HVR-V1U or HDR-FX1 at DVinfo.net

Arneil deVera · December 4th, 2006, 05:47 PM

My company was pretty much set on getting the HDR-FX1 for weddings, then the HVR-V1U came along.

I know the the HVR-V1U uses 1/4" CMOS and the HVR-FX1 uses 1/3" CCD.

Does anyone know which one performs better in low light conditions?

Leo Pepingco · December 4th, 2006, 06:10 PM

My money is on the FX1

All these new fangled whipper snapper cameras.

In a more serious note, I think that a 1/4 does not have the same kind of quality as a 1/3 chip. And if you look at the GL / XM cameras, the only reason why they are still around is because they have a friggin super leet, sweet, and hard to beat lens for the price range that compliments the 1/4 chips. And even then, the images are quite ordinary. (In my opinion.)

FX1, for the larger chips, and the more sturdy, larger body.

Arneil deVera · December 4th, 2006, 06:21 PM

Yah, I was under the impression that 1/3" chips do better in low light, but Sony seems to be hyping up the ClearVid Technology in the 1/4" chips saying it has better sensitivity.

The FX1 is rated at 3 lux and the VU1 is rated at 4 lux, but lux ratings are subjective. Does anyone have any real world experience comparing both low light performances in a setting similar to a wedding reception?

Robert Ducon · December 11th, 2006, 02:41 PM

It's all right here, one thread away people ;)

Wolfgang Winne has done all the work, and compared the two camearas in real conditions. You can see for yourself, and choose. Yes, the site is in German, but scroll halfway down, and click the links that correspond to images 31 though 38.

Personally, I like the V1/FX7 and I've used the FX1 a lot, but for low light, the FX1 may be your ticket. The FX7/V1, while smaller imagers than the FX1 - damn - what a great image! CMOS and a new codec engine make a huge difference!

Best of luck! And if you buy either one, let us know about your experiences!

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

Jerome Marot · December 11th, 2006, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arneil deVera

My company was pretty much set on getting the HDR-FX1 for weddings, then the HVR-V1U came along.

I know the the HVR-V1U uses 1/4" CMOS and the HVR-FX1 uses 1/3" CCD.

Does anyone know which one performs better in low light conditions?

I suggest borrowing the cameras from your dealer and doing low-light tests yourself. And while you are at it, try the Canon A1...

Paulo Teixeira · December 11th, 2006, 09:35 PM

If were comparing 1/3” CCDs to ¼” CCDs then that is a good difference but were comparing 1/3” CCDs to 1/4" CMOS imagers.

1 CMOS camcorders is proven to have better color reproduction than 1 CCD camcorders of the same size.

Based on these 2 camcorders, the V1u is the much better choice as far as features go and I would personally pick the V1u over the Z1u because of the 20X lens, it’s a lot lighter and it has 30p.

Heath McKnight · December 13th, 2006, 11:46 AM

V1u is the best. The 1/4" chips were built and placed in such a way that it's much like the 1/3" chips. Graeme Nattress was explaining it the other day. I'm gonna search for his post.

heath

Heath McKnight · December 13th, 2006, 11:50 AM

Update:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...t=80852&page=2

Graeme does a lot of explaining, as does Spot, on how things work, esp. sensor size.

heath

December 4th, 2006, 05:47 PM	#1
Arneil deVera Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 38	HVR-V1U or HDR-FX1 My company was pretty much set on getting the HDR-FX1 for weddings, then the HVR-V1U came along. I know the the HVR-V1U uses 1/4" CMOS and the HVR-FX1 uses 1/3" CCD. Does anyone know which one performs better in low light conditions? __________________ Monster Crayons

December 4th, 2006, 06:10 PM	#2
Leo Pepingco Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 275	My money is on the FX1 All these new fangled whipper snapper cameras. In a more serious note, I think that a 1/4 does not have the same kind of quality as a 1/3 chip. And if you look at the GL / XM cameras, the only reason why they are still around is because they have a friggin super leet, sweet, and hard to beat lens for the price range that compliments the 1/4 chips. And even then, the images are quite ordinary. (In my opinion.) FX1, for the larger chips, and the more sturdy, larger body. __________________ I told you to get an alabi

December 4th, 2006, 06:21 PM	#3
Arneil deVera Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 38	Yah, I was under the impression that 1/3" chips do better in low light, but Sony seems to be hyping up the ClearVid Technology in the 1/4" chips saying it has better sensitivity. The FX1 is rated at 3 lux and the VU1 is rated at 4 lux, but lux ratings are subjective. Does anyone have any real world experience comparing both low light performances in a setting similar to a wedding reception? __________________ Monster Crayons

December 11th, 2006, 09:35 PM	#6
Paulo Teixeira Trustee Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 1,773	If were comparing 1/3” CCDs to ¼” CCDs then that is a good difference but were comparing 1/3” CCDs to 1/4" CMOS imagers. 1 CMOS camcorders is proven to have better color reproduction than 1 CCD camcorders of the same size. Based on these 2 camcorders, the V1u is the much better choice as far as features go and I would personally pick the V1u over the Z1u because of the 20X lens, it’s a lot lighter and it has 30p. __________________ https://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoVi...esEtc/featured https://www.pond5.com/artist/paulot

December 13th, 2006, 11:46 AM	#7
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	V1u is the best. The 1/4" chips were built and placed in such a way that it's much like the 1/3" chips. Graeme Nattress was explaining it the other day. I'm gonna search for his post. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

December 11th, 2006, 02:41 PM	#4
Robert Ducon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Victoria BC Posts: 400	It's all right here, one thread away people ;) Wolfgang Winne has done all the work, and compared the two camearas in real conditions. You can see for yourself, and choose. Yes, the site is in German, but scroll halfway down, and click the links that correspond to images 31 though 38. Personally, I like the V1/FX7 and I've used the FX1 a lot, but for low light, the FX1 may be your ticket. The FX7/V1, while smaller imagers than the FX1 - damn - what a great image! CMOS and a new codec engine make a huge difference! Best of luck! And if you buy either one, let us know about your experiences! http://www.fxsupport.de/12.html

December 13th, 2006, 11:50 AM	#8
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Update: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...t=80852&page=2 Graeme does a lot of explaining, as does Spot, on how things work, esp. sensor size. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog