Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality? Thanks!


andyt

"Andy Turner" wrote in message
...

Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality? Thanks!


andyt

Andy, I have a canon xm1 3ccd, and I dont think its any better on low light
but the quality is daylight is better than a single chip one.

Peter

Andy Turner wrote:


Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality? Thanks!


andyt

From what I read the quality of the Sensors, size of the sensors, optical
quality, number of sensors all play their part so there is no simple rule.

Bit like CPUs nowadays :-)

Andy

Andy...my corns are hurting...that can only mean one of two things.

1 there's a snowstorm coming OR 2. There's a flamewar coming.

I have a feeling it's the later. It's technically easy to explain your
question and even easier to distort and twist and get caught up in all kinds
of pedantic bull****tery that will eventually expand to engulf the first
four planets out from the sun and then disappear up it's own colonically
irrigated asshole.

Here is a good simple explanation.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...tions_four.htm




"Andy Turner" wrote in message
...

Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality? Thanks!


andyt

In message , Andy Turner
writes
Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality?

Two or three years ago there was a marked difference in picture quality
over all lighting conditions (especially at low-light), favouring the
3-CCD against the single-CCD.

In general you will detect a difference with today's camcorders - but
the single-CCD models have improved so much that the difference, though
still there, is not as significant as before.

If money is of no significance then I'd suggest that you go for a 3-CCD.
Unfortunately, there's a price to be paid. There is one recent 3-CCD
model, the Panasonic NV-GS200EB where the price is not over-burdensome.
You can see the review at http://www.simplydv.co.uk (along with other
current model reviews). I don't know anyone who has this model.

The 3-CCDs are usually larger than the current crop of single-CCDs, but
personally I like to use a camcorder that comfortably fits in both hands
- so that would be unlikely to be an issue for me. Some folk like the
much smaller camcorders - but that's a matter of personal preference.

Most 3-chippers, perhaps because of the price differential, come with a
more extensive set of aperture and exposure over-rides, but to the
average camcorder user these might remain largely unused. IME a lot of
single-CCD camcorder users rarely (if ever) use the less extensive
over-rides that they have.

--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

Cheers Tony and the other guys for your comments. I think I need a new
camera now...


andyt



On Wed, 18 May 2005 20:29:56 +0100, Tony Morgan
wrote:

In message , Andy Turner
writes
Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality?

Two or three years ago there was a marked difference in picture quality
over all lighting conditions (especially at low-light), favouring the
3-CCD against the single-CCD.

In general you will detect a difference with today's camcorders - but
the single-CCD models have improved so much that the difference, though
still there, is not as significant as before.

If money is of no significance then I'd suggest that you go for a 3-CCD.
Unfortunately, there's a price to be paid. There is one recent 3-CCD
model, the Panasonic NV-GS200EB where the price is not over-burdensome.
You can see the review at http://www.simplydv.co.uk (along with other
current model reviews). I don't know anyone who has this model.

The 3-CCDs are usually larger than the current crop of single-CCDs, but
personally I like to use a camcorder that comfortably fits in both hands
- so that would be unlikely to be an issue for me. Some folk like the
much smaller camcorders - but that's a matter of personal preference.

Most 3-chippers, perhaps because of the price differential, come with a
more extensive set of aperture and exposure over-rides, but to the
average camcorder user these might remain largely unused. IME a lot of
single-CCD camcorder users rarely (if ever) use the less extensive
over-rides that they have.

On Tue, 17 May 2005 06:25:26 GMT, Andy Turner
wrote:


Is there an article anywhere that might explain to me the likely
improvements one would expect from a 3CCD camera? Are they better at
low-light situations perhaps, or is it just down to quality? Thanks!


andyt

I recently got a Canon MVX350i and to me it gives many three-chippers
I've seen a good run for their money. 20x zoom too and plenty of ins
and outs, all for under 500 quid.

It's also got a very interesting 'Network' feature...




.................................................. ...............
Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
at http://www.TitanNews.com
-=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

"Nathan Goldberg" wrote in message
...
snip

I recently got a Canon MVX350i and to me it gives many
three-chippers
I've seen a good run for their money. 20x zoom too and plenty of ins
and outs, all for under 500 quid.

It's also got a very interesting 'Network' feature...


I doubt very much that you have ever seen (let alone used) a descent 3
chip camera, otherwise you would not be extolling the virtues of what
is basically a domestic toy...

On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:47:05 +0100, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:


"Nathan Goldberg" wrote in message
.. .
snip

I recently got a Canon MVX350i and to me it gives many
three-chippers
I've seen a good run for their money. 20x zoom too and plenty of ins
and outs, all for under 500 quid.

It's also got a very interesting 'Network' feature...


I doubt very much that you have ever seen (let alone used) a descent 3
chip camera, otherwise you would not be extolling the virtues of what
is basically a domestic toy...

Have you seen and used a Canon MVX350i? How was it?


andyt

"Andy Turner" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:47:05 +0100, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:


"Nathan Goldberg" wrote in message
.. .
snip

I recently got a Canon MVX350i and to me it gives many
three-chippers
I've seen a good run for their money. 20x zoom too and plenty of
ins
and outs, all for under 500 quid.

It's also got a very interesting 'Network' feature...


I doubt very much that you have ever seen (let alone used) a
descent 3
chip camera, otherwise you would not be extolling the virtues of
what
is basically a domestic toy...

Have you seen and used a Canon MVX350i? How was it?


No, why would I, it's a toy 'Palmcorder', it would look a bit silly if
I tried placing it on my shoulder !....