I understand that purpose of it but I would much rather have a zoom ring that does not spin infinitely so your lens markers actually mean something. Plus, the fastest zoom you can do with the Z1 is done by switching the zoom to servo, putting the zoom ring at full telephoto and switching to ring zoom. And I guess I just really like the feel of holding the camera by the handle, zooming with the ring and being able to feel how far I'm zoomed in.

Oh well, not like I can afford the V1 anyway. :p

It can't be 1920x1080 though, can it? HDV is 1440x1080. I suppose the chips could be 1920x1080 and recorded as 1440x1080, but I'm not sure there would be a noticable difference (unless of course you're going HD-SDI or component out - or maybe it's still 1440x1080 that way).


After looking over this post, I am a poor writer.

Food for thought
 

Just to stir the pot a little here. Apparently the V1 is not a replacement for the Z1 but is just a little less on the pro side regarding features. Maybe Sony has a Z1 replacement in the wings that will offer more pro features than the Z1 but will be at a higher price point, say arount the price of a H1. With Canons new cameras out you would want to have something in the middle to cover that market and you would want a little separation in the feature market to get people to pay the extra for the higher end camera. Introduce some new things, take away just a few little features.... The V1??? Perhaps we'll see an $8000 Z1 replacement soon that will push the bar up a bit for sub $10K pro'ish cameras.

I don't think we'll see a Z1 replacement for a while, unless they do something like the VX2100 and PD150/170 and just do updates like that. Also, from what I've seen on the V1e, it seems to have just as many pro features as the Z1, but just different ones (Progressive-scan vs. interlaced, etc.).

heath

The big problem is the smaller 1"/4 chip size in my view, and this will be its biggest failing with the 'film look' fraternity. It may have 25p, but with less dof control that's a sad trade off.

It's also 4 lux, though the 20x zoom is impressive, going f/1.6 to f/2.8
with a smallish 62 mm filter thread (a consequence of the small chips).

20x zoom sounds as if you'll get less dof, right? Well yes if you can stand the greater magnification then ok, the 20x zoom will give shallower dof. But of course you have to zoom in more - so you can't have a whole head with a blury background, you have to have eyebrows to lips to get the same blur as with a 1"/3 chipped camcorder that shows the whole head. Make sense?

And c'mon Sony. You knew the problem with the PD's sidescreen obsuring the controls when open, and you sorted it good and proper on the FX1. Now we're back to side screens again. Why?

tom.

I could not agree more with this comment.

Ah, but because of the size of all sub-$10,000 cameras' ccds, shallow depth of field is hard to accomplish. It's also never recommended to go higher than F4.0 or so because of the chip size.

I assume to get shallow depth of field with the V1e (as with all other cameras in this category), you'll simply zoom in to the end of the lens, pull the camera back a bit, and open the iris as much as possible.

I also still think/believe/assume/wish, etc., the American version of the V1e will have 24p and 30p. Again, that's what I think/believe/assume/wish, etc. (grin)

heath

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....8&postcount=26

The HVX200, HD110, DVX100, etc., all have the LCD flip-out on the left. Canon's XL H1 doesn't even have one.

Also, I thought the tape transport was on the left still--I was wrong! Sorry.

heath

Tom, those are all good points. Funny, because it seems like the V1 / Z1 relationship is a lot like the PD-170 / PDX-10 relationship. Smaller chips, but with one major feature which the higher priced model lacks. In the case of the PDX-10, you got a high quality 16:9 mode; now the V1 gives you true progressive scanning.

Personally I'm looking forward to user reports on this camera, and also the announcement of a US version. These really seem to be the best of times if you're in the market for an affordable HD camera; there are so many options becoming available. The transition to HD is speeding towards us faster than I had expected.

lets just hope that it does not have the problem with reds that the other cmos sony hdv cams have.... the HC1 mad everyone look like cheap amateurs.

Also... I don't know about you guys.... maybe I'm just a little insecure (not)... but I like a cam a little bigger, l think clients scratch their heads when you show up with an iddy bitty thing that looks like you bought it at bestbuy.

but... I guess for sony.... moving to a new 62mm front... a whole new crop of accessories will be sold. what series of batts does this thing take?

I disagree--I've shot many things with the Z1, as have friends and collegues of mine, including DP Jon Fordham who shot a major PSA that was transferred to 35mm for theatrical exhibition. It starred Stanley Tucci and Oliver Platt.

As far as batteries, I think the www.sonybiz.net site said 970s, which are the absolute BEST batteries, IMHO, aside from Anton Bauers.

heath

i was referring to the size of the new cam.... I have a fx1 and love it's size... put some flags and a fail under it and actors start to give it some respect.

did'nt someone shooting with a z1 on the set of "24" say that one of the actors... maybe keefer.... that he could'nt act in front of anything that did'nt have 2 humps on it?

cool that the batts are 970 L's... cause those "m" series batts are dinky.

Christopher,

I've never heard of that before. And the photo Jon Fordham sent to me, of he, the crew, director and Oliver Platt and Stanley Tucci, the Z1 had NO matte box, follow focus, etc. I think actors, clients, etc., know if you're shooting on the Z1, they're getting it. If they hire you to shoot on an F900, then you're bringing that camera.

heath

so do you like that the new cam is smaller than the z1?

I have a Z1, a PDX-10 and a VX-2000. I don't mind the size of the Z1, but if travelling I'd be happy to have a smaller camera provided that all other things were equal. The PDX-10 is certainly a lot easier to take with you. The VX-2000 is a nice size I think, so I would have no problem with the size of the V1. But I'd want to see what the trade-offs are in terms of control placement and also the LCD screen quality.

Of course there's also the A1 now if you want something really small. I don't think that camera is for me, seems like they compromised a couple things (like bottom loading and manual controls) to make it small.

I like both the hand helds (Z1, DVX, etc.) and the shoulder-mounts (small like the XL H1, HD100/110, etc.; large like DVCAM, DVCPro, HDCAM, etc.).

heath