This post was in response to a post another thread, but I also though it would be appropriate to repost here as follows:

I've exchanged the HC90 for the DVD403. Here are my initial observations:

1. The HC90 is smaller and much more ergonomic. The buttons are easier to reach and I REALLY liked the internal battery design. The DVD403 is taller, yet thinner; its still rather small, but does not "mold" to the hand like the HC90.

2. The HC90 can take 16x9 stills; the DVD403 can not.

3. The HC90 has analog-to-digital pass-thru; the DVD403 does not, however the DVD403 can capture and convert (in real time) most analog source devices to DVD. This is nice.

4. I like the idea that I can store the camcorder with a dvd inserted-ready for use, with no cueing needed the next time I decide to use it. Can't store a tape in a tape-based camcorder-not good for the tape.

5. The DVD403 has a built-in 4-channel surround sound mic that sounds good and actually performs fairly well. The channel seperation/point source location could be better. The "normal" mode of the mic automatically adjusts gain which tends to "squash" the dynamic range of the audio. This could be the reason why channel seperation suffers. I'll try the mic in "low" mode and report back my findings. The HC90 does not have a built-in 4-channel surround sound mic.

6. The video quality of both camcorders is EXCELLENT!!! The DVD403 is going to dramatically change the prevailing attitudes about DVD camcorders. It produces sharp, detailed and well saturated videos. I've had the opportunity to use both camcorders at home, in the evening hours with standard room lighting. Both camcorders captured the true ambience of the rooms with no loss of detail in the darker areas. Here's the surprise; the DVD403 produced slightly better indoor results than the HC90. There was significant noise in the HC90 video, whereas the DVD403 was practically noise free and actually seemed to maintain better detail in the darker areas of the room. Of course, this is all subjective, but I am very pleased with the low-light performance of the DVD403. DVD camcorders have previously been slammed do to poor low-light performance.

Conclusion:
I don't do a lot of video editing; I don't WANT to do a lot of video editing. Lacking a Sony Vaio with the pitifully unstable "Click-to-DVD" software or $600 apps like Vegas 5 or Premiere Pro, it is nigh impossible to produce AC-3 surround sound DVD's with a EMC-HQP1 equipped tape-based camcorder (HC90, etc...). Even with the aforementioned equipment and/or software, the process to render to DVD can take several hours at best. The DVD403 produces beautiful videos with 5.1 Dolby Digital Surround sound, complete with menus and thumbnail chapters that, after finalizing (about 2 minutes), can be popped into any dvd player and immediately enjoyed. I'm very happy with the choice that I've made and have no regrets.

Regards,

Greg

I bought this camcorder almost a month ago and have been extremely pleased with the quality of this product. I had planned on staying away from the MiniDVD format because of the overwhelming sub-par reviews, but one look at the specs on this baby and I had to try it. The max resolution of all other models I looked at was around 690k effective pixels for recording, this one has 2048k effective pixels that is what sets this one apart. I have seen video with one of the other sony DVD models and it wasn't even in the same league.

The video recording quality is excellent, as with all recording equipment low light photography or videography is just that ....low light. No matter how hard the companies try nothing compares the the camera that is our EYE! That said I am pleased with the low light results.

The fact that is records in DD 5.1 is a big plus for me. The form factor is great small enough that it isn't a hassle to carry around but not to small that you can't easily access all the buttons, but i have normal sized hands if if you have mammoth hands you might have a problem.

The 3.0 megapixels stills are great but i have a Canon Digital rebel so that won't get used that much, but it is nice to not have to carry my other camera around.

I really can't say enough good about this camera. The cost benefit is actually a big seller for this camera you can get this camera for around $100 more than the next step down (dvd-301).

The battery life is excellent from what i have seen over two hours using the LCD, and you can use it with the DC adapter plugged in if you need that option.

It's not without it's faults though but I have not found many.

The optical zoom could be a little larger 10x is normally plenty but the lesser models have 12x so why leave that out? Speaking of the zoom sometimes when using the optical zoom the camera takes longer than I would expect to focus on a new subject, not always but just enough that I noticed it.

The advanced features such as manual focus, exposure, etc... are not easily manipulated during filming. You have to go through the menus each time to use them such as fading to black at the end of recording a certain scene.

Those are the main reasons that this camera didn't get all 5's from me.

If you get this camera you will not be dissappointed. Now all we need is for someone to make MiniDVD's that record over 1.4GB's LOL!!

I know DVD403 and HC90 both also identical, the big different is one use DVD and other use Tape.

I found most people said "future camcorder to be using DVD disc", but I just don't understand why Sony still produce Tape camcorder ?

They don't worry no one buy that Tape camcorder because both is same price ?

Or maybe have 1 reason (at least) Tape should be better than DVD based on today technology ?

I am looking for a camcorder so I really want to know the answer, thanks in advance !

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).

I really wish I could give you a good comparison between the two models, but I can only comment on the quality of the DVD403. Then again my opinion is actually based on my experience only. My "good" my not be someone else's "good" ya know... I would be willing to try and send a short video clip to someone with both indoor light and outdoor light so you can judge for yourself, but it would have to be short because otherwise the file will be huge..

that is great. please send me a sample. (upto 10 MB- may be 10-20 sec) rsamav@gmail.com.
thanks
Ravi

thanks a lot lazarus for the great clips.
You are quick and full of energy.
no doubt DVD403 matches up.
and I see no noise or grain in low light either.
So, may be the real-time MPEG-2 compression has been perfected by now- as we see no loss of quality. we need not hesitate to buy DVD403, just because it is a DVD model- as it gives same quality as HC90 and better than even 3 CCD models.

Coming to HKBigB's question- I think - Sony is fond of giving wide choices-
(that expalins why they keep continuing Hi8, Digital8 etc. bulky and low resolution formats).
continuation of MiniDV for conservatives- who are still weary of DVD technology, and DVD models for those who can jump at it.

lazarus or rsam, I'm very interested in DCR-DVD403, but we can't find this model here in Brazil, then it's difficult to feel the quality of the camera. Please, send me a little sample too. My e-mail is my2kmc@gmail.com

Thanks a lot!

P.S.: If you give me your permission, I could put the file(s) in a web server and the link here in this post.

From other thread I know 1 MinDV Tape = 15GB for 60 mins (DCR-HC90) and that 8cm DVD disc = 1.4GB for 30 mins (DCR-DVD403).

If based on above information, I think Tape should has better quality than DVD disc, agree ?

So maybe can say if I like better quality should go for HC90, right ?

Please advise / comments, thanks !

HKBigB,
I agree with you.
The compression algorithm is different between DV and DVD (MPEG2).
In a DV, each and every frame is compresses as a JPEG (just like a digital camera)- but all frames are retained.
this acheives 5:1 compression (compared the raw avi files in which raw data of each and frame is retained).

In case of DVD, not all frames are stored.
for example, if I just show a static object for a minute, why do I need to store each and every frame. that is the general idea behind MPEG compression. Just store only enough numbers of frames, using which a decoder will reconstruct the whole video. From device point of view, this is loss of detail, but human eye can not detect.
There are more intricacies and parameters like key frames, bit rates etc., to MPEG compression, details of which I do not know.
What all I know is higher the bit rate, better is the mpeg quality.
So, at HQ mode on DVD403, it encodes at 9 mbps. (my dvd player could not handle this- some dvd players require bit rates <= 8 mbps). compare it with DV's > 30 mbps.

So, whatever you do- you will never be able to match the quality of DV. But practically, what all we have to see, is - is it good enough for us for all practical purposes. Don't we watch DVDs and exclaim oh- they are really good. (compared to older tape technologies)- even though they are approximations in terms of frames - (based on MPEG compression).
If DVD cam, gives good enough quality comparable to DV, and saves us lot of encoding time, well, we can go for it. But if we want "the perfect" with no compromise, and we are ready to spend those hours of encoding, then DV is the way to go.

BTW, I am still in the same dilemma- HC90 vs DVD403,
but still can not understand how DVD403 has low noise in low light compared HC90 - as mentioned by George (GJc).
As per russian review site- (I took some time, translated with altavista and read the full article) DVD201 had more noise than HC40, (same optics) in low light, but in bright light DVD201 gave better picture.
for Still pictures, DVD201 gave better quality.
(Obviously, stills do not require motion level compression of MPEG- so JPEG compression is same on both).

bottom line is Owners of DVD403 are very happy and so are owners of HC90, either one is fine.

I went with a DVD-RW disk to a local store and recorded few clips on DVD403, I also found dark corner to try low light.
I found that low light clip has lot of noise.
I was just using easy camera mode.
Probably it requires program AE mode or some thing like that, which i did not explore.

Soon, I want to repeat this test with HC90 to see myself how much noise HC90 has. my initial observation is that HC90 has less noise in low light, whereas normal lights DVD403 is more natural.

Also still picture was very grainy, not at all good.
I can send samples if any body wants-

I admire your effort to test the cameras, but how were you viewing the video you took? You took the miniDVR home and viewed it on what kind of TV? (just curious).

I have not noticed much difference in performance between the still photos on my DVD-403 and still photos taken with my Sony cyber-shot 4MP camera. So much so that I have gone exclusively to using the 403 as my still camera, in part because of convenience in having a video camera on tap if I want it, and in part because it's really nice to be able to take 800+ pictures on a single miniDVD

As for low-light performance, I've found the 403 does very well in comparison to my older Hi8-probably orders of magnitude better picture in low light. I also bought the attachable light for $40 and found it does an unbelievable job at lighting in the dark--I can shoot video in a pitch-black room and the subject is crisp and clear with excellent color.

remington,
thanks. nice of you to respond, after the review appeared, not many people are active on the forum.
My aim was to compare hc90 and dvd403 in all aspects and then decide which one to go. I very much would like to go for dvd403, because it saves at least 100 bucks. (as it comes with 3 hr battery, and no need to buy memory stick).
also, I wanted to buy from internet for around $730, but they all internet sellers have restocking fee of 10% or 15%. So, I want to be absolutely sure before I buy.

so, I bought a mini dvd-rw from and then took few samples from local store. I took as much as it filled up almost the disk.
then i finalized the disk then and there itself.
So, now I have the disk which i can play anywhere.
So, I played it on a TV, computer and 17" LCD monitor.
I have not played on any 42" or 52".
I have kept very small clips at
http://www.geocities.com/sreyah

if there is problem downloading, I can email the clip
for low light performance- I found a dark conrner beneath the demo tables, where lot of bags were kept. It is a situation where myself and camcorder are in bright spot, trying to get some thing from lower light.
It is mixture of low light and bright light because of shadows by table and cupboard.

What I see is a bright enough video- but there are so many particles (spots) flickering all over the place- may we call it grains.
Yes, I too have Hi8 (TRV308) which has 1/4" ccd, and it behaves same way. I expected it to be better- because of 1/3" CCD and better resolution recording media. (200 lines vs 530 lines)
but as per camcorderInfo review- low light on DVD403, has no grains
so, what am I missing here is there any special mode.
also, don't think the video resolution observed by camcorder info is very low, even a zr100 (1/6") has 25% more resolution.

I also kept a still picture at http://www.geocities.com/sreyah
I can see so many grains there.
I am definitely missing some thing here.
what are you doing to get a good pic, as you said, you are getting as good as 4MP digital cam- even camcorderinfo gave 9.21 rating.
are you doing any white balance.
Easy mode is not good enough I suppose.

any info on these (low light, still etc) helps a lot.

I'm probably putting way too much thought in this decison as both of these camcorders look awesome. If anyone could help, I have a few questions that might help me make up my mind.

Do both cameras have LCDs that rotate all the way around so that the person being taped can see themself? (My wife loves this feature).

Regarding the need for finalization on the 403. If we tape 5 minutes of video, do we have to "finalize" the DVD in order to play it back? Can we hook the camcorder directly to a TV and play the footage we just taped without wasting the rest of the DVD?

Lastly, is there any reason to buy the HC90 if there's no way I'll ever edit video footage?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!


Thanks!!

Richard

Hi Richard,
both have lcds, which you can rotate and see yourself.
I have done on both the models at store.

coming to finalization question,
you have to finalise only if you want to take out the disk and play on
a dvd player.
if you are not yet ready to finalize, you can connect to cam directly to TV and watch.

only reasons why you would go for hc90, even though you do not intend to edit is possible better quality in MiniDV compression compared to mpeg2 compression of dvd cam. this forum, and dvd403 review are full of that discussion. (if you see video resolution section of dvd403, you will see only 304 or 314 lines, whereas, hc42 with only 1MP gives 403.5 lines, i am expecting at least that much from hc90- anyway numbers are one aspect- what appeals to our eyes is another aspect)
Thanks
Ravi