I am constantly upgrading and as a result selling my Sony DSR-TRV50E. I am looking at the older TRV950 or the new TRV80.
I know the 950 is a cracker ,but does anybody have any knowledge of the new TRV80?

[speedy_gonzales]

Originally posted by Plasma
I am constantly upgrading and as a result selling my Sony DSR-TRV50E. I am looking at the older TRV950 or the new TRV80.
I know the 950 is a cracker ,but does anybody have any knowledge of the new TRV80?

I recently got the TRV60 which is the same as the TRV80 minus Bluetooth, didn't think I'd need it.
The TRV60 is a good camera, pretty well balanced and has all the toys you'd expect from a Sony. Picture wise, I have a 36inch TV and the recorded image is flawless. Colour is good and using the 'progressive' mode you get excellent film quality video.Sound is fairly impressive too. The biggest thing I was impressed with is the still photo capability. I know everyone says a camcorder for video and a camera for stills but the images I have captured so far are excellent. Only downside is the fact you only get an 8MB memory stick, 64Mb would have been more like it!The hologram AF makes a HUGE difference when taking stills, close up, as in within 15 centimetres!

Thanks for the come back Gonzales. Yes I think the 60 and the 80 are merely upgrades of the 50. If this is the case the huge price difference is amazing. Originally the 50 was about £1400. The 60 is about £900 and the 80 £1000 (Near enough) The 8mb is ridiculous! I dont think Sony even put in a tape do they?

[speedy_gonzales]

No, you don't get a tape, or a bag! I got my gamera from www.digital-point.co.uk for around £837, including delivery which was the best price at the time. Another thing that may be of interest is a Sony DV accessory pack from www.electronics-online.co.uk which cost £60, again including delivery. It is basically a Sony handycam carry-bag, mini DV tape and an infolithium battery. Considering the NP-FM50 batteries are normally £55 or so, I thought this was a good buy, and you can never have too many batteries!

[brado]

Originally posted by speedy_gonzales
I recently got the TRV60 which is the same as the TRV80 minus Bluetooth, didn't think I'd need it.
The TRV60 is a good camera, pretty well balanced and has all the toys you'd expect from a Sony. Picture wise, I have a 36inch TV and the recorded image is flawless. Colour is good and using the 'progressive' mode you get excellent film quality video.Sound is fairly impressive too. The biggest thing I was impressed with is the still photo capability. I know everyone says a camcorder for video and a camera for stills but the images I have captured so far are excellent. Only downside is the fact you only get an 8MB memory stick, 64Mb would have been more like it!The hologram AF makes a HUGE difference when taking stills, close up, as in within 15 centimetres!

I find the video resolution is no better than my very old JVC DV1,
Which also has a 1/3" CCD. I was very dissapointed.
Is my camera faulty?
The still shots are dissapointing also. I use a Sony S85, and compared the stills using the same resoltion at 1600 x 1200.
The results were similar in most respects except for bad grain on the TRV60. This may be due to some interpolation, in the camera, but whatever, it's not good news if you are hoping to replace two cameras with one, as I was.
Have you made a comparison with stills from a good quality still camera with 2 Mp?

[speedy_gonzales]

Originally posted by brado
Have you made a comparison with stills from a good quality still camera with 2 Mp?

I have compared pictures from the TRV60 with a Canon 2M still camera(forget the make) and they were comparable. The only downside was the Sony was poor in-doors without the flash where as the Canon got some good results. The Sony however had a greater optical zoom which blew the still camera out of the water. Remember though that my video camera cost almost 7 times more than the still camera and as many posters will tell you in this forum, don't buy a video camera for it's still pictures capability!

[brado]

Thanks for your reply. What decided me to go for the TRV60 was the results from full images taken from a Sony DRC-IP220 which uses a micro DV cassette. It has the same lens and CCD.The 1600 x 1200 picture was equal to all of my present and past still cameras using the same resolution, also there is no sign of grain.
He also notes that in his opinion the mini DV cassette produces a noticable better video, when viewed on a large plasma screen TV.
probably due to the higher compression used for the micro cassette.
See http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...p220_pg3.html.

For this reason I think the CCD could be be faulty, since words like "broadcast TV quality" "pin sharp pictures" do not describe my cameras' results.

Has anyone else got a gripe about this camera?

I find playing back tapes in my camcorders tiresome and wearing on both me and the Cams. I once saw a DV tape rewinder but does anyone have any idea if there is a DV player? You know like a Video player. One that can be connected to a monitor or TV?

Sony do a portable DV player, cost, around £1k.

JVC do a twin deck that plays & records DV and s/VHS, you can even copy between them.

The HSDR3 (i think) can be bought for £700 if you shop around.

It's strictly consumer quality (plasticy build, no component or 9 pin) but will be more robust than using your cam.

failing that you could buy a low end dv camcorder for around £230, which might also serve as a second cam if you are ever doing a wedding or the like?.

[MarkE19]

Yes they do exist, but they cost a fair amount. It would be cheaper (by quite a bit) to buy another cheap DV camcorder than one of the DV VCRs.

Mark.

Yes guys I think your suggestion is the answer. Seems odd that we can buy a 3CDD Cam for about £7-800 and a relatively simple peice of rewind and review kit cost more than the Cam?