I rented out my V1 as a "B" camera to a local wedding videographer. His "A" camera was an EX1. I was curious to get a relatively unbiased opinion since I have never had the chance to do this myself. This videographer has sevearal PD170's of his own and he has also done Betacam work so he has quite a bit of experience. I thought it could be interesting to see how they stacked up IRL. I would expect the EX1 to be better, especially in low light that would be common at weddings, but how much better was the question. Unfortunatly, so far, the feedback has been kind of confusing. For one thing he said had some sort of problem shooting with the EX1. He had to get a runner to take the EX1 to the owner and get the camera "reset" (not a card capacity issue) so he could use it again. ??????? On a couple of occasions he did say that the EX1 was "like a computer" when he was talking about the issues he had. I am not sure what problem he was experiencing. Well anyway, as a result of the EX1 problems, he wound up using the V1 more than he originally intended. As far as the shooting, he told me that he got some great looking footage with the EX1 but he said he also got some terrible looking footage with the EX1. From what I could understand, most of the footage from the V1 was fine. When I first talked to him, I was really disappointed because he told me that the picture quality on the EX1 was really amazing and it just blew the V1 away. But I finally figured out that what he was talking about was the relative picture quality of the LCD monitors on the cameras. It had nothing to do with recorded image quality. Fortunately, he did wind up with some footage shot under the same conditions with both cameras so I still have hope of getting some valid feedback. But, so far, he has not had a chance to sit down and critically compare that footage, back to back.

I have a V1 and think its one of the best cameras out there, I shoot regularly next to Z1 and I like mine better, I don't have a EX 1 yet, but with all the footage out there from the EX I can compare my V1 with it. and most of the time mine is very comparible; now, in the right hands the EX has many more possibilities, I would buy one for two reason, the 1/2 inch cmos chips, and 1920x1080hd. however, my V1 has a 20x zoom which I want, and it produces an excellant video.

You might want to read this :http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/view/ShowContent.action?product=HVR-V1E&site=biz_en_GB&category=HDVCamcorders&contentId=1183546399866&sectiontype=Product&preserveContext=true

They use the V1 together with XDCAM HD

I did get to talk to the owner of the EX1 and he said that the problem the guy had experienced was that the EX1 refused to white balance anymore. And that the white balance that the wedding shooter was seeing was all screwed up. so he had to do an "all reset" to get the EX1 working again. The only negative comment about the V1 was that the blacks were more noisy than the EX1. I have no idea what settings he was using when he was shooting or what the lighting conditions were. When I got the camera back, the gain was up to 6 db, the ND1 filter was on and it was set at 1/250th shutter speed. No PP's were selected.

When I got the camera back, the gain was up to 6 db, the ND1 filter was on and it was set at 1/250th shutter speed. No PP's were selected.

I'm interested to hear the results but it sounds like he went partial auto on the V1. Filming a park opening last summer, I accidentally hit the auto gain button on the v1 and I noticed that it compensates against whatever I set the iris at.

Before I figured out what was up, the v1 had the gain at 18db! Fortunately I caught it in time.

So I would not be surprised if he had the auto-gain on, he didn't notice and he compensated by putting on a ND filter and a faster shutter.

Good catch. I didn't think about that. You might be right.

The EX1 has 2 major issues that make it a little tough to use for wedding.
1. Slow Auto Focus - We know that run n gun situations do occur in weddings and auto focus is used half of the time. The cam reacts slower than a Z1 by 1sec or so. Thaz my personal impression after using both

2. ATW - The EX1 has a wierd auto WB. Does not react fast but may be I was too pampered in the past with the Z1/FX1 but the EX1 really behaved WEIRD! IT doesnt change with the light dimming at times.. funny huh? I'm still trying to figure that out too.

I thik the V1/Z1/FX1 will be much easier to use for weddings. They react fast and it is easier to get good images for run n gun in my opinion. The main diff is the resolution in Full HD 1920x1080 25P is superb. I can even tell someone is wearing contact lenses from the LCD. Cool huh?

The main diff is the resolution in Full HD 1920x1080 25P is superb. I can even tell someone is wearing contact lenses from the LCD. Cool huh?

I am impressed. The guy that shot the wedding just kept raving about how good the LCD was on the EX1. I have had issues being able to see absolute spot on manual focus with the V1.

I think the V1/Z1/FX1 will be much easier to use for weddings. They react fast and it is easier to get good images for run n gun in my opinion. The main diff is the resolution in Full HD 1920x1080 25P is superb. I can even tell someone is wearing contact lenses from the LCD. Cool huh?

I currently used V1 for the HDV event or SD 16.9 Both are good. I still like tape format beside SXS card or the New Z7 CF card. Going to get another cam may be Z1 due to CMOS digital still flash. Seen a Tawian Wedding using Z7 it still have slow flash when playback or slowmotion.

I'd be careful about referring to reviews written a year ago. For instance, the HVX200 has recently been updated (HVX 200A) and it is much closer to the picture quality of the EX1 and sensitivity for that matter. The EX1 still has 1/2 inch chips but at over $1K higher in price. Plus, the HVX gives you a 16gig card. I believe through a rebate you can get an 8gig card with the EX1. Also, the rolling shutter and 4:2:0 color space that the EX1 employs bothers me a bit. I know; you can get 4:2:2 out of the SDI port. Although I think the picture quality still appears better on the EX1, "beats hands down" is now obselete thinking when comparing these two cameras. For the money I now believe that the HVX 200A is the better choice.

I finally found out a more about this comparison shoot. The guy who used the EX1 and the V1 never got back to me on it, in spite of the fact that I have asked him several times. But he did take his HD demo reel to another friend of mine to burn on Blu-Ray. My other friend also owns and V1 and he had an opportunity to see some of the un-edited footage. He told me that what he saw from the V1 looked terrible. Extremely grainy, poor exposure and other issues. So when he burned the Blu-Ray disc, he got the shooter to bring the original tapes so he could check the camera data. Even though the shooter was positive that he shot everything at 0 db gain, according to the camera data, he shot everything at 15 db gain, f2.8 and apparently the shutter speed was auto adjusting to correct exposure. He did tell my friend that he had been bad-mouthing the V1 because of the results he got. He finally got to see some properly exposed footage, including some low light scenes and he was amazed at the quality. So now he want to use the Z1 again.

The HVX200A has exactly the same imagers as the HVX. Picture quality is unchanged, though the noise is less if you are shooting low light.

The EX1 is not $1k more to be honest. The EX1 ships with one card, and offers a second card free. Yes it's only 16GB, but when you compare the recording times that offers at highest quality compared to the HVX, it's clear why the gap in price exists.

The 4:2:0 color space on the EX1 is at 1920x1080, which the HVX doesn't even shoot. The rolling shutter issues, such as they are, are well documented. For the money, the EX1 offers an SDI port which the HVX doesn't have. It offers 1/2" imagers which the HVX doesn't have. It offers 1920x1080 which the HVX doesn't have. It offers real focusing options which the HVX doesn't have. It offers histogram in LCD which the HVX doesn't have and it records nearly an hour of recording at highest quality which the HVX doesn't have. The HVX only offers 1280x1080 at highest quality which is something no one talks about.

Both are good cameras, but the misinformation when comparing the two is incredible.


I'd be careful about referring to reviews written a year ago. For instance, the HVX200 has recently been updated (HVX 200A) and it is much closer to the picture quality of the EX1 and sensitivity for that matter. The EX1 still has 1/2 inch chips but at over $1K higher in price. Plus, the HVX gives you a 16gig card. I believe through a rebate you can get an 8gig card with the EX1. Also, the rolling shutter and 4:2:0 color space that the EX1 employs bothers me a bit. I know; you can get 4:2:2 out of the SDI port. Although I think the picture quality still appears better on the EX1, "beats hands down" is now obselete thinking when comparing these two cameras. For the money I now believe that the HVX 200A is the better choice.

I was the one that made that seemingly emotional statement, but Perrones comparison is more rational :-)

I started a thread on the Ex1 forum coz i was baffled by Panasonic - even when I read the specs of the £9000 HPX500 I continued to be baffled by their choice of architecture - it just seems inferior to Sonys (I understand that you dont just use picture quality to choose the camera). I can only conclude that Panasonic doesnt have the technical skills to produce an EX-beater, and certainly Panny arent doing much to give me any evidence to the contrary.

The EX1 is $2000 more expensive than the HVX200a in the UK, but in my opinion the EX1 significantly better value - hence my decision to trade up from a Sony V1 to an EX1 rather than a HVX200. I mean there just cant be any contest given that the EX3 is giving HDCAM a good run for the money, and the EX1 has the same pic quality.

I rented out my V1 as a "B" camera to a local wedding videographer. His "A" camera was an EX1. I was curious to get a relatively unbiased opinion since I have never had the chance to do this myself. This videographer has sevearal PD170's of his own and he has also done Betacam work so he has quite a bit of experience. I thought it could be interesting to see how they stacked up IRL. I would expect the EX1 to be better, especially in low light that would be common at weddings, but how much better was the question. Unfortunatly, so far, the feedback has been kind of confusing. For one thing he said had some sort of problem shooting with the EX1. He had to get a runner to take the EX1 to the owner and get the camera "reset" (not a card capacity issue) so he could use it again. ??????? On a couple of occasions he did say that the EX1 was "like a computer" when he was talking about the issues he had. I am not sure what problem he was experiencing. Well anyway, as a result of the EX1 problems, he wound up using the V1 more than he originally intended. As far as the shooting, he told me that he got some great looking footage with the EX1 but he said he also got some terrible looking footage with the EX1. From what I could understand, most of the footage from the V1 was fine. When I first talked to him, I was really disappointed because he told me that the picture quality on the EX1 was really amazing and it just blew the V1 away. But I finally figured out that what he was talking about was the relative picture quality of the LCD monitors on the cameras. It had nothing to do with recorded image quality. Fortunately, he did wind up with some footage shot under the same conditions with both cameras so I still have hope of getting some valid feedback. But, so far, he has not had a chance to sit down and critically compare that footage, back to back.




I Shot a DOC. using the V1 and EX .The EX has more res. than the V1 EX 1/2 native chips 1980x1080 Yea better in low light. The first thing a noticed was the view finder res. I loved the v1 for weddings when I owned them. Now I am using EX1's and Z7's

The Homeless in Austin Trailer on my site was shot with EX1 and V1u
The weddings Trailers were shot with V1us and FX1's

www.dvdaction.net

I can only conclude that Panasonic doesnt have the technical skills to produce an EX-beater, and certainly Panny arent doing much to give me any evidence to the contrary.

I wouldn't go that far. Their new HPX170 is going to be one HECK of a camera with features similar to the EX1 (in some cases exceeding it) at a lower price. BUT, unless Panny leaves CCD, they are just not going to get 1920x1080, and they simply cannot write that resolution to P2 cards without backing out of DVCProHD (which only does 1280x1080). It's a heavy legacy burden.

But, Panasonic most certainly has the technical skills, it's just the politics that seem to be in the way. They could bring nearly all of what they've done in the Varicam to the sub $10k market, but will they?

I Shot a DOC. using the V1 and EX .The EX has more res. than the V1 EX 1/2 native chips 1980x1080 Yea better in low light. The first thing a noticed was the view finder res. I loved the v1 for weddings when I owned them. Now I am using EX1's and Z7's

The Homeless in Austin Trailer on my site was shot with EX1 and V1u
The weddings Trailers were shot with V1us and FX1's

www.dvdaction.net

Brian, I liked the trailers, strong videography - is it possible to purchase the Homeless one on DVD as I'd like to see it on a plasma screen?

Brian, I liked the trailers, strong videography - is it possible to purchase the Homeless one on DVD as I'd like to see it on a plasma screen?

Sherif I am still in production on this project. Send me your address . I will render out some scenes on Blu-Ray or send you couple of Raw clips.

Lets not get into a codec war. DVCProHD is a very acceptable codec that is used in its higher end cameras, like varicam. Let's face it. Whether native or H/H+V shift, it still all ends up 1920 x 1080 when using 1080i. The EX3 is not sub $8k, so we'll leave it out. In my comment last month, I acknowledged that the EX1 is a better camera because of the 1/2" imagers and manual lens. I was just pointing out that the HVX200a with its changes is a lot closer to the EX1, and for about the same price (when you consider the extra cards you will need), it's a viable alternative to the EX1, mainly because of the global shutter and 4:2:2 color space. Yes I wish it had 1/2" imagers, and yes I wish it had at least HDMI out. But it is still a very good camera and preferred by a lot of clients over EX1. So the bottom line is it depends on what you are shooting, and who you are shooting for? For my money, I'll rent for now.

Oh, regarding the HPX 170, it has the same chipset as the HVX 200a. It has more professional features but the same chipset. In fact, their upcoming AVCHD camera, HMC 150, will have the same chipset. What's up with that? I do agree with previous comments that 1/2" imagers should have been used in the 200a or at least in the HPX 170.

Sherif I am still in production on this project. Send me your address . I will render out some scenes on Blu-Ray or send you couple of Raw clips.

Brian thanks I'll drop you an email through your website - good luck with completing it - it looks good. Sherif

But it is still a very good camera and preferred by a lot of clients over EX1. So the bottom line is it depends on what you are shooting, and who you are shooting for? For my money, I'll rent for now.


John, Thats what I've been trying to understand (and has confused me) - what sort of client would prefer the image from a HVX200a or HPX150? Is it better in lowlight, do blacks show less noise ? The color from the EX1 just looks so beautiful - OK so perhaps if i did tons of green-screen (which I dont at all) or compositing then the 4:2:2 helps (but I dont composite) - so exactly in what situation would you choose an HVX200a over an EX1?

Sounds like you've used both cameras?

John, Thats what I've been trying to understand (and has confused me) - what sort of client would prefer the image from a HVX200a or HPX150? Is it better in lowlight, do blacks show less noise ? The color from the EX1 just looks so beautiful - OK so perhaps if i did tons of green-screen (which I dont at all) or compositing then the 4:2:2 helps (but I dont composite) - so exactly in what situation would you choose an HVX200a over an EX1?

Sounds like you've used both cameras?

I'm very curious about this as well. Because if doing a lot of green screen was important to me, I'd be using the HD-SDI and not fooling around with either the Long-GOP of XDCam or the not-full-resolution DVCProHD.

John, Thats what I've been trying to understand (and has confused me) - what sort of client would prefer the image from a HVX200a or HPX150? Is it better in lowlight, do blacks show less noise ? The color from the EX1 just looks so beautiful - OK so perhaps if i did tons of green-screen (which I dont at all) or compositing then the 4:2:2 helps (but I dont composite) - so exactly in what situation would you choose an HVX200a over an EX1?

Sounds like you've used both cameras?

It's the HPX 170 by the way. What sort of clients? Well, there's a mixture. Some like the 4:2:2 for compositing or when doing green screen. Yes, you can take SDI out and bypass the codec, but sometimes that is not an option on remote shoots requiring green screen. Some require fast motion shots and don't want to deal with the perceived motion artifacts of the rolling shutter or MPEG 2 codec of the EX1. Others are just biased or uninformed about the EX1 and demand the HVX 200. Still others have had scenes shot with a varicam or the 900 (HD version) and want "B" shots from the 200. Some want SD and they like the fact of DVCPro50/25; downconverting is not an option for them. Others feel that DVCProHD is easier to deal with in post.

I have not used the HPX 170, but it has the same chipset as the HVX 200a. So I'm basing the look on the 200a. The EX1 is excellent in low light. The 200a with the new chipset now does fairly well in low light, so I would say it's a wash as far as low light with the edge going to the EX1. To be honest, I don't do a lot of shoots where the scene is not lit.

So when it comes down to it if you absolutely want or need to buy a camera, either the EX1 or the HVX 200a/HPX 170 will find you lots of work.

It seems in my area Panasonic reins higher than Sony. Panasonic cameras are requested twice as much as Sony. This is odd because Sony always use to be the leader. I guess Panasonic is doing some really good marketing in this area.

I guess Panasonic is doing some really good marketing in this area.

You said a mouthful right tnere...

Got to do a shoot today with 2 - V1's and the EX-1 from the original comparison. This time with no operator errors. This was a 2 subject coffee table set-up and we had great lighting. Me and my V1 were the A camera. The wedding videographer was B camera on the other V1 (with me setting it up this time). Camera C was the EX1 on a door way dolly/jib arm set up. The EX1 was the "safety" always wide camera. Once we got the basic lighting set up, we set up the cameras and started to refine our lighting. Right out of the box, the DP kept commenting on how beautiful the image was coming out of the 2 V1's. BTW, he owns the EX1. He and the C camerman probably spent 45 minutes extra trying to get the EX1 to please his eye as much as the 2 V-1's. He almost wore out the A/B button on his Sony 9" field monitor that he was using to compare the images. When the shoot was over, we went back to the edit suite to look at the footage and the V1 stuff looked awesome, as did the EX1. I sure wish the V1 had the same LCD viewfinder as the EX1. It would be much easier to get quick, accurate focus. But, all in all, the V1 has to be one of the best bargins around.

Greg, I saw film from 1955 the otherday and i swear that on DVD viewing the V1 image quality far surpassed it. I think the only hindrance on these types of cameras is the focusing - ie, its hard to on the small ldc screen, so you need a 7" lcd add on.

But the image quality means you need to start really to get the camera technique right. 1 minute after everyone comments how good the V1 or EX1 image quality is, they are then back to criticising the camera movements or editing or actors!

As a camaraman, I think not being completely confident that you have nailed the focus is a mental distraction. I find I am constantly refering back to the field monitor. Unfortunately, you can't always do that when shooting. In this case, we only had one field monitor and the DP got to use that one so he could direct the 3 cameramen. One other disappointment with the LCD was its inability to reproduce the full richness and beauty of the shot I was getting. We were in a dark toned room and we had highlight lighting on distant objects in the background and they looked absolutely beautiful on a good monitor but I really couldn't tell it on the LCD. The V1 captured it perfectly on tape.

Is it too much too ask for the manufacturers to give us perfect HD cameras for under $5000.00. Ummm, well yes that probably is asking too much. But we can hope can't we?