CV's test of the Sony HC1000

5 replies [Last post]
tom hardwick
Offline
Joined: Apr 8 1999

I liked James Morris' review of the Sony HC1000 and agree entirely with his conclusion that this camera is another step further downstream from the previous TRV950 and the TRV900 before that. It is indeed strange that Sony marketing allows such big gaps in the plan, especially when Sony have been renowned for (if anything) sub-dividing a niche.

But I take issue with his complaint that the lens flare (shown in the picture on page 82) was not visible on the LCD monitor at the time of shooting. It may not have been visible to him, but I can assure him that it was indeed there. The side screen and the v'finder are fed from the signal generated by the chips, and are not at liberty to delete information that's not deemed quite right.

tom.

cyberwest
Offline
Joined: Sep 13 2000

I'm sure it was there - it was just impossible to see on that ridiculously small 2.5in LCD screen. Why they made it so tiny when the TRV950's was 3.5in is anybody's guess. Actually, here's my guess - the 3.5in version of the touch screen is a lot more expensive than the 2.5in one.

James Morris

tom hardwick
Offline
Joined: Apr 8 1999

You're right - disproportionally more expensive, especiall as fewer of the Sony camcorders sport this size of screen. Reject screens up the ante even more, and 3.5" screens probably work out at more than double the cost of the 2.5" one simply because of production quantities.

tom.

Alan Roberts
Alan Roberts's picture
Offline
Joined: May 3 1999

All other things apart, screen costs are proportional to area. So the cost of a 3.5" screen is (3.5/2.5)^2=1.96 times the cost of a 2.5" screen.

Get my test cards document, and cards for 625, 525, 720 and 1080. Thanks to Gavin Gration for hosting them.
Camera settings documents are held by Daniel Browning and at the EBU
My book, 'Circles of Confusion' is available here.
Also EBU Tech.3335 tells how to test cameras, and R.118 tells how to use the results.

infocus
Offline
Joined: Jul 18 2003

Dare I say that this just illustrates why many people feel that viewfinding is normally best done with an eyepiece viewfinder? All that then matters is the resolution of the display, and viewing optics, with no worries about ambient light either. Pro cameras have only recently started to have screens at all (not before time!), but they are primarily intended as playback devices or for use when the camera is in an awkward position.

But to Toms real point, yes, spot on - a real gap in the market where such as the TRV900 used to be. Its successors seem either not as good, or far more bulky, heavy and awkward. HD in a TRV900s body, there's the enthusiasts dream!

cyberwest
Offline
Joined: Sep 13 2000

Don't get me all excited... I know that won't be for a while!

But the Panasonic NVGS400B essentially fills the gap left by the TRV950. It's almost like a knock-off of it, except with 4Mpixel stills capability as well.

James Morris