I have heard that it has pretty good glass on it.

Leica dicomar lens. Actually, I read somewhere that Leica don't make the lenses, but their manufacturing methods and tolerances are employed. Definitely better than average, but don't expect $10,000 Nikkor prime lens quality on this $1500 device.

I also wish they'd drop the "jack of all trades" thing and give up the 4.0 Megapixel still image / voice recorder to SD and MPEG-4 to SD stuff. I strongly doubt that very many people buy this 3-chipper for low-res, low framerate internet video and I'd personally would rather they made it better and/or cheaper as a video device instead. Even the cheaper digital stills cameras do a better job of photo's - besides, the laws of physics kick in with such small pixels on a small chip (which is why I don't hold out much hope for low light performance). If it wasn't for the really good LCD panels (based on my experience with the 952) and super quiet, super reliable transport, I'm tempted to look at other cameras.

Still, I guess they know what they're doing (after all, the competition crams all this junk in their stuff too).

Just a heads up that Sony is coming out with a lower priced replacement of the trv950. It's going to be named the DCR-HC1000. Looks like Panasonic has their attention. Check out this site for info on both.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/d/News.htm

Craig H.

Yeah - I did see that. I seem to remember hearing that it was to use 1/6" devices (I'll have to check this) which would put the Pana ahead IMO because of bigger CCD's. Speaking only for myself, I have some invested in batteries and the like that would be compromised by a switch to Sony. I'm not saying I wouldn't do it - just that I factor that stuff in.

Well, aside from all the other "shortcomings" mentioned in the article about the Sony, it has one of those crappy Touch Screens. I could be a $1,000 VX2100 with touch screens and I wouldn't want it. I just HATE those d****d things. They get in the way of EVERYTHING. I would not buy ANYTHING with a touch screen, at ANY price, not matter how good it was, otherwise.

Well Panasonic is advertising the North American version for $1499.95. We still don't know if the version they will ship will have all the features of the Japanese/European models. Panasonic has crippled the NA versions in the past. But, if it has the same features of the Japanese model, it will be a killer mid-priced cam. The CCDs use 270,000 more pixels for 16:9 and don't crop. It has an improved DSP for video (some speculate it is 12 bit). 12X vs. 10X zoom with low dispersion glass that Panasonic says has 30% less chromatic aberration. Bass enhanced audio. 1.2 Mpxl stills to SD card while recording video. Dual zoom/focus ring. 4.1 Mpxl stills...and so on. My biggest gripe is most of the manual controls require opening the LCD to adjust.

We've got a bunch of TRV80s and although I don't mind the touch screen idea per se you cannot use it in direct sunlight. Now I know they don't have sun in Japan but it's big thing down under. Still it's OK in a studio -:)

>" Panasonic has crippled the NA versions in the past"

What stuff is missing on the 952? Just curious.

>"My biggest gripe is most of the manual controls require opening the LCD to adjust."

That true? What a pain - they did a great job on the 952 with discrete switches and buttons for stuff like WB, Focus, Shutter etc. Pity to take that away - it was one of the reasons I settled on the 952 in the first place.

You might look at Computers 4 Sure, the Office Depot subsidiary, on 4 July 2004, for that item. This url has a price on it, also:

http://www.computers4sure.com/product.asp?productid=1903964

Nice price for an intro, if it sticks: $1203.95, including shipping.

No information or picture, though.