sony trv70 at DVinfo.net

Luke Gates · April 26th, 2003, 07:35 AM

ok...first of all I know this has NOTHING to do with the GL1 or GL2, but you guys seem to know the most when it comes to camcorders. I have been into digital still photography for sometime now and I got a cheap consumer digital camcorder just to play with. Well now that I have it I use it more than my still camera. I am hooked on digital editing. So I want to go one step up from my 1/4 inch 680k CCD and get a better cam. The $2000 plus GL2,VX2000 is out of the question and I'm always picky about buying things used. So to get to the point...I have narrowed it down to 2 camcorders. The sony TRV80 and the new panasonic dv953. In case you're not familiar...
Sony trv80 has: ONE 1/3.6 2.1 MegaPixel CCD

Panasonic 953 has: THREE 1/6 800 k CCD's

now I know that 3 chippers always perform better...but these are some small chips. I have read a TON of stuff sayin the Sony's TRV80 picture quality is as good if not better than the smaller 3 chip cameras....and its low light is way better cause its chip is almost twice as big and there is only one taking light instead of 3. I also know Sony makes some great products where as panasonic can sometimes be on the questionable side.
one more thing...all I do is skateboarding so I need the low light for night time and a camera with a high shutter speed!
so if u read all this I appreciate it so much and thanks for answering my questions!

Ben Lynn · April 26th, 2003, 07:52 AM

Based on your own observations and research it sounds like the Sony will fit your needs better than the Panasonic.

Also consider which camera takes the higher resolution still pictures since you take a lot of stills as well.

Ben Lynn

Luke Gates · April 26th, 2003, 09:30 AM

well I have a 6.3 MegaPixel Nikon SLR that I use for stills. So the still is kinda useless to me!

Alex French · April 26th, 2003, 05:09 PM

Luke Gates:

I was in the same boat as you. I had narrowed it down to either the Sony trv80 and the Panasonic 953. I actaully ended up going with the trv80's little brother, the trv22. I went with camera mainly because of the price and how small it is. It also has a 5LUX compared to the trv80's 7LUX. The reason I went with Sony over the Panasonic is because of Sony's patented infered light that allows you to record in zero light with normal frame rates. I wanted this feature because it really comes in handy at night around the camp fire when hiking/camping. It only has about a ten foot range, but thats plenty for my uses. You can also buy a 100 foot range extender for the infered light.

Anyways, from what your saying, it sounds like the Sony trv80 may be your best bet. If your not looking for super high resolution, try out the trv22. If you buy it from Best Buy or Circuit City, you can always try it out for a few days and return it for the trv80 if its not good enough for what you are looking for. If money is no barrier, defitly go ahead with the trv80. Its said to have an amazing picture, and better than decent stills.

Here is a link discussing the trv80. Its a UK site, so some of the model nubers are different from the US version, but you will get the idea.
http://www.colinbarrett.com/simplyBB/viewtopic.php?topic=3218&forum=2&20

Alex Knappenberger · April 26th, 2003, 05:27 PM

I'd take the Panasonic for sure, it's not that bad in low light, as some people suspected, and it's just a much better camera. It has many more manual "professional" qfeatures to offer then the Sony, and of course, it has 3CCD's.

Bryan Beasleigh · April 26th, 2003, 05:30 PM

For what it's worth.
I'd recommend the Panny DV852 if you can still get one. If you want the 3 chipper go for the 953. Forget the still rez and the low or no light gimmicks. Go over to dv.com and do a search, there are several threads on both cameras, with comments from people that own or have used them.

You may also want to try the Pana MX forum here. Frank's always been a panny fan. Try his site dvfreak.com for some info on the 852 and the 953.

I own 2 Sony's, but I must say the current crop of Panasonic mid range DV camera is very good and better bang for the buck than Sony. The gems are few and far between and don't always follow brand lines.

For decent video, you need decent light. All the gimicks in the world will net you lousy, grainy, poorly colored crap. Buy a camera that gives you excellent video and not a camera that gives you ok video and ok stills.

This is just my opinion.

April 26th, 2003, 07:35 AM	#1
Luke Gates Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: new jersey Posts: 151	sony trv70 ok...first of all I know this has NOTHING to do with the GL1 or GL2, but you guys seem to know the most when it comes to camcorders. I have been into digital still photography for sometime now and I got a cheap consumer digital camcorder just to play with. Well now that I have it I use it more than my still camera. I am hooked on digital editing. So I want to go one step up from my 1/4 inch 680k CCD and get a better cam. The $2000 plus GL2,VX2000 is out of the question and I'm always picky about buying things used. So to get to the point...I have narrowed it down to 2 camcorders. The sony TRV80 and the new panasonic dv953. In case you're not familiar... Sony trv80 has: ONE 1/3.6 2.1 MegaPixel CCD Panasonic 953 has: THREE 1/6 800 k CCD's now I know that 3 chippers always perform better...but these are some small chips. I have read a TON of stuff sayin the Sony's TRV80 picture quality is as good if not better than the smaller 3 chip cameras....and its low light is way better cause its chip is almost twice as big and there is only one taking light instead of 3. I also know Sony makes some great products where as panasonic can sometimes be on the questionable side. one more thing...all I do is skateboarding so I need the low light for night time and a camera with a high shutter speed! so if u read all this I appreciate it so much and thanks for answering my questions!

April 26th, 2003, 07:52 AM	#2
Ben Lynn Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Bloomington, IL Posts: 636	Based on your own observations and research it sounds like the Sony will fit your needs better than the Panasonic. Also consider which camera takes the higher resolution still pictures since you take a lot of stills as well. Ben Lynn

April 26th, 2003, 09:30 AM	#3
Luke Gates Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: new jersey Posts: 151	well I have a 6.3 MegaPixel Nikon SLR that I use for stills. So the still is kinda useless to me!

April 26th, 2003, 05:09 PM	#4
Alex French New Boot Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: North Carolina / USA Posts: 12	Luke Gates: I was in the same boat as you. I had narrowed it down to either the Sony trv80 and the Panasonic 953. I actaully ended up going with the trv80's little brother, the trv22. I went with camera mainly because of the price and how small it is. It also has a 5LUX compared to the trv80's 7LUX. The reason I went with Sony over the Panasonic is because of Sony's patented infered light that allows you to record in zero light with normal frame rates. I wanted this feature because it really comes in handy at night around the camp fire when hiking/camping. It only has about a ten foot range, but thats plenty for my uses. You can also buy a 100 foot range extender for the infered light. Anyways, from what your saying, it sounds like the Sony trv80 may be your best bet. If your not looking for super high resolution, try out the trv22. If you buy it from Best Buy or Circuit City, you can always try it out for a few days and return it for the trv80 if its not good enough for what you are looking for. If money is no barrier, defitly go ahead with the trv80. Its said to have an amazing picture, and better than decent stills. Here is a link discussing the trv80. Its a UK site, so some of the model nubers are different from the US version, but you will get the idea. http://www.colinbarrett.com/simplyBB/viewtopic.php?topic=3218&forum=2&20

April 26th, 2003, 05:27 PM	#5
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	I'd take the Panasonic for sure, it's not that bad in low light, as some people suspected, and it's just a much better camera. It has many more manual "professional" qfeatures to offer then the Sony, and of course, it has 3CCD's.

April 26th, 2003, 05:30 PM	#6
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	For what it's worth. I'd recommend the Panny DV852 if you can still get one. If you want the 3 chipper go for the 953. Forget the still rez and the low or no light gimmicks. Go over to dv.com and do a search, there are several threads on both cameras, with comments from people that own or have used them. You may also want to try the Pana MX forum here. Frank's always been a panny fan. Try his site dvfreak.com for some info on the 852 and the 953. I own 2 Sony's, but I must say the current crop of Panasonic mid range DV camera is very good and better bang for the buck than Sony. The gems are few and far between and don't always follow brand lines. For decent video, you need decent light. All the gimicks in the world will net you lousy, grainy, poorly colored crap. Buy a camera that gives you excellent video and not a camera that gives you ok video and ok stills. This is just my opinion.