TRV27 Camcorder

[fubar]

I'm interested in the Sony TRV27 Camcorder. It looks like a fairly decent unit, but would like some input from anyone that has used it before.

I am a novice but would like to get into the DVD creation arena, initially to convert my home vhs into dvd.

Would this unit be a good starter camera for a novice...it seems fairly cheap, but I don't really understand all of the features...yet. I have read that the analog to digital conversion with pass through is a must and also the firewire, which this unit has. But, are there any other features that are a must have that this camera wouldn't fulfill?

Thanks for any help...Fubar

[troyvcd1]

I got this camcorder. Picture in good light is excellent. I guess all minidv camcorders dont work well inside in low light. Easily imports the video into computer and i heard that the digital pass through works well. I have seen only excellent reviews on this camcorder.

[Innershield]

Why not consider a digital 8. They are cheaper than the minidv, the tapes are half the price and the zoom is higher. I have a trv740 and it does an excellent job with A/D conversion. It looks as good as the source whether it be DVD VHS or even TV. You can't tell the difference.

[pbhalerao]

While buying a new digital camcorder, the important features to compare across models are:

a) CCD Pixels (the higher the better)
b) Backward compatibility with existing home video cassettes
c) Optical Zoom range (do not bother about digital zoom, it is crap anyway)
d) Cost of the unit and cost of the consumables
e) External recording capability (via Analog/Digital In) and passthough feature
f) Size of LCD Preview screen
g) Size/Weight

The above is my order of importance. This is after fixing the budget. If you have existing 8mm collection and size/weight do not bother you that much then the megapixel models such as TRV-740 or TRV-840 is what I recommend.

[vcdfreak]

For me, small camcorders are seldom good at low light environment. That's my concern. Even for those 3CCD models. Another thing is that, most DV capable (including D8) cams look very good with your TV as your TV is running at low resolution. When you talk about playing back using PC with HDTV, you'll see the difference in pic quality between different models.

If none of these is your concern, grab the one you actually feel comfortable with.


Note: XP users need to be careful playing with the Media Player. Try to use mplayer2 (older version) so that you can the entire DV resolution. You can set in mplayer2 to play full resolution once. After that your XP Media Player will display full res video instead in half duplex mode (by default). Still not sure how to set to full duplex mode in XP Media Player.

[vcdfreak]

Correction: I meant "playing back using PC OR with your HDTV". Somehow the OR got mistakenly erased.

Question: Any TV playing more than 480 (2x 240) scan lines?

[fubar]

OK, I see this is not going to be as simple as I hoped. So, with that in mind, I have to ask. What are the differences between the mini DV and the digital 8 (is this the same as hi-8?)...is it just the medium?

I don't have any existing 8 mm tapes, so that is not a concern for me. I do have vhs and vhs-c that I would like to do some editing and possibly putting onto DVD in the future.

Thanks for all the input so far...I appreciate it...Fubar

[vcdfreak]

mini DV & D8 -> Digital Video (Usually use Firewire/iLink/IEEE1394 to transfer to PC - high quality, simple and easy)

Hi-8, VHS & VHS-C -> Analog Video (You need a capture card or ADC to transfer to PC - picture will look noisy if your capture card or ADC is not good enough)

[fubar]

Well, after I think about it, the low light problem will probably be one that will be with us for a while. Even regular cameras have difficulty with low light. That's why they have a flash. A flash is more acceptable then a constant bright light shining in the room or your face, so I guess I need to keep that in mind while deciding.

All in all I think they do a pretty good job for the cost, and I'm sure if one wanted to pay thousands of dollars they could get one that does much better in low light conditions..I just don't have that kind of money during this time of the year...lol

So as far as the DV and D8 goes, I am assumming that about the only difference between them is the type medium they use and the associated costs. Would this be a correct assumption? Kind of sounds like the old days where Sony had the 8 mm and the rest of the world was using VHS.

Thanks again for all the inputs...Fubar

[Innershield]

There is no quality difference between miniDV and Digital 8. There will be a difference in quality, however, among different cameras though because of better optics, ccd and so forth. The only difference are the tapes. MiniDV tapes cost twice as much as Hi8 tapes, which is what Digital 8 cams use. The zoom is always higher on a Digital 8 than a miniDV because they are slightly larger and have the room for a longer distance between the 2 lenses. And as an added bonus, Digital 8 cams will play analog tapes as well, unless you get the cheapest model that they make like the TRV-140. Go with the Digital 8.

[troyvcd1]

The digital 8 cams are good. Be aware though that minidv is and industry standard and only sony uses digital 8. If you are gonna take a lot of video then maybe one day switch to another camera brand then your not gonna be able to play your digital 8 tapes. Plus if you ever wanna go to a more better camcorder or a 3ccd cam they all use minidv. Otherwise digital8 is a good cheaper alternative which will still give you megapixel quality as good as a trv25.

[Innershield]

You could transfer always your Digital 8 tapes to miniDV in the future if need be. And because it is all in the digital domain there will be no quality loss.

[fubar]

OK, I think I got it figured out...thanks to all for your inputs.

I need to go out and compare the two, but right now I believe the D8 is the way I want to go. I can't worry about what I will be doing in the future, and besides as Innershield said, I can always transfer to another medium...that's what's nice about digital.

So off to the video store I go.... 8)

[rwarren]

There is no quality difference between miniDV and Digital 8.

I am pretty sure that this is NOT true. I have the Sony TRV20. When I looked at camcorders a couple of years ago, the TRV20 seemed to be the best choice for me. I was using a Canon 8mm and went through the same thought process. If I get the Sony Digital 8, I can play my old tapes. Well, my Canon still works, so why not use it to play the old tapes. The tapes will most certainly play better on the deck that made them. All of my new recordings are MiniDV, which is a standard, not propreitary like Digital 8.

Richard

[troyvcd1]

Here is an interesting link. It seems that sony is phasing out their high end digital 8 camcorders.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/new_sony_2003_models_12_05_02.htm

[Innershield]

rwarren, actually your 8mm tapes that you recorded in your canon would look better if played back on a good Digital 8 due to the advanced mechanicals and electronics. You can confirm this by reading the many other posts about this. The format that is used on Digital 8 and miniDV are exactly the same and they will yeild identical quality in a given camera.

[rwarren]

rwarren, actually your 8mm tapes that you recorded in your canon would look better if played back on a good Digital 8 due to the advanced mechanicals and electronics. You can confirm this by reading the many other posts about this. The format that is used on Digital 8 and miniDV are exactly the same and they will yeild identical quality in a given camera.

I was assuming that the tapes would play better in the machine which recorded them because that is usually the case with VCRs, etc. Small differences in alignment, etc. usually cause the tape play better in the original machine.

As far as the format of Digital 8 and MiniDV go, I am pretty sure they are not the same. I did a lot of research before I bought my MiniDV and everything I read said the quality was in between Hi 8 and MiniDV. Let me try to find my sources, it has been a couple of years.

Richard

[subhadipsas]

Also do not forget the natural thing - the lens optics. Often we forget this in view of the new technical jergons. The Sony MiniDV camcorders generally use Carl Zeiss Vario Sonar lenses while the Digital 8 ones generally do not. You get less optical zoom with Carl Zeiss, generally 10X instead of 20X or more with non-zeiss lenses, but the difference in quality, sharpness, contrast of the result more than compensates for that. Another thing is, even at 10X, your video will become jerky (the more you zoom, the more jerky video you get if you are hand holding) and you will probably need a tripod to get acceptable results. Personally, 10X optical is enough for me. Bottomline, don't underestimate those Zeiss optics.

[yg1968]

I have also read that you should consider Digital8 camcorders only if you have many Hi8 videos. Otherwise, you might as well go for miniDV.

Here is a link to one guy's opinion on this issue:

http://www.eco.utexas.edu/Homepages/Faculty/Norman/ECO361N.Daily/Video.Editing/article.htm

You may also want to read about the TRV-25. Apparently, it is almost identical to the TRV-27 except for the smaller LCD screen.

[Innershield]

Why go miniDV? As I mentioned before, the D8 can play analog tapes, the tapes are half the price, and you get a better zoom. If you were able to use a miniDVd or a D8 tape in the same camera. The results would be exactly identical.