Boyd Ostroff
February 3rd, 2005, 07:15 AM
The differences are so profound I don't know where to begin... off the top of my head these are some of the advantages:

1. interchangeable lenses, including fully manual if desired (although $$$)

2. option for BW CRT high resolution viewfinder (also $$$)

3. True progressive scan CCD's with 24p and 30p modes. This permits you to shoot at the full 480 lines of vertical resolution instead of ~360 lines used for interlaced cameras like the 900.

4. 1/3" CCD's vs 1/4" on the 900 or 1/4.7" on the 950. Means better low light response, less vertical smear.

5. Far more options for picture control in terms of parameters which can be tweaked via menus.

6. High resolution 16:9 mode. Big difference from the cropped 16:9 on the 900.

I'm sure there are others, but these cameras are just in completely different leagues. Of course you would expect this from a design that is several years newer and a price that's at least 3x more than a 950 for the base model. There would be disadvantages as well though, it's bigger and heavier for one thing.

Steve Puttock
February 3rd, 2005, 09:53 PM
Boyd,thanks for the informative reply.
Guess I should start saving....

Jeff Toogood
February 7th, 2005, 11:04 AM
Does anybody know if the Lens hood on the TRV900 is available for sale anywhere?

I have a lead on a TRV900 that does not have the lens hood.

Is the lens hood functional at all? Will I miss not having it?

Thanks

Boyd Ostroff
February 7th, 2005, 01:49 PM
Searching for parts/acessories on Sony's consumer site only turned up things like batteries, straps, etc. However if you go to their professional site and search for pd100 then follow the appropriate links you eventually get to 51 pages of parts! I don't know much about the TRV-900 or PD-100, so maybe it's not a valid assumption that the lens hoods are interchangeable? Perhaps someone else can help with that.

Anyway, here's a link to Sony's "PartsPLUS" website. Unfortunately you can't link to individual pages within the site it seems: https://servicesplus.us.sony.biz/PartsPlus.aspx

Tom Hardwick
February 9th, 2005, 06:10 AM
Depends where you live Jeff, but Sony parts are readily available in the UK.

The TRV900's hood is a beautifully made and rather expensive piece of kit consisting of 8 parts. It bayonets onto the lens but in so doing means you can't fit filters to the lens - they have to fit inside the hood itself. Of course this is very bad practice as the filters are a good 10 mm from the front element, and any dust etc is much more likely to be (auto) focused on. Not only that, but by fitting filters inside the hood you decrease the efficiency of the hood tremendously - you've effectively moved the front element forward by 10 mm but kept the hood in the same place.

If I were you I'd not bother with the official 900 hood - I'd go out and buy a Hoya collapsible hood in a 52 mm fitting. Much more efficient (especially if you're doing a lot of telephoto work), much cheaper and you can fit filters right up against the zoom lens.

tom.

Jeff Toogood
February 9th, 2005, 07:28 AM
Is this the lens hood you are talking about?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=78999&item=3869977069&rd=1&ssPageName=WD1V

Tom Hardwick
February 9th, 2005, 09:12 AM
That certainly looks like the one - matt black rubber with a fine red line round the circumference at the front. The hood can be pulled / pushed into three positions but beware - the 900 (along with very nearly all camcorders) masks the side-screen and the v'finder, so you might not be told of full frame cut-off till you see the full frame image on your pc. Time for a test or two.

But it's a great hood and if you're doing a lot of telephoto work on safari for instance, the hooding can be very efficient indeed - much better than the stock hood which is only efficient at the wide-angle end of the zoom of course.

tom.

Jeff Toogood
February 11th, 2005, 09:25 AM
Did a search and didn't come up with much. What wide anlge converter lens are out there for the TRV900?
It has a 52mm thread size.

John Hartney
February 11th, 2005, 08:49 PM
Check out the canon wd58

Tom Hardwick
February 12th, 2005, 11:03 AM
The 52 mm attachment thread size is very well catered for out there in wide-angle land Jeff. Sony make some, as do Tecpro, Raynox, Kenko, Century, Cavision and others.

What you really need to decide is if you want a full zoom-through and what power you want. The less powerful 0.7x converters seem to suit a lot of folk, but I for one want a good and powerful 0.5x if I've gone to all the hassle of fitting it.

If you do get a w/angle, do get a lens hood for it too. It's even more important to hood the lens because you've added more glass elements in front of your camera's zoom, and more elements = more flare.

tom.

Jeff Toogood
February 14th, 2005, 08:15 AM
I am looking for a full zoom through lens.
I know there is lots of 52mm lens out there. I guess I was asking for some personal experiences with any of them.
I had a Canon WD-58H on my old GL2, and I imagine that would be huge on a TRV900, would it not?

Tom Hardwick
February 14th, 2005, 08:45 AM
No, the Canon lens should be just fine on the Sony. You'll need a step-down ring (58 >52). You still have the lens? Give it a go.

tom.

Steve Puttock
February 15th, 2005, 06:45 AM
I purchased a Wide Angle lens for my TRV900 ,a Vitacom 0.45X Semi Fisheye Pro AF and its OK except for vignetting at maximum wide,so best check it on the cam before purchase

Tom Hardwick
February 15th, 2005, 08:13 AM
Better yet - check it on the computer monitor, The cam's side-screen and v'finder mask off quite an appreciable chunk of the captured image.

topm.

Les Wilson
March 1st, 2005, 09:50 PM
I have a Raynox and do not recommend it. There''s vignetting at about 75% and alot of lens flare. Image is also soft when the lens is on.

Tom Hardwick
March 2nd, 2005, 01:22 AM
That seems a little unfair Ernest, dismissing Raynox out of hand like that. You've not told us which model you bought, or whether it came with 52 mm attachment threads, or what the power is or if you have a filter between lens and zoom. "vignetting at about 75%" doesn't mean much to me.

I've just done a test of the Raynox QC505 for a magazine here in the UK, and I gave the lens my hearty recommendation. I tested it on a PDX10 and an MX300 and its performance is remarkable at the price. It won't suit Jeff (who started this thread) because he's after a zoom-through, but for anyone else it's a steal.

tom.

Les Wilson
March 2nd, 2005, 06:33 AM
Sorry. You have a point. It's a .66x and it's labelled 3962-789-RAY

Tom Hardwick
March 2nd, 2005, 09:56 AM
Is that the Raynox 6600PRO? I tested one of these too, with not the slightest sign of vignetting. It was also nearly devoid of barrel distortion and very sharp indeed. But it was not full zoom as the maker warned - past about halfway towards full telephoto the image grew softer and softer. I can live with that - after all, it's a wide-angle converter.

tom.

Jeff Toogood
March 4th, 2005, 07:28 AM
Thanks guys for all the suggestions and advice. I unfortunately sold my Canon Wide angle lens when I sold my GL2.
I think I might just use the wide angle lens that came with my PD170, I will just get a 52 to 58mm step up ring. Hopefully I won't need wide angle on both cams at the same time!

Thanks again

Stephen Lemar
March 8th, 2005, 07:38 PM
Hi there,

I just got my trv900 off ebay about a week and a half ago and was about to capture a tape I had just finished up with. Hook everything up and ready to go and my powerbook doesnt reconize it at all. Tested it on a friends computer as well, it didnt work there either. In one of the menus when in vtr mode, it says "DV not ready"

Has this happened to anyone before? Is there anywhere I can get more info on this?

Thanks for the help,
-Stephen

Nick Tsigos
March 30th, 2005, 12:58 AM
so I just recieved my trv900, it looks brand new feels super tight picture looks awesome and the sound is great. but when recording or playing back footage it has a slight vibration. not sure if its normal to feel this or there is something wrong with the cam. I'm not seeing any vibration on the screen when playing back and all the audio sounds fine. so I dont think anything is rubbing on the inside or thats just the tape I'm feeling on my palm and its ok. I guess I'm asking user of the trv900 or trv950 if they feel a slight vibration or if supposed to be totally smooth. maybe I'm paranoid

NIck

Nick Tsigos
March 30th, 2005, 01:01 AM
just to follow up...I changed the tapes and I still feel it. the tapes are a little old, I'm not sure if that could have anything to do with it

Jack Chen
August 1st, 2005, 02:20 AM
Hi I am new here and I have searched through but could not find any related topics to my query.

I have observed a very strange scenario, I have a PCMCIA firewire card connected to my PC and linked to my Sony TRV900. When TRV900 was battery operated, my PC and editing software was able to regconise the videocam. However, when TRV900 was on AC power, my PC was not able to regconise the videocam.

As I have lots of tapes I would like to sort out and cut into CD, after some editing of course, I would like to work with the videocam on AC power...

My questions:

1. Is it true that I can only capture my video to PC (via firewire) when TRV900 is battery operated?

2. If #1 is false, then what should I do to get it work?



Thanks & regards.

Boyd Ostroff
August 1st, 2005, 06:46 AM
That's an odd one! Unfortunately I don't have a TRV900, and I use Macs. I can say however that my PDX-10 (next generation of the TRV-900) captures fine on both battery and AC power.

Off the top of my head I can't think of any reason why plugging the camera into the AC adaptor would affect firewire. Maybe someone else will have some ideas...

Stephen Finton
August 1st, 2005, 10:06 AM
Maybe you have a noisy AC outlet or your wiring is not right. Use an outlet checker to make sure it is all right. If you don't have an out let checker, bring it to a friend's house and try it. I assume you have a laptop because of your PCMCIA reference.

Tom Hardwick
August 1st, 2005, 11:13 PM
I'm sure Steve's hit it. There should be no difference whatsoever in the way the 900 works, whether it be from batteries or AC mains. Try plugging the AC converter into a different outlet and don't let the black box near your pc.

tom.

Stephen Finton
August 2nd, 2005, 07:25 AM
I'm sure Steve's hit it. There should be no difference whatsoever in the way the 900 works, whether it be from batteries or AC mains. Try plugging the AC converter into a different outlet and don't let the black box near your pc.

tom.

Laptops have a UPS built-in, which may be the reason why he isn't noticing anything goofy happening with his laptop. He might buy a UPS for his other things, if the trouble is with line noise.

If none of that helps then the camera has got some screwed up adapter wiring, either in the adapter itself or the camera. I'd try replacing the adapter before servicing the camera.

Boyd Ostroff
August 2nd, 2005, 07:50 AM
For that matter, why not just use battery power on the camera when you capture? That's what I do - it's a good way to run the batteries all they way down before recharging.

Tom Hardwick
August 2nd, 2005, 08:24 AM
Not only that, but the batteries are 'pure DC' and there's not the slightest chance of hum creeping in.

Sergio Perez
August 2nd, 2005, 09:01 PM
I have a trv 900 for more than 6 years, and it works fine with the ac adaptor. you probably have to take the camera to sony repairs department

Sandra Warshaw
August 3rd, 2005, 08:24 AM
It was your phrase, "my PC was not able to recognize the videocam" that got my attention...because there are occasions when that happens to me.

Not at all sure related to your situation...but share experience...in case

My system is often glitchy...

So with my system...I usually have to be sure to turn on the camera system first AND turn on all settings so it's ready to export... BEFORE I turn on the computer editing program (PREMIERE) to prepare for capture.

When I try it the other way around...it sometimes works...sometimes doesn't. (that is...the PC sometimes recognizes the videocam...though usually doesn't.)

Also...a common fix for many of my capture problems is to turn everything off (including "restarting" computer) and start all over again (CAMERA ON FIRST (set to export)...PREMIERIE CAPTURE window ON SECOND).

I realize it's probably kind of basic...(though looking through my Premiere reference book...haven't yet found reference to it...believe it's there some where...or might have found info on a forum.)

And it may not apply to your situation...since you've found there is a difference between AC versus battery. But also thinking maybe you took different steps with one versus the other that was not based on type of power.

So in case it helps ...wanted to share experience.

Jeremy Davidson
August 3rd, 2005, 01:46 PM
I don't have the said Sony gear (forgive me for posting), but I have run into AC power trouble. Once while capturing from a camera I turned on an appliance in an adjacent room, causing a dropped frame. This sounds like what Steve was talking about.

I'm not sure that hum would be an issue here since the Firewire capture is a digital transfer. Noise on the line can still cause problems, but it will manifest itself as a dropout or other digital artifact and not a hum (as with an analog transfer).

Sandra, my system (Premiere and Canon cam) is very picky about startup and shutdown. Turning the camera on or especially off while Premiere is running will cause a crash the next time it is turned on. I just make sure that the camera is on before Premiere starts and that I close the software before I turn it off.

To echo, I'd suggest trying a UPS or just a different outlet (or a different building entirely) to see if it is the incoming line voltage.

Sandra Warshaw
August 3rd, 2005, 03:04 PM
Thanks Jeremy for the tip "I close the software before I turn it [camera] off." Probably shoulda known that...but didn't.

I edited my entry above...to hopefully be a little clearer. As noted above...I was considering the times my PC would not recognize the camera...and shared experience...in case it applies. You just never know.

Still think it's GREAT the way people jump in to help with problems/challenges!

Jack Chen
August 3rd, 2005, 07:59 PM
You guys are really fantastic.. I was away for few days and I had so much responses from you guys... thanks..

To update my situation. As I mentioned I was using the PCMCIA firewire card which was giving me the odd problem when using AC. After much testing, I decided to use another notebook PC with the built-in firewire port to give it a final test and it WORKS!

However, I actually bought a new firewire cable (4pin-4pin) and used it in the test (caused the built-in port is 4pin)... so can't really conclude it was the PCMCIA firewire card issue!

FYI, the cable I used with PCMCIA firewire card was a 6pin-4pin type.

Just want to close the case and my millions thanks to all you guys. :-)

Reinhold Ellenberger
March 14th, 2006, 02:32 AM
Hello,

Got an old TRV900 which is pretty useless with the dirt behind the lens.

The dirt accumulated as an effect of repeatedly water-condensations in the tropics, especially when leaving/using airconroom cooled cam-body outside in the humid air.

I am able to still use it, but only by increasing shutter speed, or simply by putting it in the 'sport preset' program.

Do you guy's have any idea how to get rid of this problem. Is there an easy way to do it myself, or do I have to send it Sony. I am afraid, it won't be worth a high repair cost.


Thanks in advance

Reinhold

Tim Shields
March 21st, 2006, 08:28 PM
The lens unit in the trv900 are very difficult to clean but it can be done.Takes about 1 1/2 hours to take apart and 1 hour to put back together.You have to find a shop that can do this and has done alot of lens diassembly.Just make sure you take it to a shop that has done this kind of work.As long as the glass hasn't been pitted it should come out ok.Most will just tell you to replace whole lens unit but that's not economical.If you figure $50 to $100 an hour. You do the math
Tim

Tom Hardwick
March 23rd, 2006, 03:10 AM
Seems an oddity this. Dirt behind the lens? you mean behind the front element, or can you see it deep within the lens when you look down with the aid of a peoweful Maglight?

And I fail to see how raising the shutter speed helps alleviate the problem. Unless the higher shutter speed means forcing maximum aperture, where the lens nasties are thrown more out of focus.

Sounds like the end of the line to me. Buying another second hand 900 may well be a better and cheaper option.

tom.

Nicholas Heuer
August 21st, 2006, 05:57 AM
Hello All

I am looking for a TRV900 to go with my VX2000. Does anyone know a good place to look for one other than ebay. Also if anyone is lookig to get ride of one let me know.

Thanks

Dan Keaton
August 22nd, 2006, 11:58 AM
Look in the Private Classified section for the PD100a.