GS120 in low light at DVinfo.net

Marc Martin · December 2nd, 2004, 02:31 AM

I'm thinking to update my old TRV900 by a smaller GS120. Is the GS120 as good as the TRV900 in low light? I've used a lot of TRI-CCD, include VX1000, XM1, XM2 (GL1, GL2). Can you compare the GS120 to one these TRI-CCD in low light?

Thank.

Guy Bruner · December 2nd, 2004, 06:18 AM

I have not used a TRV900 so can't compare the GS120 to it. My understanding, though, is the TRV900 is slightly more sensitive than the TRV950. The GS400 has similar low light sensitivity as the TRV950, maybe slightly better. In my tests, the GS120 is about 1 F/stop more sensitive than the GS400.

I'm curious about your choice of the GS120 to replace the TRV900. It seems to me that the GS400 would be the benchmark for that cam.

Marc Martin · December 3rd, 2004, 03:57 AM

The reason is simple: I have an AG-DVX100 as my principal camcorder and I use the TRV900 just for making-off, and I need a small and light camcorder for that (something discrete)

Can you confirm me that the GS400 is less sensitive by 1F/Stop than the GS120? If so, and if the GS400 is equal to a TRV950 in low light, I think the GS120 would be nearly equal to a TRV900 in low light. The GS400 has perhaps a better image, but I prefer a better low light cam.

Guy Bruner · December 3rd, 2004, 07:55 AM

A comparision is posted here.

Dave Largent · December 5th, 2004, 01:43 PM

I was looking at the specs of the cams on your
site. I notice that the GS120 is listed as having
no manual control over gain, while the GS70 has
this. Even the PV-DV53 1CCD has manual
gain-up control. Just wondering if anyone
with the 120 can confirm that there is
no manual control of the brightness
gain?

Guy Bruner · December 5th, 2004, 04:36 PM

Yes, the GS120 has manual gain adjust. The brightness adjust you are referring to is for a photoflash. The GS120 doesn't have a flash unit.

Tom Hardwick · December 7th, 2004, 09:22 AM

The nice thing about the TRV900 is that it has a manual ND filter. Any camera that doesn't have one of these most certainly has internal, automatic ND filters, and the TRV950 has three of them. That's partly why it's so poor in low light (the other reason is physically smaller chips witjh more pixels on them).

Sony claim a low lux figure of 4 for the 900 and 7 for the 950 - (VX2100 is 1 lux) so you can see there's a big difference. My Panasonic MX300 has the internal ND in place (ie soaking up precious light) if I'm at any focal length other than max wide - and that's even if the lens is wide open. Crazy!

tom.

Dave Largent · December 11th, 2004, 09:16 PM

Anyone have any idea how the low light of the
120 would compare to any of the 1CCD
Pannys? I've got the DV53 (1/4" 1CCD,
low pixel count) and I'm hoping the 120
would offer equal or better low light reach.

Tommy Haupfear · December 12th, 2004, 07:03 AM

Dave, I think the DV53 has a slight advantage of low light performance over most any 1/6" single or 3CCD but not enough to make or break an upgrade. The GS120 might not "see" the same as the DV53 but its newer CCDs and improved DSP will most likely allow it to have lower noise and greater color accuracy as the lights dim.

Anytime I'm confused as to what cam has better low light performance I just set them next to my VX2000 and the point becomes moot. :)

December 2nd, 2004, 02:31 AM	#1
Marc Martin Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Paris, France Posts: 80	GS120 in low light I'm thinking to update my old TRV900 by a smaller GS120. Is the GS120 as good as the TRV900 in low light? I've used a lot of TRI-CCD, include VX1000, XM1, XM2 (GL1, GL2). Can you compare the GS120 to one these TRI-CCD in low light? Thank.

December 2nd, 2004, 06:18 AM	#2
Guy Bruner Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Ashford, AL Posts: 937	I have not used a TRV900 so can't compare the GS120 to it. My understanding, though, is the TRV900 is slightly more sensitive than the TRV950. The GS400 has similar low light sensitivity as the TRV950, maybe slightly better. In my tests, the GS120 is about 1 F/stop more sensitive than the GS400. I'm curious about your choice of the GS120 to replace the TRV900. It seems to me that the GS400 would be the benchmark for that cam.

December 3rd, 2004, 03:57 AM	#3
Marc Martin Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Paris, France Posts: 80	The reason is simple: I have an AG-DVX100 as my principal camcorder and I use the TRV900 just for making-off, and I need a small and light camcorder for that (something discrete) Can you confirm me that the GS400 is less sensitive by 1F/Stop than the GS120? If so, and if the GS400 is equal to a TRV950 in low light, I think the GS120 would be nearly equal to a TRV900 in low light. The GS400 has perhaps a better image, but I prefer a better low light cam.

December 3rd, 2004, 07:55 AM	#4
Guy Bruner Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Ashford, AL Posts: 937	A comparision is posted here.

December 5th, 2004, 01:43 PM	#5
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	I was looking at the specs of the cams on your site. I notice that the GS120 is listed as having no manual control over gain, while the GS70 has this. Even the PV-DV53 1CCD has manual gain-up control. Just wondering if anyone with the 120 can confirm that there is no manual control of the brightness gain?

December 5th, 2004, 04:36 PM	#6
Guy Bruner Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Ashford, AL Posts: 937	Yes, the GS120 has manual gain adjust. The brightness adjust you are referring to is for a photoflash. The GS120 doesn't have a flash unit.

December 7th, 2004, 09:22 AM	#7
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	The nice thing about the TRV900 is that it has a manual ND filter. Any camera that doesn't have one of these most certainly has internal, automatic ND filters, and the TRV950 has three of them. That's partly why it's so poor in low light (the other reason is physically smaller chips witjh more pixels on them). Sony claim a low lux figure of 4 for the 900 and 7 for the 950 - (VX2100 is 1 lux) so you can see there's a big difference. My Panasonic MX300 has the internal ND in place (ie soaking up precious light) if I'm at any focal length other than max wide - and that's even if the lens is wide open. Crazy! tom.

December 11th, 2004, 09:16 PM	#8
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	Anyone have any idea how the low light of the 120 would compare to any of the 1CCD Pannys? I've got the DV53 (1/4" 1CCD, low pixel count) and I'm hoping the 120 would offer equal or better low light reach.

December 12th, 2004, 07:03 AM	#9
Tommy Haupfear Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 1,415	Dave, I think the DV53 has a slight advantage of low light performance over most any 1/6" single or 3CCD but not enough to make or break an upgrade. The GS120 might not "see" the same as the DV53 but its newer CCDs and improved DSP will most likely allow it to have lower noise and greater color accuracy as the lights dim. Anytime I'm confused as to what cam has better low light performance I just set them next to my VX2000 and the point becomes moot. :)