Hi 8 / Digital 8 / 8mm???!

[Super Pig]

ok, in an attempt to better picture quality i realise that i needed better tapes.. now according to argos the regular 8mm tapes i had were only half the lines of a tv worth than the Hi 8 format.. now then, i bought Digital 8 because my dad says thats the best format before DV and not much noticable difference between the two... however, i have tried test recording and i have noticed no improvement in picture quality between what i had and these digital 8 now.

So what do i do now? if i was using tapes that had nearly half the amount of pixels (or tv lines or whatever) and now i have tapes that are supposed to be virtually double the quality i notice no difference!! there is still graininess.

can anyone help me out here? i was going to buy Hi 8 tapes but my father assumed digital 8 was sharper again there were no difference in price between the two except these digital 8 have less SP recording time of 60 mins.

if you would like to look here http://www.sony-asia.com/digital_imaging/handycam.html it shows digital 8 and hi 8 down the bottom.

my camera is Sony DCRTRV355E.

Thanks again!

[rsquirell]

How are you capturing the DV? If you aren't going thru the firewire and are using the same capture method you had to use for your old VHS 8mm tapes you are defeating the purpose...because your old analog capture method is converting your DV to analog. Always capture DV thru the firewire (any editing program will capture it.)

[Super Pig]

I have been using firewire, i plugged the camera straight into the TV too and pressed play on the tape.. no notice in quality change, but i notice it is quite grainy even when watching live from the camera into the TV.

is this something normal? if i put an object (my hand) in front of the cam you can see it good with no graininess that i can see.

im sure the picture looks better when filmed outside of the house also.

[Super Pig]

do you think it is the camera?? or does the head need to be cleaned? ive had the cam for about a year, it was left for months doing nothing.. but whether it is dirty or not im unsure of, i cant see it though..

but i thought a camera of this type would be greater picture quality, either that or im expecting too much?

its probably just the CCD's limitations on the camera.. its 8000,000 pixels.. or 800,00 lol i forget which.. either way i think that is the bottleneck and when i use it in doors in lightbulb conditions the picture is more grainy.. i just think its better in natural light to be honest, my dad said even his mini DV canon Mv40 did the same when he filmed in a pub in turkey and you could tell the picture was less clear, i guess its just the way cameras react to light... it all comes down to CCD also i should imagine obviously the more you pay the better picture you get, this one i seen has carlszies lens and just over double the CCD pixels as i have on my camera, i bet the picture is cracking in any light conditions with that but it costs a fortune ( nearly 1 grand ) anyways i cant have it all and i suppose i should be happy with what i have.. right?

tell me your thoughts