Shotgun/Zoom Mic for TRV950
 

I ordered this camera the other day, the TRV950, and I was wondering if it would be a worthy investment for Sony's "Zoom Mic" that plugs into the hot shoe or another shotgun type mic. I will be doing a lot of "guerilla" shooting which I basically mean just unscripted fun stuff. Is it a worthy investment or does the onboard mic work just fine for this. I've had Sony's in the past and always found the mics better than say Canon's onboard but was wondering as I moved up to a prosumer camera should I move up a level in audio also. Our school has handheld mics, and wireless mics (forgive the lingo, i'm tired) so I probably won't be investing in one of those until...school's out! Thanks for any input!

There has been much discussion about this over the last year or so. I tested the 950 and found that it does not, in fact, increase its field of view.

However, all may not be lost: check out the resolution charts here:
http://www4.big.or.jp/~a_haru/0208_3CCD.html

Scroll to the bottom and look at the resolution charts that were shot in 16:9. The TRV950 shot there is dramatically higher resolution than the VX2000 and the Canon DM-XV2. In fact the TRV950 shot is on par with the MX5000, the camera that invented the 16:9-patch-on-4:3-megapixel-CCD-for-full-resolution technique. So whether the TRV950 matches the PDX10 or not, it appears to have an excellent, excellent 16:9 mode of its own.

TRV950 - being a Sony - has very good onboard mic. So good that it picks up the sound of your breath when you look in the viewfinder, your fingers when you try to find the zoom, the zoom motor etc.

If your sound source is good and loud you will not have a problem. But you should have an extra mic handy.

I use a Sennheiser MKE300 on top of mine. The Sony (I think) will take power from the hot shoe, so you don't have to worry about mic batteries. I have read some expert say that it's a good mic but the "zoom" thing is more of a marketing feature - meaning it will hardly make a difference.

If you are recording ambient sound or sound from several sources, remember that the character of your sound will change as you turn your camera and with it the directional mic. The onboard will actually work better in a case like that. Or you could record ambience with a separate system (A stereo mic and a minidisc recorder would do in most cases). Afterwards you can mix that sound with what the directional mic has recorded.

Tor,
Do you pick up any motor noise with the mke300? I'm wondering because many posts on this mic in the past mention something to this effect.

Tim, I would forget about zoom mics and concentrate on the better of the consumer cam mics, although I don't know what all those are. The mke300 might be fine for you ($170).

No motor sound (or rather: so little that I don't consider it).
The complaints I've seen about mke300 is that on some cameras it seems to interfere with the "phantom feed" thus creating some noise. That's why Sennheiser issued a mke300d specially designed to be used with DV cameras. I use the plain mke300 and do not have such problems on the TRV950.

Although I do not have a shotgun currently on my 950, I have been looking into the matter and have a good idea what I am going to go for.
First, you have to consider budget. If you have at least £400/$500 then get a beacktek box for XLR and use the Sennheiser modular K6 system with ME66 shotgun.
Sennheiser also have the MKE300D. It must be a "D" however, as these have shielding to prevent interference with digital cams. This is apparently a very good prosumer shotgun mic with 3.5 mini jack and retails in the UK for £160.
I have also heard many people rave about Azden shotguns (Exact model escapes me, something like XMR1?). These sound great and come in XLR or 3.5 mini jack and represent serious value for money as I have read from many sources that the sound they deliver is unrivalled at the price.
The last Mic I was looking at is an Audio Technica AT55. It’s a mono shotgun with mini jack but it is cheap and will probably be better than the Sony.
Speaking of the Sony, I have read that it is poor. It is hot shoe and works with the cameras zoom. At tele the mic takes over but at wide settings I have heard it mixes 80% cam mic with 20% external with the results being mixed up and confused.
At the end of the day, go for the K6/ME66 if you can, many professional organisations such as the BBC use it with their DV cams.

If you're thinking about the Sony HS-1 little 'intelligent' hotshoe mic, please go here (quarter way down the page) and read my review on it.
http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/mic.html

tom.

I guess you would get a 16:9 adapter for the DVX100? :)

Azden SGM 1X and the trv950
 

I'm asking on behalf of someone else.

Are there any 950 shooters using this microphone? It seems a bit long for the cam. I did a search here and could find only vx2000 shooters working with it, and one instance of someone who was GOING to get this mic for his/her 950, without a follow up.

If so, does it pick up much handling noise when mounted straight to the cam?
It looks like it would. If so, can that "integrated" shock mount be removed (and replaced with a proper universal)?

Any other like priced shotgun recommendations are welcome.

Thanks,
Regards,
Shawn

Oh, and please specify whether or not you use an XLR adaptor box. I'm thinking that this person could go without one, and simply adapt it to a mini jack via cable, at least for now. He/she is on a small budget.

TRV950 in Russia
 

I'm expecting to be going to Russia in the next few months and I really want to take my camera with me. It says it shouldn't be used in temperatures under 0 degrees, but I wonder how crucial this is. Just wondering if anyone knows anything that may help me in my decision. I've heard of issues with Russian customs and so forth, but I thort I'd ask here first.

Cheers

I've used my XL1S with -5 (centegrade) temperatures without
any problems. It did have time to adapt inside a bag though.

Expect anything from +15 to -45 C. Russia is biiig.
Expect batteries to last much much shorter than you are used to, so keep them warm.
Maybe someone else has detailed advise on moving the camera from indoors to outdoors and back again in a safe manner. I don't remember it well enough to pass it on. Rob's on to something.

I have a SGM 1x and a TRV-900, which is similar to the TRV-950. If you mount the mic on the camera, it will likely show up in the frame of the shot unless you slide the mic way back into the shockmount.

In doing that, it isn't going to be much better than the built in mics (at least on the TRV-900, the built-in mics are pretty darn good). I guess it may be a bit more directional than the built-ins.

You could get an external camera flash bracket. This screws into the tripod mounting hole on the bottom of the camera, and has a handle off to the side, on top of which is an accessory mount you can attach the mic to. That would get the mic a bit farther away from the camera (to avoid motor noise) and get it out of the frame of the shot.

What you really want is to get a nice long XLR cable, then attach that to an XLR-1/8" inline transformer adapter (maybe you can get these at radio shack), and get the mic as close to the speaker/action as possible. I took a 3', thick wooden dowel from the hardware store, drilled a 1/4" hole in one end, stuck a bolt thru it, and then screw that bolt into the mic shockmount. Instant low-cost fishpole. Have a grip hold it and point it at the action, as close as possible w/o getting in the shot.

For my latest work, I used a large diaphram cardiod studio mic (Rode NT1) on a mic stand boom running into a separate mixer and recorder. I thought the audio quality was quite better than running the Azden into the camera mic input.

Internal Lens Barrel Ambient Noise Emanating - TRV950?
 

Folks,

I've had my TRV950 for some 6 weeks now and have learned, for the most part, where its strengths are, and where I think it is weak.

However, there is one aspect that I am wonder if it is a weakness of all models of TRV950, or mine in particular. This aspect is the amount of ambient noise emanating from the lens barrel with autofocus on. Since the TRV-950 has a built-in mic, the level of noise at the barrel is important...but...even on the PDX-10 it still would play some role with the mic sticking out right above the barrel, in my case as you will note below.

So....here is a specific set of observations. Depending upon folks responses to these observations I may send my camera back to Sony to have the lens assembly and autofocus motor swapped out.

Observations:
1. Upon turning on the camera from off state an audible "clack - clack (actually sounds like cluck, cluck)", similar to a rocker being set in place emanates (from area of lens barrel and just behind) for about 1 second. Is this normal? ... anyone know what this is?

2. With autofocus on, and camera panning to force the autofocus system to work, and ear in the vicinity of the lens barrel, or right on the lens barrel, I can clearly hear the turning of the servo combined with some kind of "tickover" - like a small gear tick. If I place my ear against the tape compartment solidly, with cam in MEMORY Mode, to eliminate the head/tape noise I can hear this tick, tick, tick of the autofocus system as well. Further, this tick, tick makes it all the way to the tape in quiet recording environments. In more normal recording environments....ambient noise ~60db it does not. In a completely quiet room - I can even here the autofocus system working when I use the eyepiece, some 7 inches away from the lens assembly. For the most part, when using the LCD screen, I cannot hear the autofocus system working.

Notes: As far as I can test....the autofocus is working. It has been fooled several times during stills where I thought it should not have been, but, careful tests on a tripod with non-moving subjets (to remove the possibility of motion blur being mistaken as out of focus) at all zoom ranges seems to indicate the autofocus system is actually autofocussing.

Is this autofocus noise a "feature" of the PDX10/TRV950 as a product?....or do I have an excessively noisy motor. (PS - I know that without you folks being able to perform the test this is really an unfair ask...but.....short of sending it back to Sony to find out.....there is no other way to learn if others experience the same noise). I did try to listen to another TRV950 at a local dealer but the ambient noise was probably 90 dB in the showroom area.....could not hear anything but that during the testing.

Thank you for your time in responding.....

As far as your first question goes I just tried mine in a quiet room with no noise and I get a similar set of sounds when I power up the camcorder. A whirrr, 2 click type sounds and another whir from I am pretty sure the autofocus motor as it does not do this sound in manuel focus.
I will try out the other situations though I know there is noise that bleeds over into the audio if I use the onboard mic so I avoid using it except for klutzing around the house.
I have not had any autofocus problems as far as focus time or drifting though I have heard people say they have had problems under certain situations.
KennJ

I'm certain my autofocus makes a noise too, but i can't hear it because the tape motor makes too much noise. With that, I've decided the built-in mic is unusable in lownoise conditions anyway.

Thank you for the responses.......

am looking at external mics now.....

TRV950 or GL2 for shooting indoor sports?
 

I've had my eye on a TRV950 for a long time and am ready to buy. But now that Canon is offering a $250 rebate on the GL2 I can get one for a little more money. So the question one must answer is, what do I get for the additional cost. Well, one feature is progressive mode. I understand what progressive mode is technically. But how does it affect your results, the final video?

I shoot indoor sporting events, namely Judo. I edit and add slow motion replays. Will progressive mode video give me better slow motion? What are the disadvantages of progressive mode? Does it blur when shooting action sequences? Does it require better lighting? (Remember, I shoot indoors with available lighting).

Thanks!

You really have to see progressive or Movie Mode for yourself to determine whether it's appropriate or pleasing.

I last heard that it's better to do slo mo with 60i, but post that one in Film Look if you haven't already, you're sure to get plenty of feedback.

The GL2 is going to do better in lowlight, with it's bigger chips and lower pixel count, which indoor, available light almost always translates as. On paper, this is pleasing, but it may not matter in the least, depending on your situation.

The GL2 has a long optical zoom, a feature that surely must be appreciated by sports shooters. I find the 12x zoom of the 950/PDX10 adequate in most scenarios; though I have not shot sports, I have shot live theater, so shooting from a distance isn't foreign to me.

Can I set "aperture priority" on trv950?
 

Does the trv950 have an "aperture priority" mode? Aperture Priority allows the user to set (and hold) a specific aperture setting, then the camera will automatically adjust shutter speed to ensure correct exposure. This feature is useful to control depth-of-field.

Update: Apparently, the trv900 has an "AEA" mode that is an aperture priority mode. Does this exist on the trv950?

I'm not sure that this can really be done. Just looked in my PDX-10 manual and it isn't mentioned. However you can certainly set for manual mode and adjust the iris and shutter wherever you like.

Personally, it seems like it would be rather disconcerting to see the shutter speed change as you film something. I just don't use any of the auto functions on my camera however, so I've never looked into this. Maybe someone else has a more definitive answer.

You're right - the AEA mode on the 900 allowed you to set an aperture and have the camera determine the shutter speed automatically. This worked well, but in bright light did sometimes give me 'shutter-stutter' where speeds were too high to give fluid motion to my video footage.

But the 950 is not the camera to allow you to control depth of field Ming Dong, fo reasons I'll explain here.

Nowhere does the Sony specification make it clear that exposure is controlled (in both manual and automatic) not by varying the aperture but by applying more or less ND. This camera is going to be used in the shutter priority mode for most of it's life and most people are going to assume that turning that exposure wheel will be setting an aperture by varying diaphragm blades. Not so.

Any photographer would be right to assume this as using different apertures can affect not only the DOF but also the way highlights and out of focus areas look. Small apertures (especially with such tiny chips) also allow you to control the amount of diffraction, so for a softer look you'd want to film at f8 and 11.

What actually happens is that if you're filming at full telephoto in the manual exposure mode the camera has all of one stop to play with. What this means is that (contrary to the 'Display' information that's effectively useless) the camera will open to full aperture of f2.8. If it gets brighter - or you want to film at a smaller aperture - you can film at f4. If it gets brighter still the camera has no more apertures up its sleeve - it now resorts to using the first of the three ND filters. If it gets brighter still the second and then the third ND come into the optical path.

ND filters won't affect the DOF at all of course. But for aperture priority the closest you'll get is the 'portrait' mode, where the camera clings onto wide apertures and varies the shutter speed to give correct exposure.

tom.

The GL2 may have a smaller side-screen, but it makes up for this in being much more of a photographer's camera. Longer zoom, better in low light, far less CCD smear, bigger chips, switchable NDs, choice of apertures, reliable 'display', apertures and gain-up shown in v/f.

Go the Sony route if compactness and discreetness are paramount. Also Info-lithium is great and so is the screen however.

tom.

The GL2 lacks progressive scan but does have Frame Mode and will give a progressive look at the expense of a little resolution. I've used this feature on several Panasonic camcorders and I prefer the look to interlaced for most of my events but bear in mind that frame mode and handheld don't usually mix well.

Here is a good article by Steve Mullen on the differences between progressive scan and frame mode.

http://videosystems.com/ar/video_progressive_need_know/

You say the GL2 lacks progressive scan, but so too does the TRV950. Another loss in the move from TRV900.

Shooting in frame mode or progressive (frame mode is progressive---they're are both capturing frames), the final video when played back in fields will look slightly choppy, with movement in the footage. In other words, interlaced looks smooth or natural, progressive shot footage played back interlaced does not look as smooth or natural (with movement in the footage).

I personally wouldn't call 15fps progressive scan much of a loss on the TRV950 but I do prefer the TRV900 to the TRV950 (sans PDX10).

This is a bit off topic, but the GL2 brochure states that "the GL2 includes a 16:9 recording mode, which applies an electronic anamorphic stretch..."

Is that simiilar to the capability of the pdx10?

Only if you pan/tilt/zoom too fast. :-))Not to my knowledge.Then you should be looking at cams with bigger CCDs, cams that don't require as much light as the small chip'd ones.

Frank is on the mark here. The bottom line is you will not be all to happy with either of these camcorders and should look at cam's with a minimum of 1/3"CCD's due to your subject matter.
KennJ

Its similar in the fact that it applies an anamorphic squeeze to get the 16:9 footage to tape but it lacks the increased angle of view and has noticeably less resolution than the PDX10 16:9 mode.

Here is an illustration of how the PDX10 achieves its quality 16:9

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/74415/PDX10.jpg

Here is a great link on how camcorders achieve 16:9 either by letterbox or an anamorphic squeeze.

http://www.maxent.org/video/16x9.html

TRV950 not recognized by iMovie or FCP
 

I just purchased a brand new TRV950. I connected it to my mac via ilink cable and my computer does not recognize the camera.

(I have a PD100 that works perfectly w/the cable and my computer)

I went to the Apple store and to B&H and neither place could get the computer to recognized the camera.

Has anyone else had problems with this? Is the iLink port broken on my camera or has Sony made it so the Mac video editing software no longer works.

Before I called Sony, I wanted to put this out and see if anyone has any suggestions.

Thanks.

Sure sounds like a camera problem; you did the correct tests and found the same computer could recognize another camera using the same cable, and another computer couldn't recognize the camera.

There are plenty of people using the TRV-950 and its sibling the PDX-10 with FCP on the Mac. Does everything else work properly with the camera? Have you tried pressing the RESET button (on the PDX-10 it's under the LCD screen next to the zebra switch)?

You may also want to try checking out the iMovie discussion forums, where the issue of various cams not being recognized by iMovie comes up: apple/discussions/iMovie. Sometimes it actually depends on at what point you turn on or attach the cam; seems to vary from cam to cam, believe it or not.

"downgrade" from PD150 to TRV950
 

Hello,

I'm looking to sell my PD150 which I bought for a film project that is since completed. I find the PD150 too bulky and conspicuous to use on a regular basis.

I'm interested in hearing opinions comparing the two cameras, other then the obvious differences of no timecode or XLR inputs.

Also, is there an hours meter on the 950 like there is on the PD150, I'm thinking about buying used.

Thanks for any advice.

Jeff

Hello,


Myabe take a look at the PDX-10 also.. You will then have XLR inputs, 16:9 ,DVCAM and a very nice camera in a small package..

Mike M.

I'd second Mike's comments. The PDX-10 has all those features that I'm sure you've come to like on the PD-150. I don't think the 950 will have an hour meter but the PDX-10 does and you can set timecode. The XLR box is removable for those times you want to be inconspicuous. but it still records through builtin mikes like the 950.

Thanks for the feedback. So, my next question is: When buying a used camera what is a generally accepted amount of hours. I assume that "taoe run" hours are the most important. Is that correct?

I agree that the move from the 150 to the 950 will be a big backwards step, and that the PDX10 is a more logical move. The 950 doesn't have an hours meter, no. Tape run hours are one thing, but in the engineering world of tape transport, keeping running is a simple operation. It's the lacing, unlacing, loading, unloading that demand so much of a mechanical system. It's a chain of events that has to be set into synchronous motion.

Moving to a 950 will make you wonder where all your wide-angle coverage has gone, as well as all the light. Nice side-screen though, with clever party-pieces like touch operation. It's three menus deep even on the side-screen!

tom.