TRV80: Last of the “good” Sony consumer camcorders

Author's Rating:

Pros: Great video quality, large LCD, good widescreen mode, good build quality.

Cons: Lack of manual audio level control, must use menu for manual exposure and fader.

The Bottom Line: 
Get it on clearance while you can. The TRV80 should last for years while keeping you current with its enhanced Widescreen capability.

Author's Review
The TRV80 & 70 (and 50, 30, 20 & 10 before them) occupied that “middle ground” between consumer (TRV39 and below, and new HC65 and below) and true prosumer camcorders (TRV900, 950, VX2000, 2100, and the new HC1000).

As a single CCD camcorder, the TRV80 doesn't offer the superb colour saturation of the three-chippers, but its large single CCD and good firmware set it apart from other “lesser” single CCD camcorders. I chose the TRV80 over the comparably priced low-end 3 CCD GS120 in the argument that the Sony offered better low-light performance and superior widescreen implementation.

By now most people are familiar with the features of modern camcorders, so rather than just rehash the feature list available on any dealer's web site, I'll give a review based on my real-world use of the camcorder and go over some features that haven't been discussed much.

Handling

The TRV80 could be considered a “large” camcorder by today's standards, but only when compared to the newer Sony HC line and the “book” style of upright cams. Compared to my older TRV720 Digital 8, the TRV80 is positively minuscule. This compactness relative to the old D8 model has its pros and cons. First, being smaller makes it easier to carry, and I'm more apt to actually take it with me on trips where I might have left the D8 model behind. However, the reduced size of the TRV80 means the controls are slightly out from the natural position of my fingers.

Tape loading is from the bottom, a nuisance if you are an indie filmmaker doing a lot of tripod shooting.

Most functions are accessed from the touch-screen menu on the LCD. This concept is fine for most functions, but for filmmakers that want to manually set the exposure it is an annoyance. I wish Sony had included a jog dial for exposure and fader (for fading in & out), rather than forcing the use of the menu. However, if you rotate and fold the LCD screen back against the camcorder body, the LCD buttons become visible in the viewfinder, and you have the option of turning off the LCD panel entirely. With the LCD off, the viewfinder lists “Exposure” and “Fader” in the respective upper-left and lower-right corners, indicating where to find them by touch on the LCD panel. This is very easy to do by feel, and is a neat feature if you prefer to use the viewfinder (or if you are outside and the LCD is washed out by bright sunlight). This is the one situation where the touch-screen is actually MORE convenient than using real buttons and jog dial.

Video quality

Video quality is quite good, with images sharper and more naturally colourful than my old D8 model (which was pretty good in its own right, and superior to the newer, cheaper Sony D8s), but not quite as nice as the TRV950 or VX2000 (as you would expect), but I suspect it would take a serious video hobbyist to spot the difference you get with those more expensive models. The electronic Steadyshot works very well to smooth out extraneous camcorder shake.

On the standard sharpness setting you get great detail, but if you look closely at objects against a contrasting background (a flower against a wood fence, for example), you can see some faint halos or “mixing” of pixels. To cure this, turn down the sharpness setting a couple of notches.

Like most camcorders the TRV80 sets the exposure a little to “hot” when shooting in Auto mode. If you want to make a good shot even better, I'd recommend turning down the exposure control one or two settings before recording. This is only convenient if you have the time of course; for impromptu shots the camcorder generally does a good job when left on Auto.

Sound quality

The built in microphone is okay for family functions, not okay for an independent film (but you knew this). The internal mic is an improvement to what I was used to with the TRV720, with better sensitivity and more bass. For serious recording you will need an external mic. Be careful when using a mic attached to the camcorder though - the compact body transmits a lot of motor noise (more than the larger TRV720 did), so you will need an insulating shock mount. I use a Beyerdynamic EA86 that reduces noise considerably, though not entirely, so it is fine for all but the quietest scenes. For quiet dialogue you need to mount or hold the microphone off camera.

One problem of owning a consumer camcorder and using it for prosumer duties is the lack of manual sound level control. For example, if you a filming a dramatic scene that has widely fluctuating sound levels, the camcorder's auto sound level control can be overloaded during loud peaks, leading to distortion. One possible cure to this, although one I haven't tried yet, is to attach some sort of adjustable attenuator to the camcorder that lets you adjust the sound level before it reaches the camcorder's mic input. One such device I'm considering is the BeachTek DXA2, which (in theory) should do the trick. Of course, it you are truly serious you would record separately on DAT, mixing sound in post, and using your camcorder sound only as a backup.

16:9 Widescreen

With the TRV80 & 70 Sony FINALLY offered a decent widescreen mode, whereby the 16x9 image utilizes the oversize CCD rather than being cropped from the normal 4x3 image, thus keeping resolution. The widescreen image is anamorphically squeezed into the regular 720x480 frame size, but current video editing software (such as Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7 and FinalCut Pro 4) can “unsqueeze” the file so it appears as proper 16x9 footage without losing detail. Additionally, filming in 16:9 mode gives you a wider angle of view at the widest setting, so you may not need a wide-angle lens for those tight shots.

However, there is a catch (isn't there always?): when you zoom in, the image becomes more and more cropped in the way described above, so depending on your zoom level your widescreen footage may not be at optimum resolution. However, this system is still better than what we had before, and is still superior to some more “professional” cams such as the Sony TRV950 and VX2100, and to that of many mid-range Cannons and Panasonics.

Good widescreen performance is long overdue. As of this writing (Summer 2004) most people in North America still own 4x3 TVs, but with rapidly falling prices and increased programming in high definition, the adoption of widescreen TVs by most people will happen very quickly, perhaps in the next two to three years. Most camcorder purchasers hope to hang onto their gear for a few years at least. That, and the fact that many amateur filmmakers prefer to film in widescreen as a hedge against the future, makes one wonder why camcorder manufacturers have been slow to properly implement this feature (this is especially disconcerting for owners of higher-end gear like the VX2100).

Progressive scan

30 frames per second progressive recording is a little-documented feature of the TRV80 that appeals to serious hobbyists. Basically, instead of the normal 60 fps interlaced (where every other field is recorded at 1/60 of a second), Progressive mode simulates 30p by “filling in” the fields so that more image data is utilized. In order to be displayed on regular televisions (which are only capable of 60i), the TRV80 “copies” the second field from the first, so the two “fields” that make up a single “frame” are identical. This makes for slightly choppier video, as the smoothing nature of interlaced display is lost, but it gives the video noticeably more detail and gives it a slightly more “film look.”

Screen captures of video shot in progressive mode look excellent, with the smearing of interlaced video visibly reduced. The only problem with Progressive mode is that the Steadyshot is disabled, so you'd need to use a tripod if shooting in this mode.

Still photos

As a two-megapixel digital camera, the TRV80 produces larger and more detailed photos than any still you could get from video (progressive or interlaced), but the colours and depth are not up to dedicated digital camera standards. Still, it's a nice feature to have, with an automatic pop up flash for dim scenes, and a hologram focusing system for auto focus assist in low light. Transferring the photos to your PC via the supplied USB cable is a snap - you can use the included Picture Package software or have your PC read the camcorder's memory stick as if it were a removable hard disk.

Comparisons to other Sony camcorders

The TRV70 has identical performance, but is somewhat less expensive due to its lack of Bluetooth wireless networking and a smaller (2.5 inch) LCD screen. I know of very few people that take advantage of the Bluetooth feature, and even Sony seems to have conceded it is a technology that nobody wants by not including it on any of their new models. Some people praise the TRV70's LCD screen because it offers a higher pixel count than the TRV80's, but I wonder how much of an advantage the higher resolution factor is on such a small display, especially if used in the letterboxed Widescreen mode, where you would lose another half-inch. The TRV80's 3.5" screen offers higher resolution than the new Sony models, so it is by no means deficient in this regard and is far better than a 2.5" screen when shooting in widescreen mode.

The replacement for the TRV80/70 is the HC85, and on paper it looks like a decent camcorder. However, there are some downgrades to go along with the upgrades on the newer model. Besides the elimination of Bluetooth (no big loss), with the HC85 you get a lower resolution LCD, no hologram autofocus assist, a proprietary S-video port (so you can't use your own S-video cables), shorter standard battery life, and (subjectively) lower build quality. To me, the HC85 feels “disposable,” while the heftier TRV80 feels more robust.

On the plus side, the HC85 has colour super nightshot, a “hybrid” LCD screen that is easier to see in bright sunlight (and incorporates an updated menu system), and the ability to use steadyshot while in Progressive mode, which is a nice feature. However, I get around these issues by using a tripod while in Progressive mode (for scripted movies a tripod should be used anyway, unless you absolutely must go handheld or are going for the “handheld look”), and using the viewfinder while shooting in under bright conditions. Colour nightshot doesn’t interest me.

Then there is the peace of mind of going with a “tried and true” model. The HC85 supposedly uses the same imaging system as the TRV80, but some reviewers have reported noticeable video noise on dark objects, even when shooting under ideal conditions. Perhaps Sony has employed cheaper digital to analogue converters, or some other components that let in video interference.

The huge price reduction from the previous models also makes me suspicious. One likely reason for the lower price of the HC85 is Sony's realization that they can no longer charge $2000 CDN for a single-CCD camcorder when rival manufacturers are selling 3-CCD models for less. Additionally, electronics tend to get less expensive over time while offering more features. But you don't just reduce the price by a whopping 35% (from the TRV80) and 25% (from the TRV70) overnight without going the “cheap” route somewhere.

I considered the HC85 at $1299 CDN, but picked up a demo TRV80 for $1329 CDN. After the TRV80 had been priced at $1999 CDN for so long, $1329 seems like a bargain, so I have no regrets at going with this excellent camcorder.

I was tempted to give it a perfect five-star rating, but elected to give it four due to the TRV80's dependence on the touch screen, the lack of manual audio control (for the price it should have it), and the way in which the video ratings are described. A "5" for video quality means "excellent, professional quality" and while the TRV80 is very good (possibly the best consumer single-chip camcorder ever made) it is not quite up to that standard.