1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

(1 X 3.3 Mega Pixel) vs (3 X 1.07 Mega Pixel CCD)

Discussion in 'Camcorders, Action Cams & Video Editing Forum' started by PRINCEGRINCH, Mar 17, 2005.

  1. PRINCEGRINCH

    PRINCEGRINCH
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    650
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +7
    Sony DCR-HC1000E (3 x 1.07 Megapixels CCD) vs Sony DCR-HC90 (1 X 3.3 Megapixels Advanced HAD CCD)

    Can someone please explain to me what the difference would be between the two camcorders above would be, as one has a 1 CCD which is 3.3 Mega Pixel Chip and the other has 3 CCD Chips which are 1.07 Mega Pixel?

    Would there be a significant differnce? Would it be worth the extra £300 for the Sony DCR-HC1000?

    Also how would the 1 x 3.3 Mega Pixel Chip of the Sony DCR-HC90 Camcorder compare to that of Sony DCR-IP55 MicroMV Camcorder which has a 1 X 1.2 Mega Pixel Chip. IN TERMS OF LOW LIGHT PERFORMANCE as the DCR-IP55 is poor.

    I want to know whether its worth buying the Sony DCR-HC90 from a UK site for £550.

    One final question would it be worth buying a camcorder from Price Japan? What would the Power Supply & Format be like? Could I get an import Warranty for it in the UK?

    Thanks
     
  2. Wayne Moule

    Wayne Moule
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2000
    Messages:
    1,365
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +32
    I've looked at these 2 as well.

    The HC1000 uses 3 x CMOS chips, possibly to make it smaller. I would say it would be on a par with the HC90 but not better. I've also read than CMOS is not as good as CCD.

    I don't think the HC1000 is worth an extra £300.

    I will hopefully be getting the HC90 in the Summer, as it is easier to hold for me as well.

    I'm going to try and sell my Panasonic GX7 first though.

    Compare the 2 here
     
  3. PRINCEGRINCH

    PRINCEGRINCH
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    650
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +7
    Thanks for the reply Wayne. I have two more questions, the first one being the most important:

    1) How well do you think the HC90 would perform in low-light as the IP55E MicroMV was very poor.

    2) Isn't comparing a 1 CCD Chip to 3 CCD Chips like comparing a Composite Video Signal to an RGB Signal? (Where 2 CCCD Chip is an S-Video)

    Thanks
     
  4. Wayne Moule

    Wayne Moule
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2000
    Messages:
    1,365
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +32
    1) Comparing the spec of the 2, the HC90 Lux rating is 5, before using Nightshot and the IP55 is 7 Lux. So I'd say the HC90 would be better. If the lighting is that bad, you may need a light.

    IP55E spec

    HC90 spec

    2) No. At this consumer price range, I'd say you won't notice a huge difference.

    Go for the HC90, it is fab and let me know how you get on. I had a go on one in Jessops and loved it.
     
  5. PRINCEGRINCH

    PRINCEGRINCH
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    650
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +7
    Thanks again Wayne for the help & advice. All I need to do now is find the best price for the Camcorder. So far the best I've found is £535 (£545 with delivery), but I'm going to pick it up from the shop so its £535 for me. I'll let you know how I get on with it, when I get it. :thumbsup:
     
  6. Wayne Moule

    Wayne Moule
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2000
    Messages:
    1,365
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +32
    Great news.

    I had a Sony Digital 8 at first and that was great, so you'll be fine with Sony. It's being pushed as having professional results anyway.

    :thumbsup:
     
  7. cerebros

    cerebros
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,187
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Leicester
    Ratings:
    +11
    Is that just in terms of video or in general for imaging sensors? Can't imagine it's for all imaging sensors, otherwise Canon wouldn't have moved to using CMOS in all their DSLR's, but I don't know if there are any technicalities that would make it worse than CCD for video.
     
  8. MarkE19

    MarkE19
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    17,107
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Rainham Essex
    Ratings:
    +2,380
  9. cerebros

    cerebros
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,187
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Leicester
    Ratings:
    +11
    Unfortunately i didn't find much of use there - only some additional links to some CMOS Vs CCD articles that are 3 years out of date and so haven't been updated to reflect that image noise isn't a problem with CMOS tech anymore, at least in stills cameras (otherwise pro photographers wouldn't be buying Canon's £5+ top end DSLR's), although I can't see why the same advances wouldn't apply to video sensors.
     

Share This Page

Loading...