V1 Effective Light loss over DVX100

[Stephen van Vuuren]

I'm musing buying a V1 to replace my trusty DVX100a and lacking the ability to try a V1 first here locally, I'm trying to guestimate possible light loss as I have a small and simple light kit that works well for my DVX but not sure if will hang with a V1 in equal conditions.

I'm considering that:

(1) Adam Wilt noted a 3 stops slower than DVX though it was pre-production model and no test images were provided. That's a pretty big step down and lot more light to add to a scene though I guess the 1/4" HD CMOS chips are to blame.
(2) However, if dynamic range (and shadow detail) are greater, perhaps more usable detail in shadows (as well as highlights)?
(3) Lower noise in blacks vs. DVX means more usable latitude when underexposed in low light?

Any thoughts or do I need to wait for side by side tests? I'm not so much interested in uber low light sensitivity (i.e. wedding/news footage) but shooting in low key lit scenes and getting good results (rich blacks, shadow detail with low noise) with my existing kit.

[C.S. Michael]

I'd like to hear an answer to this question also. If the V1 has an Achilles Heel, it might be low light performance. I'm looking forward to reading some first-hand impressions...trying to decide between a V1 and the Canon XHA1.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

The differences between the cams in low light is negligible. 1/4 or 1/3, the differences are miniscule. As said many times before, if you're shooting in very low light and expecting very clean images, 1/3 HD isn't for you, in any flavor. Sony has a rep for the cleanest images by far in low light; they still hold that rep, IMO. Even with +9dB gain, it's very clean in the V1. +12dB exhibits some grain, and past 12dB it becomes to noisy for my taste, but some folks have felt like it's very acceptable.

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

The differences between the cams in low light is negligible.

I believe you as you have a good eye but also trying to reconcile Adam's 3 stops slower to this. Basically if I have a scene with low light/lots of shadow with my DVX at say f4 that looks good (although DVX in cinegamma is a little noisy in blacks) but as at the limit of DVX before it get too noisy and loses detail, will the V1 require 3 times as much light or does it handle low light and noise better than DVX (in cinegamma mode)?

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

if you're shooting in very low light and expecting very clean images, 1/3 HD isn't for you, in any flavor.

I'm not looking for ultra clean (I started out shooting super8 and 16) but I just want pleasing images without having to drown a set in light. Basically ISO/ASA ratings though exact numbers.

Probably without a nice A/B test, it will be hard to figure out. But I'm asking anyway :)