Ok, i know that the Z1 has 1/3" chips and the V1 has 1/4" chips...that aside, a test claimed that the V1 resolves 800tv lines. I'm not sure what the Z1 resolves? I know that cameras shouldn't be compared based on shooting charts but....has anyone tested these two cameras for a comparison? I am between these two cameras, perhaps waiting until next month will provide more answers.

I've watched 1920x1080 test video of a FX7/V1 and I have hundreds of hours of FX1/Z1U footage, and the FX7 is *much* less pixelated and of better image quality than the FX1/Z1U. If you look at still frames (or video) you'd want the V1/FX7 as your camera!!

I recommend - stay away from the Z1U and go for the V1 any day, to anyone. The resolution is simply sharper and more pleasing to look at.

My Z1U footage, while HD, is blurry and pixelated in comparison. More camera induced (CCD) noise, which is turn is then compressed by the HDV codec = worse image on the Z1U.

FX7 all the way. I urge someone else to post stills/footage.

Robert thanks for your feedback

I shoot lots of SD where I have to hand off the tape right away. I want the 30p and HDV for other stuff but the SD pays the bills. Did you get a chance to see how it performs. Specifically 4:3 SD.

Jerry,

I haven't tested SD with the Z1U nor a FX7/V1.

Try reading this article - I recommend it to anyone interested in the FX7/V1:

http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=141

so Sony is still tweaking the camera. :-) that could be encouraging.

so Sony is still tweaking the camera. :-) that could be encouraging.

Please re-read the article. It's fraught with inaccuracies (the HVX is "almost uncompressed?!!")
Additionally, in the middle of the article, written in late September, he's sure the pre-production model of the V1E is not going to change much, but 2 weeks later it's updated to indicate that the camera was a pre-production model and is different.
He's referring to the V1E, not the V1U. Different camcorders. The V1E doesn't have 24p, whereas many of your posts, Alex, are relating to 24p. It's very important to note dates, differences in cameras, and the source of the information.

He's testing a European Sony V1, in 25p mode.

He says Sony updating the camera.

Steve may be testing a camera closer to production version. and thanks, I did notice the reviewer was talkinag about 25p not 24p. Sony's 25p enhancements likely apply to 24p, but we're speculating about alot. I enjoy seeing the latest images.

Until the camera is at release 1.0, who knows what new and exciting things Sony may document / release. I see no "Functions" and "Design" section on their website as of this writing. I wonder what they are waiting to formalize there. a new DVCAM HD Format for the DVCAM Cassette? probably not, but its open season on speculation. :-)

Alex,
your "speculations" are about to end much of this thread in the Area 51.
1. HDV is what it is. there is no development of, nor sensibility in, an "HDV DVCAM" format. HDV is a 19/25Mbps format, can't be changed and be called HDV. The V1 is fully developed. There were some preproduction models that were lent out, foolishly so, IMO, as it's allowed this sort of ridiculous speculation and inaccurate reporting to happen.
2. FWIW, VASST released a training DVD on the V1U nearly a month ago, and the unit that will ship isn't any different than the units used to produce this training DVD. *Nothing* in the cam can change in terms of features, only tweaks to what is already programmed in the software, and that does not include dropping in new features at the 11th hour, particularly a radical format change.
3. The features of the camcorder are *well* documented. Both by Sony and others. Because you can't find it doesn't mean they're not there, and doesn't mean that there is more "development" transpiring. I assure you it is not.
I'd like to urge you to read/study the various camera formats so that you might better understand how/why they work the way they do, and perhaps get a feel for how camcorder manufacturers do what they do. It might also help you ask better-informed questions?

It might also help you ask better-informed questions?

Ha ha ha. Spot, he’s not asking questions notwithstanding the question marks: he’s making statements. You know that. Right Alex? Even more likely he’s just wanting to communicate. Make his voice heard: right Alex?

Oh to be a moderator at DVINFO!

Spot, I for one, and I just know I’m not alone, truly appreciate your input here. Just wanted to say that, and now I got the opportunity.

Cheers mate. Keep up the (grueling) good work!

I've watched 1920x1080 test video of a FX7/V1 and I have hundreds of hours of FX1/Z1U footage, and the FX7 is *much* less pixelated and of better image quality than the FX1/Z1U. If you look at still frames (or video) you'd want the V1/FX7 as your camera!!

I recommend - stay away from the Z1U and go for the V1 any day, to anyone. The resolution is simply sharper and more pleasing to look at.

My Z1U footage, while HD, is blurry and pixelated in comparison. More camera induced (CCD) noise, which is turn is then compressed by the HDV codec = worse image on the Z1U.

FX7 all the way. I urge someone else to post stills/footage.

Bob, I was struck by the frame grabs from the German site. Is the FX7 THAT much less grainy than the FX1. Some of those shots were striking in how much more grainy the FX1 was than the FX7. It almost made me think that the FX1 wasn't adjusted properly. Granted the FX7 was darker, but I'd take those shots over the FX1.

I think the grainy differences are due to the different sensor types....

but, I'm seeing the same thing... the V1 has much better detail.
There is one picture with shopping carts and a wire screen around them...

In the V1 grab you can see the wire screen easily, on the Z1 grab the screen is so mushed you wouldn't even know there was a screen there...

That shows that the V1 has much better resolution than the Z1

Bob, I was struck by the frame grabs from the German site. Is the FX7 THAT much less grainy than the FX1. Some of those shots were striking in how much more grainy the FX1 was than the FX7. It almost made me think that the FX1 wasn't adjusted properly. Granted the FX7 was darker, but I'd take those shots over the FX1.I do agree with that - it's really quite striking how much better the FX7 is compared to FX1.

The German test results from Wolfgang really do seem to tie in well with the comments from Robert so i'd say there's no unit problem or anything - it seems like a genuine very significant step forward from the previous genereation of cams FX1/Z1. (as good as those cams are).

I went to Sony Style today here in N.Y. I was able to play with their FX7, but this time I got to shoot in to their Home Theater area with the camera as well as the well lit main area of the store. In the Home Theater area I was able to turn the lights quite low and test low light. To be honest, I was a bit disappointed since the grain was pretty evident. I shot in both HDV as well as DV. My overall impression of the camera is it really is quite good, but still in very low light, you're going to have to expect a fair amount of grain. What I saw on tape was quite different than those grabs I saw on the German site. The camera was in full auto mode. Frankly I don't undertand the almost total lack of grain in those grabs and the results I saw today. I'm still thinking of the FX7 as a substitute for my VX2000, but frankly it's really no match under those conditions for the VX2000. I had with me my Canon HV10, but Sony didn't allow me to shoot with that camera in their store, only the FX7.

Once I left the store I took out my HV10 and shot some footage. I have to tell you, I think the HV10 has a lower noise floor than the FX7....I really do. Yesterday I shot with both the FX7 and my HV10 in a local high-end camera store. Although there was no area to test low light, the HV10 looked a bit cleaner than the FX7. Obviously the FX7 is intended for an entirely different purpose, but the results were still there.

. My overall impression of the camera is it really is quite good, but still in very low light, you're going to have to expect a fair amount of grain. What I saw on tape was quite different than those grabs I saw on the German site. The camera was in full auto mode. Frankly I don't undertand the almost total lack of grain in those grabs and the results I saw today.

I'm guessing that the grabs were shot with a low or zero gain setting. With the FX1, unless you actually select gain on the three way gain switch, the camera will automatically add gain, whether or not you are in manual on aperture and shutter speed. It was my understanding from one thread, that the same occurs on the FX7/V1U models too. So you can't just shoot it on auto..

Your VX2000 (I have one too) in manual mode adds gain after the aperture is opened wide.... So this is different from what you are used too.

In any event, neither my FX1, or from what I hear, the FX7, has the low light umph of our VX2000's.. I have the FX1 too, and can tell you that from experience.

I'm guessing that the grabs were shot with a low or zero gain setting. With the FX1, unless you actually select gain on the three way gain switch, the camera will automatically add gain, whether or not you are in manual on aperture and shutter speed. It was my understanding from one thread, that the same occurs on the FX7/V1U models too. So you can't just shoot it on auto..

Your VX2000 (I have one too) in manual mode adds gain after the aperture is opened wide.... So this is different from what you are used too.

In any event, neither my FX1, or from what I hear, the FX7, has the low light umph of our VX2000's.. I have the FX1 too, and can tell you that from experience.

Some good points Chris. But let me ask you this, I too owned the FX1 and never got grain to the extent that showed up on that German site with the frame grabs from the FX1/FX7. Have you ever gotten video noise that bad as showed up in those grabs? I found those shots very odd.

If you have the V1 in iris-only mode, and gain and aperture are set to manual, you'll not see the gain increase as shutter increases or apterture is stopped down. you have to manulally add gain if you want it in those modes.
Our training DVD on the V1 goes through these modes somewhat deeply.

The V1 also has a limiter on the automatic gain control (AGC). You can set the AGC to max out at any gain setting, including zero dB. So if the AGC limiter is set to zero dB, I'd imagine no gain would be added even in full auto mode. But I'm not sure if this is true since the manual is not out yet.

Some good points Chris. But let me ask you this, I too owned the FX1 and never got grain to the extent that showed up on that German site with the frame grabs from the FX1/FX7. Have you ever gotten video noise that bad as showed up in those grabs? I found those shots very odd.

I assume you guys are talking about this site:

http://www.fxsupport.de/12.html

I did note in my first experience with the FX1 that at a lot of grain would show up in certain situations. Could even occur in daylight when I was stopping down and using ND. I had not realized that "auto" gain was always on whether or not I was shooting in auto or manual modes. I had assumed that if I shot the FX1 in manual shutter and exposure modes, no gain would be added unless in pushed the gain button. I did not realize that if I wanted no gain, in my shot, that I needed to have it programmed into one of the selector switches, and have gain control selected. It took my feeble brain a long time to grasp that. Since I don't do this for a livelyhood, I was not concerned about it, but it was only when I sat down and really looked into it, that I discovered that. With that discovery, that grain that showed up occasionally to my chagrin does not come into play any longer, unless I want to push things with a high gain at the end....

As I recollect, I think I can limit the gain on the FX1 too in the auto mode, but I just don't have the camera available to confirm it at the moment..

Follow up:

I saw another thread yesterday with shots from FX7. One of the shots had the white feathers on the breast of a bird blown out. Right away, others were questioning latitude of the FX7. Of course, it was just an exposure issue, and the poster was not claiming he had done everything to expose the scene properly.

Point of all of this is, any of the cameras we have available to us these days can do spectacular work, if you have the patience and time to discover what the camera can do.

Follow up:

I saw another thread yesterday with shots from FX7. One of the shots had the white feathers on the breast of a bird blown out. Right away, others were questioning latitude of the FX7. Of course, it was just an exposure issue, and the poster was not claiming he had done everything to expose the scene properly.

Point of all of this is, any of the cameras we have available to us these days can do spectacular work, if you have the patience and time to discover what the camera can do.

I saw that too and anyone familar with video would not have been concerned about the feathers being blown out with the camera in full auto. The camera was obviously reading the surrounding darker waters.

To the poster who said they used their HV10 after they used the FX7.

How do the pictures on the german site - frame grabs from the FX7 - compare in terms of SHARPNESS to frame grabs from your HV10?

I still see fuzz that reminds me of my experiences with Z1U/FX1s - didn't look as sharp as I initially expected.

Ignoring latitude and colour, how does the sharpness of the FX7 compare to your HV10?

To the poster who said they used their HV10 after they used the FX7.

How do the pictures on the german site - frame grabs from the FX7 - compare in terms of SHARPNESS to frame grabs from your HV10?

I still see fuzz that reminds me of my experiences with Z1U/FX1s - didn't look as sharp as I initially expected.

Ignoring latitude and colour, how does the sharpness of the FX7 compare to your HV10?

Robert, that would have been me. I've not taken any frame grabs from my HV10 to compare to the German site, but I've found the video of the HV10 to be quieter than the FX7. I find the FX7 footage, although very nice, is still not quite as clean as the HV10 (at least in full auto mode). Sharpness is pretty close, but Sony tends to use more edge enhancement than Canon. I've seen the same pattern with their digital cameras. In my two encounters with the FX7, I come away feeling the HV10 footage looks more high end, more professional. But remember, the two cameras have very different purposes. Although I prefer the video quality of the HV10, I wouldn't use it professionally due to limitations like mike inputs and others. But for a "fun" HDV camera, I have yet to see video from any other HDV camera (including the FX1 that I had owned) that beats this tiny cam in picture quality. Keep in mind I haven't yet played with the larger, newer Canons (A1, G1).

Some good points Chris. But let me ask you this, I too owned the FX1 and never got grain to the extent that showed up on that German site with the frame grabs from the FX1/FX7. Have you ever gotten video noise that bad as showed up in those grabs? I found those shots very odd.

I have got some extreme FX1 grain on some underwater shots I took when I enabled a red filter (which limits the amount of light coming in). I dont have any to post, but I was shocked at what I was seeing.

With the gain manually set even to zero it was far far better (but I didnt shoot anything that way on the same day for a side by side comparison)

Let me start by saying I don't mean at all to bash the HV10. I bought one. But had to return it.

View these two clips:

Sony HC3 (http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/media/testmedia/HC-3_HDV_camera_in_freefall.mpeg)

Canon HV10 (http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/media/testmedia/HV-10_HDV_camera_in_freefall.mpeg)

These shots were taken during identical conditions within 15 mins of each other, the only better comparative would have been wearing two cameras on the same helmet, which is not the most safe thing in the world to do, assuming the helmet will even mount them side by side.
Both cams had stabilization disabled.


The HV10 exhibits identical behavior on an ATV rubber mount, and on a horseback helmet mount. I was really saddened to see this, because the HC3 has no audio features, but the HV10 does, so was excited for this little camcorder.
That said, the A1 shares the same OIS system as the HV10, if I'm understanding what I'm told.

If you have the V1 in iris-only mode, and gain and aperture are set to manual, you'll not see the gain increase as shutter increases or apterture is stopped down. you have to manulally add gain if you want it in those modes.
Our training DVD on the V1 goes through these modes somewhat deeply.
Am I missing something, Douglas, but isn't iris and aperture the same thing?

Let me start by saying I don't mean at all to bash the HV10. I bought one. But had to return it.

View these two clips:

Sony HC3 (http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/media/testmedia/HC-3_HDV_camera_in_freefall.mpeg)

Canon HV10 (http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/media/testmedia/HV-10_HDV_camera_in_freefall.mpeg)

These shots were taken during identical conditions within 15 mins of each other, the only better comparative would have been wearing two cameras on the same helmet, which is not the most safe thing in the world to do, assuming the helmet will even mount them side by side.
Both cams had stabilization disabled.


The HV10 exhibits identical behavior on an ATV rubber mount, and on a horseback helmet mount. I was really saddened to see this, because the HC3 has no audio features, but the HV10 does, so was excited for this little camcorder.
That said, the A1 shares the same OIS system as the HV10, if I'm understanding what I'm told.

I can't get to these clips, the link isn't working. But my experience with the HC3 which I had owned and the current HV10 is that the HV10 has unquestionably better picture quality. It's more noise free with better resolution and color than the HC3. As I've mentioned, I was even favorably impressed with the HV10 relative to the FX7. But yes, it would be nice to have the audio input and other goodies. But for me it's simply a high quality 'fun' HDV cam that seems to take better video than anything I've seen! :)

Am I missing something, Douglas, but isn't iris and aperture the same thing?

Yes. In my vocabulary, I refer to the blades that control exposure as the "aperture."
Sony have a specific series of settings for the camera all labeled "Iris."
You can have:
Manual iris
Manual iris that when stopped down will auto-increase gain
or
Manual iris that when stopped down decreases shutter.

Douglas,

I'd love to watch the clips but as another posted said, they're not working. Could you explain what you noticed between the cameras?

Like everyone else, wish the HV10 had mic-input (I can see why they didn't include it - marketing dept). It'd make a great backup camera or family movie camera, no doubt.

I'm interested in any camera that offers HD at sharper quality than the Z1/FX1 or V1/FX7 - value $!

But what of the HC3 vs HV10?

Like everyone else, wish the HV10 had mic-input (I can see why they didn't include it - marketing dept). It'd make a great backup camera or family movie camera, no doubt.


One of the reasons is because it’s cheaper to leave those out. I think a manual focusing ring and a microphone input should be standard on any camcorder $1000 and up but when the HC3 came out with much less features then the HC1, a lot of people considered the HC3 as the better camcorder saying that the extra features aren’t necessary for a consumer. Now if Canon knew that Sony was going to release a UX1/SR1 with more manual features than the HC3, then I bet the HV10 would have indeed included a microphone input and a manual focusing ring.

Resolution like that isn't nessisary either, but it's there. Sure, it's cheaper to use the same components multiple cameras, but I'm in marketing, so I'm biased.

I still think Canon wasn't dumb and realized that the image was really really good, and didn't want it to even dare touch sales of it's higher end cameras. It you look at the prices of the two cameras under the XH-H1, and their spec differences, I doubt that HD-SDI is really that much more expensive of an option between the two. Of course not. It's the marketing department going "look, we know users want this.. so, they can have it, if they spend two more grand.. woohoo!"

Anyhow, I want an HV15.. with mic input of course - at no extra cost. ;)