DVD camcorders have to real time MPEG2 compression and then "burn" into the DVD disk. It is a well known fact that real time MPEG2 compression is lossy.
the following russian site has compared a MiniDV and MiniDVD camcorder
of same config side by side
http://www.videomax.ru/tests/dvd201/
these are last year's models and I hope they do some thing like that for
HC90 Vs DVD403
They conclude that using a MiniDV for recording live video and then using software compression to MPEG2 yields better results than real-time MPEG2 compression as done in DVD201.
In the following web page turtlebeach says that real time MPEG2 is lossy compared to DV
http://www.turtlebeach.com/site/pro.../indetailsw.asp
I do not know whether it related to their product or in general.
But it does tally with the russian review site's observation.
However if Sony improved the real time compression hardware to almost match the quality of DV quality in this year models like DVD403,
and then the optics being same- the quality on DVD403 then be same as that of HC90.
As there is no quantitative proof of this until the professional reviews show up, but qualitatively lot of people GJc and lazarus have experienced good quality in DVD403, as per their messages here.
If we can assume quality being same- DVD403 has the following adavatages as far as I could get:
(1) The Audio noise problem (motor noise being picked up) won't be there on DVD model. Only some people observed this motor noise on HC90. There is a separate thread on this.
(2) DVD403 comes with 3 hour battery. (practically 2 hours).
and also NP-FP's are cheaper than NP-FA's (unless you buy Hong Kong batteries on ebay)
(3) And of couse the 5.1 dolby digital on DVD403- built in.
(4) You do not have to do hours of encoding on your computer.
(5) Stills- if you want- You have to buy Memory Stick Pro Duo- which is expensive- in case HC90, in case of DVD403, you can store stills on DVD itself- you can probably accommodate more than 1000 pictures on a Mini-DVD- but in a practical situation, you will not store more than 100 in a trip, thus consuming less than 100 MB, which means only 2-3 less minutes of less video per disk. (since you use same disck for video as well stills)
Since I do not own any of these, and yet to decide which one- I will look forward for comments from owners of either model.
I went to local circuit city in this weekend, they had some panasonic 3ccd models side by side DVD403 (they do not have HC90). I saw the video on DVD403 lighter than the real color- whereas panasonic 3CCDs are closer to real color. for example, dark blue appears as light blue on dvd403, but same as dark blue on panasonic 3 ccd (even on cheapest one like PVGS65)
when I decreased the brightness on DVD403's LCD, it seems to get darker, but that is not what we want- (I do not want to reduce brightnessness of my TV to be able to see blue as blue).
The above russian site also mentioned that HC90 produces lighter (or blurred/softer) than PVGS250.
I also could see some grains when I pointed DVD403 to a darker area,
even pana 3ccd is also grainy in low light. This one is contrary to GJc's observation. May be if I turn off digital zoom it may be better- I did not check whether digital zoom was on- but I presume digital zoom is off by default- so, it did not make sense. I have to try it again- to make sure.
if any owner of DVD403 can comment on this- it will be great. (tigran who mentioned the russian site- says that- we need not worry about softness or lightness on HC90).