V1 25p issues (combined threads)

[Simon Wyndham]

Do you have a direct link to the files?

[Tony Tremble]

Simon check out my previous post. I've put managed to upload some representative sections.

Cheers

[Simon Wyndham]

Glancing at those two images, you are indeed seeing the same problem that I had on the camera I used.

Hmm. This does not bode well at all!

[Stuart Brontman]

I saw footage from the V1U at DV Expo a few weeks ago. Granted, Sony put their best foot forward, but what I saw on screen was GREAT looking progressive footage and muddy, soft looking interlaced. They had a clip with a fashion model shot in 24p that was incredibly sharp and detailed. They also showed footage of flowers in a field - shot interlaced. The colors looked nice, but the image seemed soft to me. Others in attendance thought the same. I never was able to determine how they were recording/showing this footage on the high end monitor.

I agree that your posted images show a real decline in image quality with progressive. Very interesting and very confusing.

I hope the next couple of weeks produce a bunch of samples from early buyers of this camera. Then we'll know what's going on here...

[Thomas Smet]

Originally Posted by Stuart Brontman

I saw footage from the V1U at DV Expo a few weeks ago. Granted, Sony put their best foot forward, but what I saw on screen was GREAT looking progressive footage and muddy, soft looking interlaced. They had a clip with a fashion model shot in 24p that was incredibly sharp and detailed. They also showed footage of flowers in a field - shot interlaced. The colors looked nice, but the image seemed soft to me. Others in attendance thought the same. I never was able to determine how they were recording/showing this footage on the high end monitor.

I agree that your posted images show a real decline in image quality with progressive. Very interesting and very confusing.

I hope the next couple of weeks produce a bunch of samples from early buyers of this camera. Then we'll know what's going on here...

I'm not sure if the FX7 and the V1 use anything different or not but I felt the exact same way about the footage posted from the FX7. I thought it looked much much better then FX1 footage but still had an odd soft muddy look to it. I had hoped that perhaps there was some major difference between the FX7 and the V1 so I am waiting to see what the V1 actually looks like but now your post has me thinking. I still think the V1/FX7 look nice but I think it is lacking in fine details in the distance. For example some of the shots from the FX7 the trees in the distance look a little fuzzy to me. I have so far seen this overall look from all the FX7 shots. My concern isn't so much about resolution because I could care less about resolution but about the overall muddy look.

I have viewed the footage on 3 different computer monitors and exported the footage to HDV tape and watched it on my HDTV as well compared to HDV clips from other cameras.

I also hope some actual footage from the V1 can clear up some of this.

[Ken Ross]

Tom, I'm assuming your talking about progressive mode in the FX7? I never explored that with the FX7 I borrowed from my friend, but I will say the normal interlaced footage, viewed on a 50" Fujitsu plasma, was cuttingly sharp. I guess since I had no interest in the progressive mode, I never explored it.

[Thomas Smet]

The FX7 does not have a progressive mode.

I am talking about many of the samples that were done with the FX7 as interlaced clips compared to the FX1 clips. Yes they looked much sharper then anything SONY has even done but details in the distance had a certain fuzzy look to them. It is really hard to explain and is more of how I view images then anything that could be used by other people. Again it was is no way to say the images were bad, just that I'm not really sure if I like them yet. Many people on here may love the images but I'm not sure if they fit my style.

[Stuart Brontman]

The fact that interlaced footage looked really sharp on a 50" plasma seems even more confusing, given the muddiness Tom and I saw. Perhaps these early units (including those at DV Expo) are truly that - early units with inconsistencies. All I know is based on the visual evidence of the V1U at DV Expo, I would not buy one for interlaced work. And Tom - I agree - footage showed to us of the V1U in a park showed long focal length shots of trees and the lake. I thought the detail was pretty poor. Others did as well. Not scientific, but certainly noteworthy.

It's the same old story - wait until full production units start making their way into the public. Based on the 25p results that started this thread, even that may not answer our questions until enough units are out there. Was/is this unit a lemon? Is it indicative of the real, final camera. I sure hope not.

[Ken Ross]

Wow, that's interesting. The only thing I can compare it to is the footage from the Canon HV10. The FX7 shows all the detail and resolution that is evident in the HV10 footage and the HV10 has been praised for its very high resolution with its 1920X1080 CMOS sensor. My friend's FX7 was just purchased at B&H photo, so its certainly a firm production unit.

You know as I write this I'm thinking about the clips I downloaded from that German site. I put those m2t clips in my editing program and back out to tape. I was then able to play those clips on my HV10 out to my plasma. Those clips were NOT sharp and were very unimpressive. In fact I believe I commented on just that in another thread. Both the FX1 and the FX7 looked pretty poor to me on that site and I mentioned how I'd never buy a camera who's footage looked like that! I even went on to say that my FX1 was far sharper than the FX1 clips he posted.

I can tell you with 100% certainty, my buddy's FX7 does not begin to look like the clips posted on that site. It is razor sharp with plenty of detail, right out to the horizon. I've raved about the HV10 and its fantastic resolution, and I believe the FX7 very well matches it. :)

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Stuart Brontman

I saw footage from the V1U at DV Expo a few weeks ago. Granted, Sony put their best foot forward, but what I saw on screen was GREAT looking progressive footage and muddy, soft looking interlaced. They had a clip with a fashion model shot in 24p that was incredibly sharp and detailed. They also showed footage of flowers in a field - shot interlaced. The colors looked nice, but the image seemed soft to me. Others in attendance thought the same. I never was able to determine how they were recording/showing this footage on the high end monitor.

I agree that your posted images show a real decline in image quality with progressive. Very interesting and very confusing.

The funny thing about this is that I was under the impression the controvery on 'softness' was surrounding only the progessive mode and NOT the interlaced. I don't recall which site mentioned (and posted clips) of how sharp the interlaced footage was, but when he went in to progressive mode it softened. It was blamed on pre-production issues.

Here's another thought though highly unlikely: Could there be some difference in the hybrid nature of the V1 with it's combo progressive/interlaced capabilities vs the FX7 with only interlaced. I just can't imagine what's going on given the extremely high level of detail the FX7 I saw is producing.

[Zsolt Gordos]

Just ordered one... Why would it be any different from the ones Simon and Tony have?
I have been hesitating for long between HVX and V1 - praying now for not making big mistake.

Any idea what if all the copies have the same problem? Shall I return the cam to Sony or the shop?

Thanks

[Ken Ross]

I don't believe that either Simon or Tony 'have' the FX7/V1, they've simply used one at shows. Those could have been pre-production models. Trust me, the production model FX7 I used yesterday & today has no such interlaced issues. Keep in mind that I DID see those issues with the clips posted on the German site that came from these cameras, so I know what Tony & Simon are talking about. My friend's unit is simply razor sharp and looks nothing like the clips posted on the German site, no ands, ifs or buts. If the camera was only capable of those posted clips, I wouldn't consider it for a second. As I mentioned, the FX1 I had owned produced far sharper clips than those posted on the German site. I have no idea why this should be.

[Thomas Smet]

Ken you saw a NTSC model while so far most of the clips and reviews that have been so so were for PAL models. Could the PAL version be the only camera that seems to suffer from this issue since the NTSC users on here swear it looks great? I have yet to see any decent NTSC footage from this camera.

By the way I thought the V1 that TONY has is a production model that he actually bought from a store and not a pre-production model. I think those FX1/FX7 clips were also from a store bought final model of the FX7.

I hope to see some better footage soon.

[Ron Chau]

Here is a raw clip shot with my FX7. I was playing around with the picture profiles boosting the color and sharpness.

I've posted samples before, most were zoomed in closeups. This is full wide angle. Hope this helps.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=W5HS2JEA

[Heath McKnight]

I can't comment on the V1e, but the pre-production model of the V1u had great 60i, 30p and 24p images, under the best, good, fair and worst conditions.

heath