Bottom line V1 or Z1?

[Dave Campbell]

Steve, when I had both cameras, I never did tests that extensive, but I did do this. I took both cameras and held them together. I took video at the same time in my black home theater room with my normal lights on. I then walked outside and took some outside pictures. I then showed both videos and asked the wife what she liked better. The color seemed a little lower from the HC1 in the room shot. But, other than that, nothing jumped out.

Now, there are two ways to asks about these comparisions. One is against today's stuff. But, the way I look at it is the pictures better than my VHS, SVHS, and DV from the past. Clearly the answer is yes. So, lets just say then that I saw the picture of the HC1 being 95% of the Z1. When I was not using the Z1 because it was too large, heavy, then what good was it? So, for most folks ones eyes and TV setups are such they the average person will NEVER see a difference they will comment on, IMO, anyways.

Dave

[Dave Lammey]

Steve: I have both the HC1 and FX1, and while I can't answer most of your questions because I haven't studied those issues, I can say that the HC1 does tend to bleach out highlights outside, unlike the FX1, which really does handle those situations much better. The HC1 is roughly similar to the PD/VX series in that respect, perhaps a little worse, so I find myself riding the manual exposure quite a bit when I am outside to try to counteract this effect.

[Dave Lammey]

Originally Posted by Gints Klimanis

A pleasant surprise with the Z1U is that I can do the same work as the Sony VX2000 *without* a wide-angle adapter. My Z1U footage is incredibly sharp, even though the VX2000 wasn't that bad.

.

I agree with this, Gints -- I find that I don't need a wide angle lens with the FX1, whereas I needed one for my PD170/VX2000 ... I have heard that the V1 has a narrower field of capture (not sure if that's the correct term) so that you will need a wide angle lens to do the same thing with the V1.

[Bill Pryor]

This is true, with the V1 you have about a 38.5mm or so (in 35mm terms) at the wide end, where the Z1 is about 5 or 6 mm wider, which is significant for a lot of shooting. My thought is that if a guy is thinking about a depth of field kit like the Redrock M2, it's about double the cost of the wide angle adapter, so why not get that instead and pick up some old Nikkor lenses used. Of course you have to learn to shoot with an upside down image, but in my case I've done that a lot with view cameras.

[Stu Holmes]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

This is true, with the V1 you have about a 38.5mm or so (in 35mm terms) at the wide end,

It's actually 37.4mm max wideangle (35mm equiv). But it's a good point you make for sure.

With the Sony VCL-HG0862K 0.8x WA adaptor, the max. wideangle then becomes 29.9mm (35mm-equiv).

[Heath McKnight]

If you mostly do 24p work, definitely go with the V1. I love the Z1, but converting to 24p takes time and starting with 24p is an advantage. And if you have to shoot something in 60i, well it can do that, too!

heath

[Bill Pryor]

Speaking of 24p, in those long review posts by John Fordham that are now gone...he said someplace something about being unable to remove the pulldown for true 24p filmout...remember that? I'm confused about that. You can, can't you, load the 24p footage as 24p and work in a 24p timeline? Did I misunderstand what he said or did he get it wrong or what?

[Chris Medico]

If I remember the review correctly the issue was most of the NLE software didn't have the option for a true 24p timeline. I think that Vegas now does if I read that thread correctly.

I have Liquid 7.1 and I know it does not support pulldown removal and a true 24p at the current time.

Chris

[Heath McKnight]

Well, the camera isn't out yet, so I for one am curious what support we'll be seeing once it ships.

heath

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

something about being unable to remove the pulldown for true 24p filmout...remember that? I'm confused about that. You can, can't you, load the 24p footage as 24p and work in a 24p timeline?

Scan the list of threads and you'll find that EDIUS does.

[Bill Pryor]

OK, so he was talking about the NLE he was using, I guess...I didn't get it that way; that's good. Presumably all the major ones will be able to handle the stuff once the camera is on the market.

[T.J. Williams]

1. If you come from a background shooting with the "new" dv type cameras then the controls Of the Z1U probably feel right. If like me, you previously shot with ENG style cameras then learning to reach for the right control is more difficult.
2. The Z1U has a remarkably bright and clear flip out. I can see the picture in bright sunlight against a glacier. Other flip outs are not so easy to see in bright conditions.
3. Cameras with "Normal" eng style lenses allow you to adjust them very naturally by gripping the rings of the lens to focus and change iris in the slightest increments. Trying to work to focus marks or make invisable iris changes is much more difficult with Z1U style cameras where you must interact with the lens thru motors.
4. Smaller chips probably mean more dead pixels, more visable lens abberations for the same quality lens, and certainly even more depth of field when there is already way tooo much.
5. We have shot a film on 1080I Converted it to 24/35mm film and it projected in a road show all over the country. The result was amazingly beautiful. 24p origination in my opinion is overrated. If you want the "look" you have it if you don't want it. Like in a fast pan, you still have it. and that cannot be removed.
All the best on choosing
TJ

[Colin Zhang]

[sorry for the bump; just couldnt resist adding my two cents]

I agree that the low light performance is a real drawback to this otherwise good camera. It is really hard to decide but it really depends on your specific needs. For example, I normally do the type of event footage (just got back from a trip to Inner Mongolia that included a bit of filming) where low light is an expected demand. However, I also need a good camera that is small enough to be easier carried around than the Z1 (eg the A1) but large and heavy enough to be easy to use. The problem with the A1 is that although it meets my first criterea, its just too "consumer-ish" to me, and kind of light for my liking. So, the V1 seems like the winner to me. Plus, its kind of cheap since I live in China it is only 25,000 yuan (over 10,000 yuan cheaper than the US price).

[Stephen Armour]

One more consideration on the V1 vs the Z1.

This may not matter to many, but to us it was important: I do not believe the Z1 has an HDMI port out. Since we were seeking the most bang and the best image for the buck, the direct uncompressed capture to an intermediate codec was very attractive. Though the Z1 has features we would have liked, that feature alone, plus the lower cost of the V1, swung the pendelum in it's favor.

We have not regretted chosing the V1 and would certainly do it again. If you know it's limitations and advantages, it is a very good cam with excellent output. Very good bang for the buck!

[Piotr Wozniacki]

Originally Posted by Stephen Armour

We have not regretted chosing the V1 and would certainly do it again. If you know it's limitations and advantages, it is a very good cam with excellent output. Very good bang for the buck!

And with the DR60 drive, it's even better - believe me. And as to the PQ, I'm currently cooperating with an Z1 owner; we're mixing our recordings happily on the timeline - but even though a casual viewer can't notice it in the final rendered movie, we both agree the PQ from my V1E is nicer resolution- and colour- wise than that of his Z1.