TRV900 -- various questions

[Frank Granovski]

I seem to recall something about this topic at:

http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/

[Boyd Ostroff]

I think this is what recall. Probably not very helpful, as people have reported elsewhere that the RM-95 is no longer listed on Sony's site.

The camera stores the running time (hours of drum rotation time) up to 9999 hours 59 minutes in internal, nonvolatile memory. Also stored is the date (year/month/day) of initial user power on, and the date of the most recent condensation event ("dew" indicator). Memory is maintained by an internal +3V lithium battery, not user accessible. Reset may possibly clear this memory (?). You can only read out this data if you have the RM-95 service remote though.

[Paul Chun]

If you could choose between a TRV900 or a PDX10 what would you pick? Given the PDX10 has better 16x9 and the TRV900 has better low light capabilities. I'm looking for something to travel with and don't want to use my PD170 since its a little big. I like the fact that you can take off the XLR connector on the PDX10 and it looks basically like a TRV900/950. Suggestions?

[Frank Granovski]

My opinion, the TRV900---if you don't mind lower resolution, no XLRs and no superior widescreen.

[Paul Chun]

Frank,

Why is it that you prefer the 900 over the PDX10? Any specific reason?

[Boyd Ostroff]

There is a comparison of the 900 and 950 at Bealecorner which you might find interesting. Of course the 950 doesn't have the XLR block, BW viewfiinder, DVCAM recording or high res 16:9 mode of the PDX-10.

The 900 is getting somewhat old now so you will also need to consider the life expectancy of a used camera vs a new one.

[Paul Chun]

Boyd,

I understand your point. The 900, as I understand, has better low light capabilities (4 lux) vs. the 950/PDX10 (7 lux). Would this make a big difference in real world situations? Also the 900 takes the "L" series Lithium batteries that my 170 takes so I wouldn't have to invest in different batteries that the 950/PDX10 takes "M" series.

I already have a 900 but was thinking about upgrading and either selling it or giving it away to a family member. I love the PDX10's capabilities but am wondering if I'd be giving up too much for the different batteries and low light capabilities.

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

> I already have a 900 but was thinking about upgrading
> and either selling it or giving it away to a family member.
> I love the PDX10's capabilities but am wondering if I'd be
> giving up too much for the different batteries and
> low light capabilities.

I adore my PDX10, but before buying it I suggest you check out the new Panny '30.

[Frank Granovski]

Why is it that you prefer the 900 over the PDX10? Any specific reason?

I too read bealecorner and have followed Tom Hardwick's comparisons here. I've never used a TRV900 but have played with one and shot many hours with the PD100A. The both have their pro's and cons.

[Shawn Mielke]

I also adore my PDX10, both of them, in fact, and think that it would make a fine replacement/upgrade to your 900, as well as a complement to your 170, as it is for mine. Beyond your traveling, you will have another cam with good sound and sound inputs, and the 16:9 is fantastic to have around. You will, however, be giving up some of the manual control that you have with your 900.

[Paul Chun]

Shawn,

What manual controls would I be giving up? I would think that the PDX10 would be more of a pro camera vs. the 900 and would have more manual features. Also I read some problems with audio capturing with the PDX10. I'm using a Mac and Final Cut Express so am I going to have this problem?

[Shawn Mielke]

I also use Mac and FCE, and have no problems capturing audio.

I'm not especially familiar with the 900, but doesn't it have independent NDs and independent gain control? The PDX has neither of these, although it seems to be officially true that it has undocumented and automatic internal NDs. There are a couple of major threads around here about this.

The PDX has an "exposure" control, WB, independent audio channel controls, a heap of shutterspeeds, and the same custom presets and auto/focus/lock switch and button in the front that the PD170 has.

[Shawn Mielke]

It's more of a pro's holiday cam. Perhaps Sony sought to keep the cost of it down, and also have it not threaten PD150 sales? Peculiar omissions, perhaps, but a brilliant little cam nevertheless.

[Boyd Ostroff]

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Chun : Also I read some problems with audio capturing with the PDX10. I'm using a Mac and Final Cut Express -->>>

Paul, you should be fine in the audio department. The problem seems to be related to the firewire drivers and NLE software on some versions of Windows.

Shawn, I haven't seen a 900 either but I'm willing to bet that exposure control is pretty much the same as the PDX-10, which is also the same as my VX-2000. From bealecorner

MANUAL CONTROLS: Not unique to this camera, but you can control shutter speed or aperture (or both at once) manually. I appreciate this degree of control over the image. The camera has up to +18db video gain (very grainy at +18) which is controlled as an extension of aperture size.

As you mention, the PDX-10 has "double secret" internal ND filters that pop in to force the camera's aperture to stay in the sweet spot of the lens. As you turn the exposure wheel in manual mode the camera will decide whether to actually change the iris opening or drop in one of the ND filters instead. So you do have full manual control, but you aren't always sure whether it's over the iris or ND filter wheel. Interesting that Sony has never documented this.

[Paul Girard]

Are there any tweaks or tools out there so you can change factory settings on these cams.
In specific, I need to use auto focus a lot. I shoot a lot of hand held, close, fast moving stuff. Is there a way to speed up the factory set auto focus motor?

Am I insane....or are there cameras out there that have naturally fast focus.

Paul