TRV905 Vs TRV80 at DVinfo.net

Stelios Christofides · July 19th, 2003, 02:53 AM

Hi

Is picture quality different between these 2 cameras. I would like to use the camera mainly in the auto mode.

Stylianos Moschapidakis · July 19th, 2003, 05:31 AM

Stelio, I don't have an answer to your question since I haven't used any of those cameras, but I just wanted to welcome you to this forum!

Bram Corstjens · July 19th, 2003, 07:05 PM

They will be the same. Both cams use just a little bit more of their CCD censor(s) to get the wider image.

p.s
The TRV-950 has optical image stabilisation whereas the TRV-80 has digital. Digital degrades the image quality a bit. I however haven't been able to discover any decrease in quality by activating the image stabilisation on the TRV-80

Phil Dale · July 24th, 2003, 04:09 PM

Well havent I wasted allot of money, if only Id of known 3ccd is no different to 1ccd before I got the 950 oh well I guess I should spend more time reading the really useful information you can get on these forums and I wouldnt make such mistakes.

Tommy Haupfear · July 24th, 2003, 08:24 PM

Buying a TRV950 over a TRV80 is no mistake!

No shame in the TRV80 but the video I've seen from it is very typical of single CCD. Not only is the color accuracy less but the TRV80 appears to lack color saturation compared to the TRV950 (or any 3CCD cam).

As for as image stabilization goes. The new breed of megapixel cams offers image stabilization that uses the unused portion of the 4:3 CCD resulting in very low resolution loss. The only problem with this is when you have an enhanced widescreen mode that also relies on the extended portion of the CCD. Some cams disable DIS when in 16:9 and others the DIS becomes less effective.

Another benefit of OIS is in still mode where DIS is most always disabled since the stills (like some widescreen modes) rely on the entire CCD. Optical image stabilization really comes in handy when you start getting upwards of 10x optical zoom and handheld camera shake is more apparent.

Phil Dale · July 27th, 2003, 05:12 AM

Tommy, I was being sarcastic. The biggest mistake I ever make is reading some of the postings on this forum.

Tommy Haupfear · July 27th, 2003, 08:17 AM

My bad..

You should have put a smiley face or the "not intended for the ironically challegned" at the end of your post!

:)

Frank Granovski · July 27th, 2003, 02:43 PM

Phil, this is the official disclaimer to be posted at the bottom of these kinds of posts:

Disclaimer: not intended for the ironically challenged. :)

Note: each time you use this disclaimer, a fee of $ 0.02 must be paid to Bill Pryor.

Bryan Beasleigh · July 28th, 2003, 12:45 AM

Or .028 Canadian.

Frank Granovski · July 28th, 2003, 01:09 AM

Since we have Bryan Beasleigh on board, any time you want to use the term, "puffed-plastic TM," special permission must first be obtained from Bryan. :)

Stelios Christofides · July 28th, 2003, 01:32 PM

So whats the answer then? Does the TRV950 that costs nearly double the money gives double the image quality than the TRV80 in the auto mode?

Tommy Haupfear · July 28th, 2003, 01:41 PM

Its actually just a $500 difference (www.onecall.com) and I definitely think its worth the upgrade with just the 3CCD and OIS.

Of coures you want to leave the cam in full auto which kinda points more to a TRV80 user and saves you some green.

Stelios Christofides · July 29th, 2003, 03:44 AM

"Of coures you want to leave the cam in full auto which kinda points more to a TRV80 user and saves you some green."

Does this mean then that in "auto mode" there is no much noticable difference in video quality between the 2.

Kenn Jolemore · July 29th, 2003, 05:13 AM

Does this mean then that in "auto mode" there is no much noticable difference in video quality between the 2.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All sillyness aside there is a very big difference between a 1 and 3 CCD unit. Compairing them is not sensable as they are in different classifications of camcorders.
If you are just going to use a cam for home and family shooting the trv80 is well beyond the basic needs.
KennJ

Stelios Christofides · July 29th, 2003, 05:58 AM

Thanks for ur reply. Since I will be using it mainly for home video work I will go for the TRV80

July 19th, 2003, 02:53 AM	#1
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	TRV905 Vs TRV80 Hi Is picture quality different between these 2 cameras. I would like to use the camera mainly in the auto mode.

July 19th, 2003, 05:31 AM	#2
Stylianos Moschapidakis Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Cambridge, MA/Crete, Greece Posts: 189	Stelio, I don't have an answer to your question since I haven't used any of those cameras, but I just wanted to welcome you to this forum! __________________ Stelios G.M.

July 29th, 2003, 05:13 AM	#14
Kenn Jolemore Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: norfolk Va. Posts: 124	Does this mean then that in "auto mode" there is no much noticable difference in video quality between the 2. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ All sillyness aside there is a very big difference between a 1 and 3 CCD unit. Compairing them is not sensable as they are in different classifications of camcorders. If you are just going to use a cam for home and family shooting the trv80 is well beyond the basic needs. KennJ __________________ KennJ

July 19th, 2003, 07:05 PM	#3
Bram Corstjens Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands Posts: 126	They will be the same. Both cams use just a little bit more of their CCD censor(s) to get the wider image. p.s The TRV-950 has optical image stabilisation whereas the TRV-80 has digital. Digital degrades the image quality a bit. I however haven't been able to discover any decrease in quality by activating the image stabilisation on the TRV-80

July 24th, 2003, 04:09 PM	#4
Phil Dale Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: UNITED KINGDOM Posts: 25	Well havent I wasted allot of money, if only Id of known 3ccd is no different to 1ccd before I got the 950 oh well I guess I should spend more time reading the really useful information you can get on these forums and I wouldnt make such mistakes.

July 24th, 2003, 08:24 PM	#5
Tommy Haupfear Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 1,415	Buying a TRV950 over a TRV80 is no mistake! No shame in the TRV80 but the video I've seen from it is very typical of single CCD. Not only is the color accuracy less but the TRV80 appears to lack color saturation compared to the TRV950 (or any 3CCD cam). As for as image stabilization goes. The new breed of megapixel cams offers image stabilization that uses the unused portion of the 4:3 CCD resulting in very low resolution loss. The only problem with this is when you have an enhanced widescreen mode that also relies on the extended portion of the CCD. Some cams disable DIS when in 16:9 and others the DIS becomes less effective. Another benefit of OIS is in still mode where DIS is most always disabled since the stills (like some widescreen modes) rely on the entire CCD. Optical image stabilization really comes in handy when you start getting upwards of 10x optical zoom and handheld camera shake is more apparent.

July 27th, 2003, 05:12 AM	#6
Phil Dale Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: UNITED KINGDOM Posts: 25	Tommy, I was being sarcastic. The biggest mistake I ever make is reading some of the postings on this forum.

July 27th, 2003, 08:17 AM	#7
Tommy Haupfear Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 1,415	My bad.. You should have put a smiley face or the "not intended for the ironically challegned" at the end of your post! :)

July 27th, 2003, 02:43 PM	#8
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Phil, this is the official disclaimer to be posted at the bottom of these kinds of posts: Disclaimer: not intended for the ironically challenged. :) Note: each time you use this disclaimer, a fee of $ 0.02 must be paid to Bill Pryor.

July 28th, 2003, 12:45 AM	#9
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Or .028 Canadian.

July 28th, 2003, 01:09 AM	#10
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Since we have Bryan Beasleigh on board, any time you want to use the term, "puffed-plastic TM," special permission must first be obtained from Bryan. :)

July 28th, 2003, 01:32 PM	#11
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	So whats the answer then? Does the TRV950 that costs nearly double the money gives double the image quality than the TRV80 in the auto mode?

July 28th, 2003, 01:41 PM	#12
Tommy Haupfear Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 1,415	Its actually just a $500 difference (www.onecall.com) and I definitely think its worth the upgrade with just the 3CCD and OIS. Of coures you want to leave the cam in full auto which kinda points more to a TRV80 user and saves you some green.

July 29th, 2003, 03:44 AM	#13
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	"Of coures you want to leave the cam in full auto which kinda points more to a TRV80 user and saves you some green." Does this mean then that in "auto mode" there is no much noticable difference in video quality between the 2.

July 29th, 2003, 05:58 AM	#15
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	Thanks for ur reply. Since I will be using it mainly for home video work I will go for the TRV80