This is speculative, as both the GS400 and HC1000 are not released yet, but I thought it would be worth discussing using the known specs so far.

I want to shoot short films as a hobby and am looking for a camera with the following:[list=1] 16:9 capability without losing any vertical resolution. Optical image stabilizer (related to #1, because from what I'm read, electronic stabilizers work by using a higher resolution to fixate on the image and thus turn off in 16:9 mode, where there is no further resolution to give). 3 CCDs. Manual controls - I want to experiment and be able to override camera settings. Around $1500 or less. Horizontal orientation (held with the fingers on the side and not the front).[/list=1]I want to buy new, preferably a Canon, Panasonic, or Sony brand (partly because of brand reputation but also to narrow down the number of models to research) and the sooner the better, although I don't mind waiting a few months.

The Panasonic GS400, Sony TRV950, and Sony HC1000 all have the following in common:[list=1] 16:9 mode. Optical stabilizer. 3 1/4.7" CCDs with 690k video pixels. Good manual controls. 12x optical zoom. Top-loading (the HC1000 may not be, but the Sharp models that it emulates are side-loading).[/list=1]What are the advantages/differences of each?

The GS400 has a 'Pro Cinema mode', which is a "frame mode (30P) with a special gamma setting to make the video look more like film" (StrongDotGuy). Since one of my strongest priorities is to get a film-look, this is an appealing feature. I'm not sure if either the HC1000 or TRV950 has an equivalent function. The GS400 also sports a Leica Dicomar lens, which apparently has a good reputation. It boasts a 4 megapixel still image capability, but still image shooting is not a priority for me. This model is supposed to come out in early July and cost about $1500.

The HC1000 is supposed to be the successor of the TRV950, but you wouldn't tell by looking at it. It has much more of a consumer-look than the TRV950, but that may be an indication of improved, smaller technology. It has a T star lens with a special coating, reserved for Sony's higher-end consumer camcorders. The Japanese website (http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/handycam/PRODUCTS/DCR-HC1000/surround.html) mentions a "Surround 5.1 feature", but I haven't read anything about how good this is or how it works. Some negatives of the HC1000:[list=1] 2.5" LCD screen instead of the 3.5" found on the GS400 or TRV950.
Probably will arrive later than the GS400 - scheduled to be released in Japan on July 10th and no word of a US date.
Not a big deal by any means, but a strange body shape.[/list=1]The Sony TRV950 is currently available for $1580 from B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=249633&is=REG). Released in mid 2002, it fits all my criteria. Physically, it appears to have a more 'professional' look with its large lens hood and size than either the GS400 or HC1000. Negatives include: [list=1] Not as easy to run-and-gun because of its size compared to the GS400 or HC1000. It can shoot 16:9 without sacrificing vertical resolution, but only in NTSC and not PAL (see http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?threadid=25218).
2 years old, which is reflected in its lack of newer features like 'Pro Cinema' or 'Surround 5.1' mentioned before. I suspect that there have been less obvious improvements made in that time such as menu interface and overall build quality.[/list=1]

Before I finish, I'll list some models that came close in my evaluation but for one reason or another fell short:[list=1] Canon Optura XI - 1 CCD. I've read several forums and reviews which indicate that the image quality isn't as good as the TRV950 or other 3 CCD cameras like the Panasonic DV953. Otherwise, the Optura XI is a good camera for the price ($900 after Canon's rebate). It has an optical stabilizer, 16:9 mode without a vertical resolution hit, and good manual controls. Canon Optura 30/40 - electronic image stabilizers instead of optical, which don't work in 16:9 mode. Also 1 CCD. Panasonic DV953 - 16:9 mode has a loss of vertical resolution (see http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22991). Otherwise, it has everything I'm looking for (3 CCDs, optical stabilizer) and a good price at that. Sold out at B&HPhotoVideo.com. Panasonic GS120/200 - doesn't have the 16:9 vertical resolution loss that the DV953 has, but loses the optical stabilizer in favor of an electronic one.[/list=1]There are higher end models which fit my criteria and then some (Sony PDX10, Sony VX2100, Panasonic DVX100, etc.), except they get into the $2200+ range.

Right now, I'm waiting and leaning toward the Panasonic GS400. It has a decent (speculative) price and the 'Pro Cinema' mode is interesting. But really, all three of these cameras seem very close in features and price.

Which would you pick and why? Any comments or corrections?

Andy

Andy asks:Which would you pick and why? Any comments or corrections?Okey-dokey, Andy. :-))$1500 or less? That would be the PV-DV953/MX5000, NV-GS100 and most likely the PV/NV-GS400 (but I'm not sure about the 400 yet). How much is the Sony HC1000 list price? Both the Sony HC1000 and Pana GS400 are not out yet so there is NO feedback available. The Pana 953 and GS400 are easy to grip from the top side unlike the Sony TRV950 and PDX10.I don't mind waiting for a few monthsTom says that he can wait too.The Panasonic GS400, Sony TRV950, and Sony HC1000 all have the following in common...16:9 mode...Optical stabilizer...3 1/4.7" CCDs with 690k video pixels...Good manual controls...12x optical zoom....Top-loading (the HC1000 may not be, but the Sharp models that it emulates are side-loading)Where did Sharp come in? It's got to be a red herring, right? Do we really know the CCD specs of the GS400? It's still all a big secret. Furthermore, the TRV950 does NOT have the better widescreen as the PDX10 and these Pana models.What are the advantages/differences of each?How do we know? The full specs are missing plus there's no feedback from 2 of these cams because they're not out yet.The GS400 has a 'Pro Cinema mode', which is a "frame mode (30P)No it's not.TRV950...not as easy to run-and-gun because of its size compared to the GS400 or HC1000.You got that right! But how do you know the HC1000 is easy to grip?but for one reason or another fell short...Canon Optura XI - 1 CCD. I've read several forums and reviews which indicate that the image quality isn't as good as the TRV950 or other 3 CCD cameras like the Panasonic DV953.Huh? But the Optura Xi is a 1-chip camera. An apple and 2 oranges my friend. :-))Panasonic GS120/200 - doesn't have the 16:9 vertical resolution loss that the DV953 hasOops. That's not right either. The GS120 and 200 have less CCD pixels for video, far far less, in fact.

"How much is the Sony HC1000 list price?"

Again, it's speculative at this point, but camcorderinfo.com reports a debut price of $1550 ( http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/sony-dcr-hc1000-camcorder-announcement-trv950-05_10_04.htm ). In any case, it's safe to assume given the TRV950's current price of $1600, and the expected price of the competition (GS400), that the HC1000 will be around this price range.

"Where did Sharp come in?"

I brought up Sharp in my sentence that the "HC1000 may not be [top-loading], but the Sharp models that it emulates are side-loading" in reference to the bodyshape of the HC1000. The aforementioned camcorderinfo.com article refers to the HC1000 bodyshape as a Sharp-model ripoff. And the Sharp models that look similar to this design are side-loading.

"Do we really know the CCD specs of the GS400?"

Again, speculation. But both the specs released from Panasonic Europe (see http://fortvir.net/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=pic06334&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php and http://fortvir.net/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=specpic2&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php ) state that it is a 3 1/4.7" CCD with 690k pixels for video. The support for 16:9 without vertical resolution loss is assumed from the fact that the GS100 has this.

"Furthermore, the TRV950 does NOT have the better widescreen as the PDX10 and these Pana models."

I referenced this thread in my original post ( http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?threadid=25218 ) which discusses that the TRV950 does support 16:9 mode without a vertical resolution loss, but only in NTSC.

"What are the advantages/differences of each?" "How do we know? The full specs are missing plus there's no feedback from 2 of these cams because they're not out yet."

My original "what are the advantages..." was a rhetorical question. It was meant to frame the following paragraphs where I laid out what I thought were the major differences.

" The GS400 has a 'Pro Cinema mode', which is a "frame mode (30P)"
"No it's not."

So what is it then? I have read a reference that it is a 16:9 mode combined with a higher gamma setting. What is inaccurate about StrongDotGuy's description (about the GS100's Pro Cinema Mode, to be precise)? Is it the progressive that is incorrect?

"You got that right! But how do you know the HC1000 is easy to grip?"

Well, um, I don't. But the pictures ( http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/sony-dcr-hc1000-camcorder-announcement-trv950-05_10_04.htm ) don't suggest horrible ergonomics or anything.

"Huh? But the Optura Xi is a 1-chip camera. An apple and 2 oranges my friend. :-))"

Which is the first item I stated about the Optura XI ("Optura XI - 1 CCD"). I also mentioned that this was the sole reason I chose to exclude the model for my next purchase.

"Oops. That's not right either. The GS120 and 200 have less CCD pixels for video, far far less, in fact."

This you are correct - I must have gotten the GS120/200 confused for the GS100, which does have the 16:9 mode I described.

Andy

This is all very confusing. As far as I know the TRV950 does not have true widescreen. It takes a big verticle resolution hit when you switch to 16/9.

Is someone saying the GS400 can do true 30 frames per second progressive scan? Please clarify this. I don't believe it, but if it does I'll buy one.

Be careful not to let specs on a sheet over ride what the cameras' video output actually looks like. You have to try these tools for yourself. Technically, the PV953 is better than the Optura Xi, (3 1/6" ccds versus 1 modern 1/3") but I would take the Xi's image over it any day.

The Pro Cinema mode is widescreen I believe, and you have the option of setting it in frame mode.

it won't do 30fps, it'll most likely do 24/25fps as so far there is no confirmed news of an NTSC version of it, and as PAL runs at 25fps that's most likely what it will record at

there is no confirmed news of an NTSC version of itThere's been US dealer web sites advertising the PV-GS400 for the last couple of months; the 953 and GS100 have both widescreen (pro cinema mode) and 30fps (frame mode).

"As far as I know the TRV950 does not have true widescreen. It takes a big verticle resolution hit when you switch to 16/9."

Your response led me to do some further homework on the TRV950, and I was mistaken. Standard NTSC resolution is 720x480. Standard PAL resolution is 720x576. The TRV950 in 16:9 (using part of its 4:3 CCD sensor) uses a resolution of 944x528, which is more than adequate for NTSC but falls a bit short in vertical resolution for PAL. Because of this, I was under the impression that shooting 16:9 for NTSC with a TRV950 would be close enough to 'native 16:9' without having any cropping and resulting in a wider image capture.

However! I reread some of the forum posts regarding this and it turns out that the TRV950, while it does capture at a higher resolution than NTSC requires, does not capture any wider image than its 4:3 shot. The PDX10 *does* capture a wider shot and is the kind of 16:9 capture that I am looking for. So indeed, it appears you are correct in that the TRV950, when shooting in 16:9 mode, loses vertical resolution from its 4:3 mode. So I stand corrected on this.

For reference:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?threadid=25218
Ignacio Rodriguez says that "even though [the TRV950] does not use a wider portion of the CCD than 4:3 mode like the PDX10 does, still uses enough pixels to produce an image better (resolutionwise) than that of native DV resolution cameras like the PD170."

http://www.maxent.org/video/16x9.html
At the bottom of this page it shows an illustration of the wider image obtained by the PDX10 compared to the TRV950. The image captured by the TRV950 in 16:9 is the same width as the 4:3 shot of the PDX10.

"Technically, the PV953 is better than the Optura Xi, (3 1/6" ccds versus 1 modern 1/3") but I would take the Xi's image over it any day."

I agree that it's important to try the camera in person before purchasing, but I just wanted to see if anyone could offer a compelling reason to choose the HC1000 or the GS400 on paper.

What specifically do you like about the Xi's image quality over the 953's? I'm very seriously considering the Optura XI because it provides everything I'm looking for, minus the 3 CCDs, but for an extremely good price (about $700 less than a GS400).

Andy

Regarding "Pro Cinema Mode" on the GS400, I did a search and came up with this:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22991

Tommy Haupfear says the Pro Cinema mode on the GS100 "combines 16:9 mode, frame mode, and its cine-like gamma setting (similar to DVX100 but non adjustable)."

There's a good description of Frame Mode at http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-etc.html#filmlook .

Andy

I agree that it's important to try the camera in person before purchasing, but I just wanted to see if anyone could offer a compelling reason to choose the HC1000 or the GS400 on paper.These papers have a lot of empty lines. The best thing to do is when these cams become available, bring a miniDV tape to the shop and record some test footage with all of these cams, and then take the tape home and run some tests.

What is inaccurate about StrongDotGuy's description (about the GS100's Pro Cinema Mode, to be precise)? Is it the progressive that is incorrect?
Frame mode is a pseudo-progressive mode. The camera outputs the frame as if it were completely captured at full resolution in one scan of the CCD. But, the frame is interpolated. This reduces the vertical resolution to 320 lines. We don't know yet if the GS400 will have this mode, but one could speculate it will be there since it is on the GS100 and is used in conjunction with Pro-cinema.

This whole discussion is really very speculative (as you note) since as Frank points out, two of the cameras aren't even available and it will take some time after they come out before we get any user feedback. And by then the TRV-950 may not be available, or may be selling at a blowout price which would skew things further. And of course there will also be new models coming along that we don't even know about yet. And those "higher end" cameras you mention may very well be cheaper also (actually I think the PDX-10 may be had for under $2000 already).

So I don't see how you could make any meaningful decision until you're actually ready to make a purchase, and then you pretty much have to choose from those cameras that are actually shipping.

"What specifically do you like about the Xi's image quality over the 953's? I'm very seriously considering the Optura XI because it provides everything I'm looking for, minus the 3 CCDs, but for an extremely good price (about $700 less than a GS400)."

Andy, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and of course looking at video from camcorders in this price range is very subjective. What one guy likes, the next might prefer another.

With me, I bought the Pana 953 last summer. The widescreen mode was VERY sharp and clear. I almost kept it for that. But, it was so subject to verticle flaring it ruined most of the shots I took outdoors. AND (the big one for me here) I totally hated it's color response. This thing had the ugliest color I've ever seen on video. Everything was industrial greenish-gray, with some orange-reds thrown in.

At first I thought I must be doing something wrong with the settings. 2 days of tests later - nope, that's not it. Must be something wrong with the camera....I took it back, and sure enough the next one was exactly the same. The 953 went back to the store. Except for the very high resolution SD video, I did not like it compared to what I already own.

I currently have a single chip Sony TRV820 D8 cam. I totally LOVE the color response on this thing. It also has a portraight setting that turns off all the edge enhancement, along with some other things, it almost makes the video look like film. Basically, it gives exactly the look I'm looking for.

The 1/4 inch CCD I believe is the same one used in the PD150. This was, I'm pretty sure the only consumer D8 made that way, which probobly explains why I like it so much.

The problem is the 1 megapixel chip only uses 460 pixels for the video. That is very low resolution by todays standards. I have a widescreen HD TV so....you guess the dilema.

The camera takes a big hit in resolution in 16/9 mode (Hey, at least it has one). Anything taken in bright contrasty situations that has dark diagonal lines just falls apart into cartoon jaggies.
If you are really carefull, like never blowing out highlights, and shooting simple subject like faces, you would never notice the resolution hit - but it's there.

Check out this clip I found on the Internet taken with the Optura Xi:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/blogs/gems/philg/MG42.wmv

(Sorry if it's rude to post someone's link. It came off of the review page for the Optura Xi on Camcorder Info.com).

It is shot with all the elements I would avoid like the plague with my current cam, YET SHOWS NONE OF THE PROBLEMS! The videographer is shooting in a tight space that combines bright outdoor sunlight with stark interior shadows. He lovingly focuses on all the diaganal straight lines of the gun, and there are NO jaggies to be found!

That video, to me anyway, is totally beautiful. It looks like it was made with a several thousand dollar camcorder. Remember, this is compressed down to about 10 percent of it's file size, and it still looks amazing. The color is a little soft maybe, but at least it looks nice. Easy to bump that up a little in an editor. I also like the slight softness, and lack of any synthetic edge enhancement.

Also, notice how smooth the optical image stabilization is on there. The Sony's use digital stabilization, which takes up an area of the chips resolution, so in 16/9 mode it's unavalable. I believe the TRV950 and the new HS1000 work exactly the same way. I remember on the 953 that feature didn't seem to make much difference. The Optura Xi has the most noticable stable image feature I've ever seen. It almost looks like a glide cam effect.

I also tried the Cinema Frame mode on the Pana 953. It was basically a marketing joke. It makes everything stutter like an old time movie effect. (More so in the viewfinder, but it still looks that way on the cams output).

So, I have been searching for pretty much the same features that you have, and I am about a hair away from buying the Optura Xi right now. There is a $200 rebate going on untill June (VERY savvy marketing, Canon) which means you can get it for about $800. Yup, I'm getting very very close now.......

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Sturges : Also, notice how smooth the optical image stabilization is on there. The Sony's use digital stabilization, which takes up an area of the chips resolution, so in 16/9 mode it's unavalable. I believe the TRV950 and the new HS1000 work exactly the same way. -->>>

The TRV-950 and PDX-10 have optical super-steadyshot which is available in both 4:3 and 16:9 modes. Also, the image from these two cameras can benefit a lot by lowering the sharpness setting under Custom Preset. I keep mine set all the way at the minimum, but this is a matter of personal preference and has been discussed at length in the TRV-950/PDX-10 forum.

Mileage may vary with the Optura Xi. The construction gives off a definite cheap feel and while the video may be high resolution it lacks color accuracy of 3CCD cams (regardless of RGB filter). I kept mine about a month before moving back to a Panasonic 3CCD.

The 1/4 inch CCD I believe is the same one used in the PD150.

The PD150 uses 1/3" CCDs.

Kevin didn't appreciate the DV953 but we have a forum full of happy owners here. Want proof?

Just check out Guy's excellent site full of frames, stills, and video from the DV953.


www.fortvir.net

As for the PDX10. If you can get past the $2000 price tag its an unbelievable cam and definitely worth a look.

Here is my take on the Xi vs DV953 from a previous thread.

I've had both the DV953 and Optura Xi and the DV953 is the best choice even considering the difference in 16:9.

The Xi fell short in two departments for me. Low light was was about the same if even a little worse than the DV953 which isn't saying a whole lot!

The other is the contrast ratio of the Xi. The Xi constantly blew out highlights (sky/treeline) no matter what setting I tried. My DV953 never had this problem nor has any 3CCD cam I've owned (VX2000 and PDX10).

I wasn't too thrilled about the bottom loading on the Xi but it wasn't a deal breaker.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002...OpturaXi(5).JPG

Maybe these frame grabs will help you understand one of the flaws in video quality that the Xi exhibits. The VX2000 obviously lacks the high resolution widescreen mode but at least you can discern the clouds.

Optura Xi - 1CCD

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-12/74415/OpturaXiWidescreen.JPG

VX2000 - 3CCD

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-12/74415/VX2000Widescreen.JPG

btw - those frames are still in their anamorphically squeezed state.

Tommy, you mentioned in this thread http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22991 that you own a GS100. How does the GS100 compare to the Sony PDX10? I'm going to assume that the GS400 will be similar to the GS100 and will be priced about $1500. The PDX10 is available for $1850 from B&H - would you say it's worth the extra $350 over the GS100?

Update: I just realized that if the current GS400 specs are accurate, it has an important difference over the GS100 - 1/4.7" CCDs instead of 1/6". Nevertheless, I would still be interested in hearing about a GS100 vs PDX10 comparison from someone who has used both.

Thanks btw to both Kevin Sturges and Tommy Haupfear for the insightful reviews.

Andy

How does the GS100 compare to the Sony PDX10?The Sony is a black professional DVCAM format cam with XLRs; the GS100 is not---unless you get the black mamba version and an XLR adaptor such as a Beachteck, minus the DVCAM capability---which doesn't matter a whole lot. :-))

Andy its tough comparing the GS100 to the PDX10 because they both offer some unique features as Frank touched on.

I miss the XLRs, slow shutter speeds, and maybe even the "look" of the PDX10 but the GS100 is such a small cam that I can take it anywhere. The GS100 also has its Pro Cinema mode and it gives such a unique look but its hard to deny the high resolution widescreen mode of the PDX10.

Of course the GS100 is a lot lighter and much easier to hold. That could make a difference to some.

I think at this point waiting for the GS400 would be smart since the GS100 in any color is next to impossible to find. The Panasonic Japan website mentions that production has stopped.

As usual I get the craving for a new cam every _______ (insert current season) and I've been considering selling my Black Mamba in the next week or two. You heard it here first!

Lots of info here. Sorry about my mistake with the optical resolution with the TRV950. To me it still seems like all these cams are pretty close in image quality overall.

My budget is pretty tight, but I do really have the urge to get something new before summer. I was looking at some footage from my Sony D8. Some of it looks so great, but other shots with lot's of busy detail look poor. That infrared night shot mode, especially with the feature that blends in the available light is just so useful when you need it. It's saved my shots in several situations, where there wouldn't have been any shot at all - I wish that was included in higher priced cams.

Tommy did you ever try an ND filter with the Optura Xi? I would think it might have solved your problem. My current cam is pretty bad in harsh daylight, but the ND's do miracles with it.

The pictures you linked to looked pretty close to me, but also seemed pretty Jpeg compressed which made it harder to tell. The sky just looked slightly blown out, but the over all detail on the Optura was much better than the VX200. It also didn't look like it was adding any edge enhancement, which looked noticable on the VX. That's pretty amazing for a camera that's about $1'400 dollars cheaper. I have to make compromises somewhere, so whatever I buy, I'm going to have to do alot of balancing between features and budget.

Did anyone check out the clip that I linked to in my earlier post? I think I would be pretty happy with that kind of quality for under a thousand dollars.

All this info is really good. We can help each other with that - but it's also true that everyone just has different needs and different tastes for what they like.

I was transfering a VHS tape to DVD for someone today. 10 years ago that tape (with the cheesy titleing) was state of the art picture quality for video pro's. My how far we have come with tools that are available to anyone now :)

Kevin, thanks again for your Optura XI impressions - it was quite informative. The quality of the rifle video was impressive. The colors shown in Tommy Haupfear's pictures are troubling (almost green sky) and this review http://www.dvspot.com/reviews/canon/optura_xi-review/index.shtml also mentions that certain colors were "noticeably off, mostly in terms of saturation."

For the price of $900 though, you get 16:9, optical stabilizer, decent image quality, and good manual controls. Worth considering for sure.

Andy

Hoya's PRO ND4 filter does a lot of magic to my Optura100 under outdoor shooting conditions, especially shots of the sky.

Tommy did you ever try an ND filter with the Optura Xi?

Yeah a ND filter would have helped but I had trouble with just about every blue sky I came across. The VX2000 was not using a ND filter at the time and even my cheap $300 DV cams had a better grasp on the contrast ratio. For day-to-day shooting I rarely use a ND filter but maybe the Xi required one outdoors pretty much all the time. The Xi sure did have a high resolution 16:9 mode!


Another point to make about the Optura Xi is that it is a bottom loader.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-12/74415/OpturaXi(5).JPG


Size difference between my VX2000 and past Xi

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-12/74415/OpturaXi(2).JPG

Yeah, sure everybody, thanks a lot for the information here - I am now completely confused :)

Should I just wait for awhile yet?

My current Sony D8 cam:
Takes beautiful color. That is one of the most important things for me. I will NOT go backwards on the color response.
Under certain conditions the video on my D8 looks fantastic. I am not kidding - better than a lot of the stuff I see on TV, or on many DVD documentaries. (Don't those people know how to use a camcorder? For one example, I just rented the documentary about Phish "Bittersweet Hotel". Most of it was shot on a TRV950, and was transfered to film. It looked just awful compared to the home movies I put on DVD. Grainy, terrible low light, faded color, blown out highlights everywhere, like everything on TV, zipper effects on straight lines. Resolution looked only marginally better than my D8. Oh yeah, the music was awful too (sorry).

I really should make a quick website and post a bunch of screen grabs from what I can get out of this cam if I work really hard at it.

8mm tapes cost next to nothing, and are very robust.

Has 16/9 mode. I have an HDTV, and I only shoot in 16/9 widescreen now.

Has the film like Soft Portrait mode. ( I really don't want to give up the color or Soft Portrait AE mode. Does anyone know if the TRV950 has that?)

I will also really miss that infrared Night Shot mode that let's you blend in the surrounding color (or you can just make it black and white to get rid of the X-Ray green look). I have video of my brother and I boating on a lake just after sundown, and of a local Harley fest, that look great in Night Shot. There would have been no other way to do it. The shots intercut great with the daylight footage. Everyone who sees it, says Wow, and thinks I meant to give it that look.


What I don't have, and what I want for less than $1'500:

Higher 16/9 resolution for wide shots with lots of detail in the content.

Optical Stabilzer. I have no stabilizing at all on the camera in 16/9 mode. Try getting steady hand held footage without it....

Manual Audio in. I have no control over the audio on my D8. Try plugging a mic in, or worse a mixer. Totally unusable. The onboard mics sound OK on it.

Low light performance that isn't any worse than what I have now. My current cam is just OK with that.

Arrrgh, and more bills are coming in. What to do? Having read what I just wrote here; I guess what I am looking for is a higher resolution version of my current camera. Please please let that new Sony HC1000 have true 16/9. It might be exactly what I'm looking for. Plus it's BLACK. ;) Thanks for your input here everybody. At least while I'm waiting, I LIKE exploring all this information.

Hmmm..I just checked out the review on DVSpot. Over all it was really good! The camera came out strongly recommended. He pretty much passed over about any color shifting. It didn't seem to be an issue. Non of the other videos I've seen from it had the green sky effect. In fact the video examples he had looked great. The sky was blue, not blown out, and the resolution on this cam beats anything within at least a thousand dollars of it's price range. It also blew away the Sony's he reviewed.

I also checked out his review of the Pana GS200. The video was full of jaggy zipper effects on diagonal lines! That was one of the first things he mentioned - a huge negative. The Optura Xi shows none of those. If the Optura does have a very slight color shift, I think that would be very easy to fix in Vegas. I do a lot of tweaking in post anyway. Also the Optura does excellent stills, better than any other camcorder I've ever seen. Comparing his test videos, it also looks to me like it does a better job with low light than anything else in it's price range.

He also mentioned it has a built in ND filter. I was really surprised that he didn't go into this further. Is it for stills only?

For a single chip cam, I've also noticed that the Canon's do not exhibit that ugly yellow halo effect on detailed contrasty lines. Something my Sony D8 REALLY suffers from. That up untill now, is the only big visible difference I've seen between single and 3 chip cams. The Optura Xi seems to have solved that issue.

The best 16/9 resolution around - even beating $3'000 camcorders. No visible edge enhancement. Almost fully manual controls with dedicated buttons everywhere. Great optical stailization. Manual Audio. At about $800 after the rebate, this is an amazing deal for the money. The Optura Xi is really looking like the clear winner out there.

The optura is a great lil cam. Slap a microphone on it and you've got a mini 16x9 monster. If you experience "color" issues you can either use a filter on the front, or do some color correction in post.

I mean for less than a grand, it can't be beat.

Kevin, if you adore your Sony D8 color saturation, you may have some issues with that of Canon. They look QUITE different in terms of color.

I think Kevin prefers a "desaturated" video look from a 1CCD cam (and cold colors).