 |
 |
Digital 8 vs. MiniDV?
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
More specifically, the Sony TRV730 vs the Canon ZR20.
How do these formats differ, and which takes better video?
I've managed to cajole the powers that be to have both of these on hand for the next few days, and I'm clueless.
SdC
|
|
Do people do anything but whine over at AI Forums, or what?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
I have read that MiniDV has a slightly better picture, but my guess is that for you average iMovie user, any difference would be imperceptable. I think the biggest differnces are size and, to a lesser degree, price. The digital8's are bigger and heaver, due to the larger tape, but less expensive. I guess if you had a large collection of Hi8 tapes, the digital8 might be an advantge. I like the size of the miniDV's- the cannon is a great size- enough to make up for the difference in price.
My guess is if you have them both to play with for a week, all the opinions on the board will be woth next to nothing compared to your own expreince.
Paco
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
The datastream should be the same across the two tape formats.
Digital8 is more prone to dropouts, though.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'd go w/ MiniDV. Smaller does it all for me.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
go here: http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html
the author compares miniDV and digital-8 and claims that their output quality is equivalent.
the digital8 format is able to record digital video on analog 8 mm tapes. as well as being able to record in DV mode, it can also play back analogue 8 mm tapes (meaning you can import them into your Mac); handy if you have a bunch of analogue 8 mm tapes
to quote:
"Digital8 is largely a camcorder-only format, though two "Video Walkman" portable player/recorders are available. It appears to be the 8mm division's way of keeping its customer base from defecting to DV. By leveraging the massive investments of 15 years in 8mm analog camcorders and transports, the unit cost of Digital8 gear is kept very low, roughly half of what a comparable DV camcorder would cost, and its ability to play back legacy analog tapes is worthwhile for those with large libraries of 8mm. "
Note that although the quality of the formats may be equivalent, that doesn't mean that the quality of the cameras doing the taping is. you would have to compare each on a case-by-case basis.
edit: Just been to the Sony shop and I think Digital 8 will win me on price.
[ 01-19-2002: Message edited by: nitram_again ]
|
|
_ _ _ _____________ _ _ _
Martin
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
(
Last edited by MadMacs; Oct 5, 2002 at 12:08 AM.
)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: usa
Status:
Offline
|
|
Digital 8 has the above mentioned advantages, but don't DV seems to be the format of choice... I would go with DV.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fort Worth, TX, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
My Digital8 Sony TRV310 is great, for what it's worth.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<Jimmy Bones>
|
|
Originally posted by suckfuldotcom:
<STRONG>More specifically, the Sony TRV730 vs the Canon ZR20.
</STRONG>
I have a sony trv 320, and a previously had a sony trv 315 (but it got stolen.) I couldn't say I would recommend the newer generation sony digital8 since Sony switched from 1/4 CCD to 1/6 in the newest models.
My cam is great, but I have heard the newest ones have a bad time in low light situations.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top