VisionAir 0 #1 August 12, 2003 I'm looking into replacing my now busted trv20, and I've read Quade's review of his trv22, but I'm curious if anyone has any info on the trv70. I'd like to know if the following is worth the $600 increase. The trv70 has 30 more lines of horz. res. and 1,430,000 MORE pixels then the trv22. Plus, if I'm reading Sony's comparison chart correct, there's no fire wire port on the trv22. How about the trv 33 38 or 39? Any info or words of wisdom will be appreciated. Huh?!? What cloud?!? Oh that!!! That's just Industrial Haze Alex M. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maronsso 0 #2 August 12, 2003 I just bought the TRV60 (European model of the TRV70 in the US) about 1,5 month ago. Been jumping an old Sony HI8 camera for quite some time before switching. The TRV60 is freely mounted on top of a Bonehead Optik helmet. After about 40 jumps with the camera I must say that I'm more than satisfied. Works like a dream and gives excellent result. For me it was worth the extra. One excellent feature is the 16:9 format. I'm the only one at the DZ that can record in 16:9 and it has so far given a couple of extra jumps from people who prefer 16:9 over 4:3. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #3 August 12, 2003 First things first -- there definately IS a FireWire port on the TRV22. Buy the camera you need based on the features you need. While some cameras may have chips with higher pixel counts, I think you'll find that this increase in resolution is only visible in any real and measurable way in the digital stills saved to the Memory Stick. That said, if you really want a digital still camera I wouldn't suggest any of the cameras that are doing double duty as still and video cameras at this point. As far as the -video- resolution that is actually recorded to the tape, that is bandwidth limited by the DV25 data format. A subjective opinion may be that the cameras with the higher pixel counts give you "better" contrast -- I've never been able to measure that and all of the current single-chip camers look as if they're about the same once recorded to tape. I -believe- all of the current Sony single-chip cameras can record in either 4:3 or 16:9.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parachutesj 0 #4 August 13, 2003 QuoteAs far as the -video- resolution that is actually recorded to the tape, that is bandwidth limited by the DV25 data format. A subjective opinion may be that the cameras with the higher pixel counts give you "better" contrast -- I've never been able to measure that and all of the current single-chip camers look as if they're about the same once recorded to tape. You might add that a higher pixel rate gives them the opportunity to do a better steady shot. Not saying they are doing this - but I've heard a lot about the differences of different Sony models (all single chip). This might be an argument for higher resolutions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RevJim 0 #5 August 14, 2003 QuoteI -believe- all of the current Sony single-chip cameras can record in either 4:3 or 16:9. My "bottom of the new line" TRV 19 has firewire, LANC, and can record in 16:9. After getting a few jumps in with it in Rantoul, I can say I am quite pleased with the quality. Much better than the JVC GR-DV1 I had previously.It's your life, live it! Karma RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VisionAir 0 #6 August 15, 2003 Ok I've been reseraching this for a while now and have succeded in only giving myself a headache. I found a site (www.camcorderinfo.com) with good reviews. I had myself convinced into getting the 22 versus the 33 due to the larger ccd giving slightly better low light performance even tho the 33 scored better (tho only slightly) on regular video performance. After a visit to Circuit City and getting some hands on I start to think why not go with the 19 if it's only difference from the 22 is that the nightshot isn't "Super", the v/f is b&w, and there's no memory stick. Then I notice the 38 and I like the feel and shape of it plus it has a few easier accesible manual controls and a larger screen, but thats not to important for my use. So I'm finally convinced in the 22 again and I figured I'd take a look and see how it compared to my old 20. Now I just don't know anymore. Where as the old 20 and new 22 both have the 1/4 ccd, my old 20 has 690,000 effective video pixels, over twice what the new 22 has of only 340,000 effective video pixels. In order to get the same quality I have to bump back up to the 33 but sacrifice ccd size and low light ability. I use to complain of the low light shots with my old 20 which has the same size ccd as the 22 of which they say does a good job, and now I have to go even smaller to get the same effective video resolution. Do you think they improved low light performance on the ccds so that you can get better performance out of the 22 and maybe even the smaller 33 versus the old 20. And at what point of effective resolution does this "bandwith" limitation come into play? Do you think the 22 with half as many effective video pixels will perform as good as my old 20?. To quote Vinnie Barbarino......I'MMMM SOOOOO CONFUUUUSED Huh?!? What cloud?!? Oh that!!! That's just Industrial Haze Alex M. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RevJim 0 #7 August 15, 2003 It sounds like one of your major decision factors is the low light ability. Why? Knock that off the list and I think Quade said it best: QuoteAs for the horizontal lines of resolution . . . the limiting factor there is actually the miniDV compression so, you can pump a higher resolution INTO the compression chips, but what ultimately comes OUT of them . . . guess what . . . it's all the same and again it's already been exceeded by the TRV19. Again, good marketing ploy, but sorry, wrong market (from me anyway). Also, the pixel count, for either video or still...once again, Quade rules: QuoteOk the pixel count thing on the VIDEO side of things just doesn't matter beyond a certain point. That point is already exceeded by the TRV19. It has a direct effect if you want to use the camera as a digital still camera, but frankly, that's not an option so you can just throw those specs out the door. Nice marketing tool, but sorry, wrong market. Remember, the TRV19 cannot record analog signals in (like from a VCR). It can record both USB and Firewire in though, which covers the vast majority of other camera flyers. Seriously, pick the camera that has the options you want, but I see no reason to pay more for options you won't use. That's why I ended up with the TRV19. I'm quite happy with it too.It's your life, live it! Karma RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VisionAir 0 #8 August 15, 2003 Thank you Corcho, the quotes you refer to explain it better. I searched the thread for trv references during my research but hadn't come upon that post. (until now) The reasoning for my low light concerns is for the low light situations such as in the hanger or office, or in the plane on cloudy days, but I suppose those aren't that important of shots. QuoteRemember, the TRV19 cannot record analog signals in (like from a VCR). Does the trv22? Theres been times I've had to record analog signals from older camera's.( Nevermind...answered my own ?) The recurring suggestion I read is to buy what makes me happy, and I will plan to do that, but I just like to have several opinions to base my own on. Once again....thank you for your time. Huh?!? What cloud?!? Oh that!!! That's just Industrial Haze Alex M. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VisionAir 0 #9 August 16, 2003 Well it seems I put the cart before the horse in the matter of replacing my helmet and cameras. My conscience got the better of me and I cancelled my insurance claim for ummmmm "running over it". I can't risk a class d felony over a $3k helmet. Sooooo it looks like I'm gonna get to practice up my freeflying skills until I can pay off some credit cards to afford replacements. Damn conscience...it always seems to get in my way. Huh?!? What cloud?!? Oh that!!! That's just Industrial Haze Alex M. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shindig 0 #10 August 17, 2003 I'm the guy in charge of all the video equipment out that the military freefall school in yuma az. I have about every TRV there is and the 70 is the worst of them all for the pure fact of the location of all the plug ins. You would have to cut a ton of holes in your Dbox if that's what you use. I've resorted to stroboframing the thing to the helmet it is on. I wish they would start making the cameras with the controls on the outside like the trv11 and pc100 but thats wishful thinking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
