From: d32x@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: rec.video
Subject: Re: TR200 - initial review
Date: 17 Nov 92 10:38:18 EST
Distribution: rec
Organization: Cornell University

In article <1e8hajINN398@seven-up.East.Sun.COM>,
swk@tylos.East.Sun.COM (Steve Klosterman - Sun BOS Hardware) writes: 
> This weekend, my wife and I purchased a Sony TR200 handycam.  This is our 
> first camcorder, although we've used older VHS machines before.  We compared 
> the TR81, TR101 and TR200 using the 81 as our model to beat.  I have some 
> questions at the end that I'd like more experienced owners to comment on!
> 
> We paid $1199, locally.  No mail order place expects to have them. (for 
> comparison, the local TR81 price was $999, approx $100 more than mail order). 
> The TR200 has all of the features of the TR81 except superimposing a single
> image onto the video.  
> 
> It uses a new battery technology, lithium ion, 1/2 the size of normal 
> batteries and immune from the 'memory' capacity problem.  With battery, 
> it weighs under 2 lbs and is 25% smaller than the TR81.  Max battery capacity 
> is 1 hour.  It's smaller than our 35mm camara and very easy to just 'take
> with you'.
> 
> It's rated at 3 lux, vs 2 lux for the TR81.  I haven't done
> a spec comparison, but the same 410,000 pixel, resolution.  Slightly 
> different lens.  I believe it uses the 1/3" CCD instead of the 1/2" (TR81).
> 
> It has a extremely fast zoom and a new focusing mechanism which is *very* 
> fast.  Going from a macro-focus of my ring finger (1/2") to a wide angle
> scene 300' away, it refocused in less than 1/2 a second.  The TR81 took
> over 2 seconds with a lot more hunting.
> 
> The docking station is very clever and convenient.  You connect to your 
> audio/video system with no cables needing to be plugged into the camara...it
> just slides into a guide on top of the box.
> 
> So, how do we like it?  OK, not blown away.
> 
> My previous, infrequent experience is with a 6 year old VHS unit.  I was 
> expecting Hi8 to be "breath-taking", AFM sound to be "stunning", colors and 
> quality to be substantially better than my older tapes.  Hooking it up to my 
> Sony XBR television and stereo, our initial tapes were disappointing.  
> 
> 1. Under low-light conditions (indoors), the picture is very grainy.  Perhaps
> 	I'm expecting too much from Hi8?  I tend to believe that the difference
> 	in lux ratings is marketing hype.  There was a noticable 'reddish'
> 	tint to indoor shots.
> 
> 2. In very quiet settings, the microphones pick up the sound of the tape
> 	drive motor.  This verges on 'driving me up the wall'.  Do all of
> 	the handycams suffer from this, though?  The sound, overall, seems
> 	to be pretty good.  Since I plan to use this to videotape concerts,
> 	though, this is a major drawback.
> 
> 3. the new focusing (very fast) mechanism works great, but appears to
> 	hunt a lot more than I'd expect, drifting slightly in and out
> 	of focus as my subject moves around a room (just noticable).  
> 	Perhaps the slower focusing on older camaras do the same thing 
> 	but damp the visual annoyance instead of fast, severe swings.
> 
> Do *all* of the small camaras exhibit similar symptoms to these?  
> 
> I'm going to live with this camara for a week, decide what I can live with
> and what really bugs me.  My tendency would be to move up to the TR101 rather
> than down unless the TR81 genuinely solves the annoying things.  
> 
> Steve K

For recording concerts, not being able to set recording level (ALC) could be
a problem, but concert sound aint that great anyhow.  Also, graininess at low
light isn't Hi8 fault, it just CCD sensitivity.  And I have the Nikon VN750
(TR101), and love it.  The image stabilization is great, and has full iris
control.
Newsgroups: rec.video