|
|
Posted by Smarty on 01/08/07 15:56
I've owned and used two TRV900, and both of them were inferior in a number
of ways to the more recent HDV camcorders I've purchased. It is my belief
that Sony ***did decide*** to market an HD equivalent, and in fact the FX1
sits in their HDV product line in much the same way as the TRV900 did,
lacking some pro features such as XLR, but retaining excellent performance
at a relatively low price. Further, I think the stratification of their
product line to create HDV, AVCHD, and other pro HD formats creates further
distinctions in pricing, performance, and features which make market sense
by creating real differences which separate these buyers / market segments.
Smarty
Smarty
"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
news:50f4t6F1fjdsjU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Jim S" <Jim S@jimsplace.com> wrote in message
> news:45a1b44f$1@clear.net.nz...
>>
>> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
>> news:50cbk2F1eku98U1@mid.individual.net...
>>
> Sony, like Canon and JVC, are concerned that they will undercut sales of
> their professional line of camcorders by producing "amateur" machines that
> produce competitive video quality. It's why, when they took the TRV900
> off the market, they replaced it with the far less capable TRV950 -- it
> didn't hold a candle to the TRV900, but it was loaded with the kind of
> gimmicks and gegaws that appeal to "shoot the kid's birthday" set. The
> TRV900 was a serious amateur machine that functioned at the prosumer
> level. Similarly, the VX2000 and VX2100 competed with the PD150/170, but
> for about $1,000 less. Sony lost sales of its more expensive line of
> prosumer/low-end professional machines, so it has decided not to market an
> HD equivalent.
>
>>
>> Cheers, Jim
>>
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|