Hello.
I am just now beginning to take the dvx100 seriously as next cam. Sorry I'm late, Teach', I'll catch up, promise :-). I've been reading and I have a basic question.
24p and 30p and progressive in general yield better resolution and fewer image problems, ("artifacts", "combed" edges, etc.) than interlaced, yes or no?
If this is the case, then I can understand the attraction to this camera with wide open eyes, film look completely aside. Progressive sounds like exactly the sort of improvement video on the whole could use.
No doubt this has been covered here innumerable times, but I wasn't sure how to search for so specific a thing. Will try again.
Thanks,
regards,
Shawn

It does indeed. Steve Mullen wrote an article in Video Systems describing his ideas on this (very detailed - the link is off Terrence's DVX100 page) and Adam Wilt has some information on this as well.

The improved resolution from progressive is most evident on shots with motion.

Began reading Mullen's article almost immediately after posting this. Thank you, Stephen. This, I would venture to say, is the real revolution behind the 24p mania.
Regards,
Shawn