HVR Z5 exceptional ignore the rolling shutter malarky

Robin Burrows · December 25th, 2008, 08:44 PM

Yes Tom, I am aware that it does this but there are issues with it and for what I want which is underwater or confined space use trying to get nano flash units in a housing or attached to the camera and then get cheap enough and large enough flash to record for hours or weeks is a no go at the moment. This is a shame as underwater is where the colour space would make the most difference! for Full NAT Geo or BBC filming at the moment the only options are the FW 900 or 700 type cameras which you need a mortgage for the camera, lens and housing, lights and lens.
For shoots abroad where your in jungle or out of the way. To be able to send HDV tapes back to base to be rolled, pulled and edited as you go its very easy to copy the tape, keep one in sealed bag and post the other back to base. Until full HD gets like this It wont be feasible for most the sort of stuff I do.

With reference to the previous comment on rolling shutter and the SR 12 most of these cameras not only scan lines slower from the CMOS block (hence show movement worse) they do one line or a few lines at a time hence if you move fast, in the time it takes to scan, while you have panned across your fence post the camera has turned it into a set of stairs with each step one line up. The newer more expensive cameras scan faster so you have to pan faster to move it enough for each line to saw tooth but also handle more than one or many lines at once so you get a block of straight then a step then a block of straight so its not so exaggerated. Also some camera manufacturers put in a false motion blur so that if you pan it too fast you don't see the skew more a blurry picture.

I do agree that most viewers who are not camera crew will not notice the skew, wobble, or flash effects. As I said you need to weight it up from the film and users point of view. Unfortunately for professionals you may find the company contracting you out will not buy the footage if they notice it and do not like it!

As i mentioned before you can get global and rolling shutters on all types of sensor with big enough processing and storage but if you had a global shutter and the flashes went of it would wipe out your frame not just a few lines. Is this worse?

This is turning into a talk on rolling shutter in general now though and started off being a Z5 talk with a bit on its heavily reduced rolling shutter effects from the V1 and SR12. What I was getting at was I do like the Z5 and newer cameras improvements in rolling shutter, wobble and light handling especially over the V1 and its ability to film high intensity light sources its amazing. Try filming a sunset or sun rise, or the sun glinting or glaring off the sea. A reflection of someone or something in a window or mirror or car headlights coming towards you. CMOS does do a very good job of this. No more pixell bleed, blooming and vertical bars from point light sources. They were controllable before if you know how and could get enough light to adjust shutter and aperture but never went away unless you camera cost the earth and was top of the range. Now anyone can do it. with or without general ambient light, ND filters and lots of playing.

Ill enjoy the day when the EX1, Z5 and Z7 combine with newer processing, cheap large capacity solid state memory and large chips. Ill be in my element on land and underwater.
Maybe 4 years time....

Tom Roper · December 26th, 2008, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin Burrows

As you both mentioned and at the top of the post what I discussed was the amazing resolution and quality of the new screen and viewfinder on the Z5. Its almost like there is a hole through the plastic and its not an LCD! It is an OLED screen though which has won many awards.

Apparently this information does not check out. If you feel I am in error perhaps you should post a link to your source. I am told the viewfinder is LCD.

Jeff Harper · December 26th, 2008, 02:19 PM

It would appear you are correct Tom. From the Sony website:

Display
LCD Screen : 3.2" wide Xtra Fine LCD™ display1 (921k pixels)

Viewfinder : 0.45" Xtra Fine (16:9) Wide LCD1 (1,227k pixels)

Ken Ross · December 26th, 2008, 02:30 PM

I was kind of thinking he meant "OLED-Like"? Regardless, the resolution of the viewfinder is extraordinary in this price class. I've never seen anything close. Jeff, does it hit you when you use the viewfinder...more rez than you've seen before?

Jeff Harper · December 26th, 2008, 04:54 PM

Oh yeah. You've heard me complain about some things with the cam.

However, on the subject of the viewfinder: I was stunned. It really is WYSIWYG. Gorgeous. Beautiful. It's fantastic. It's high rez.

If you're looking for a cam that gives you exactly what you see in the LCD, this is it.

As much as I loved the VX2100, which I have sold, BTW, the viewfinder left much to be desired. The good thing is the footage always looked better than I expected, but the uncertainty drove me crazy.

Ken Ross · December 26th, 2008, 05:56 PM

Nice to hear Jeff. That's so important for me and yes, I too have the VX2100 and I know exactly what you mean. You really can't judge from the 2100's viewfinder what the footage will actually look like. The other thing I don't like about it is the fact if you're just slightly off-axis, the image becomes distorted. I never had that with the VX2000. Go figure.

Jeff Harper · December 27th, 2008, 12:41 AM

I agree, I found I liked the viewfinder better on my PD150. I actually liked the images from my PD150 better also, but that doesn't even make sense, I know. I kept one PD150 just because I like it so much.

Uli Mors · December 27th, 2008, 02:29 AM

I am considering a Z1 or Z7 or Z5 at the moment , too.

I am a XDCAM HD shooter and do a lot of weddings too. For receiption and dancing I´d like to have something HD-like for handheld work. Up to now I used a vx2000 - perfect for this kind of work - but not HD of course.

I have access to EX1 , Z7 and FX1 - so I did some test shootings at some weddings end of this year.

a) I´d prefer a CCD over CMOS - flashlights look horrible , especially if you slow down footage in post... All other footage looks fine.

b) I´d prefer CMOS over CCD - at the moment , Z5 & CO. seem to be better in lowlight (rarely lit dancing etc.)

c) size & weight: EX1 is a wonderful camera - but too heavy for unintrusive handheld work, thats why I consider to go for Z model

d) Z1 runs out, prices are considerably cheaper now (last weeks to buy one!)

e) Z7: I shot some great moments in virtually dark situations (candle lit...) and was impressed - couldnt make such shots with my xdcam hd

f) I am not sure, but probably dont need interchangable lenses - so my choice could be Z5. In a few weeks I can work with a Z5, need to know how it feels and how "manually" the lens operates.

In the end I will have to decide if I go for a cheaper "old" Z1 or with a new "rolling shutter" Z5.

uli

Ken Ross · December 27th, 2008, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I agree, I found I liked the viewfinder better on my PD150. I actually liked the images from my PD150 better also, but that doesn't even make sense, I know. I kept one PD150 just because I like it so much.

Jeff, I think the PD150/VX2000 had warmer, almost more inviting images. The PD170/2100 are cooler. I initially didn't like it either, but now when I look at my VX2000 (still have it), the image looks too warm. I guess you just acclomate to what you've got. But I suspect the 2100 is more accurate than the 2000/150.

Ken Ross · December 27th, 2008, 07:55 AM

Uli, in looking at several Vimeo projects from the HDR-FX1000, I'm of the opinion that although the flash impact on rolling shutter isn't wonderful, it can be worked around. My wife was totally unaware of the effects until I pointed them out...she just thought a flash had gone off and the picture was momentarily effected just as would a CCD. I think her reaction would be very typical of a bride or other customer.

Of course if you decide to use slow motion in post while the flash is going off and the result is particularly bad, that might not be a great editing decision. It depends on how bad the effect is and how important the moment is.

But most of the clips I saw were not nearly so bad as flashes went off. As I said in another thread, let's face it, even with CCD the impact of flash photography is not wonderful. Having now seen the low light capability of the Z5/1000 with their CMOS sensors, I really think that needs to be factored in relative to the noisier imagery of CCDs under the same lighting conditions.

You pick your poison.

Tom Hardwick · December 27th, 2008, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin Burrows

have just received my HVR Z5E and woudl like to comment on what a great camera it is.Firstly, rolling shutter? Load of rubbish.Robin

Couldn't agree more Robin. I too find the rolling shutter and its associated 'flash-hash' a real early technology foible that I don't want to buy into until it's sorted. I'll stay with my Z1 until that happens, as undoubtedly it will.

tom.

Ken Ross · December 27th, 2008, 11:38 AM

Well it turns out that Robin's comment about the OLED in the Z5's viewfinder may not be entirely inaccurate. I pulled this from the Z5 pdf document and it's obvious there IS something different about this viewfinder other than its high resolution:

"The 0.45 inch-type XtraFine EVF (Electronic View
Finder) has approximately 1,227,000 pixels (852x3
[RGB]x480). This device has three independent
LEDs for Red, Green, and Blue colors. This
technology allows users to monitor objects with
remarkable color reproduction accuracy and high
resolution*9. The EVF has a selectable display
mode between Color or Black and White. The
XtraFine EVF displays virtually 100% of the picture
area at a color temperature of approximately
6500K."

Tom Roper · December 27th, 2008, 04:05 PM

I saw that yesterday Ken, however in two other places in the same .pdf the viewfinder it is referred to as LCD. It was Alister Chapman, a very respected and in-the-know DVInfo member who called me out on the claim I made about it being OLED, trusting what Robin had said. I even apologized for not independently checking it out before posting the misinformation.

But even so, there is some doubt I have now about it NOT being LED, since as you noted I have never seen a LCD viewfinder's stated resolution to include using all the RGB primary color pixel points in the resolution count. The resolved image size is 408,960, not 1,226,880. To do so makes about as much sense as blinking three times and tripling the number. But there is another disclaimer in there, something about seeing the RGB primaries under fast panning, which does not describe a phenomenon I've heard about for LCD. That too makes me think it actually could be LED or even OLED.

Even at 408,960, that's way better than my EX1 viewfinder which is (I can assure you, LCD) something over 250,000.

So maybe if Robin really knows something about this, he will post a link to an article, data sheet, blog or whatever that said it used OLED in the viewfinder, or point us to those awards he said it has won.

Ken Ross · December 27th, 2008, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

But there is another disclaimer in there, something about seeing the RGB primaries under fast panning, which does not describe a phenomenon I've heard about for LCD. That too makes me think it actually could be LED or even OLED.

Even at 408,960, that's way better than my EX1 viewfinder which is (I can assure you, LCD) something over 250,000.

Tom, that caught my eye too! I've never seen any LCD viewfinder exhibit the effect that Sony talks about. So it does make me think there is something unique here. On the other hand, if it were OLED why not say so? Wouldn't that be yet another selling point if true?

So I think we agree it's not OLED, but it may not be a 'classic' LCD. If you recall, Sony came out with an LED backlighted XBR LCD display a few years ago. It was, for the time, by far the most expensive LCD ever made. Instead of convention backlighting, they introduced LEDs instead. It was said to provide greater color accuracy. Samsung continued that trend with their LED 'zoned' displays.

So perhaps it is an LCD but with LED backlighting? To me that might make more sense.

Robin Burrows · December 27th, 2008, 09:31 PM

Well it looks like I am wrong, and if so I will apologize but due to the info in the book and a Sony OLED display winning awards in the same doc, I got confused.

It is stunningly good yes we all agree on that, I was of the oppinion that the viewfinder was fine pitch LCD and the flip screen OLED but that is a minor fallacy not intended to confuse.

Both the EX! and Z5 and Z7 all have a way to go to get where we want them to, Rolling shutter is a pile of rubbish but if you know how to use your tools it is perfectly acceptable.

Ill ask Sony about the LCD screen on Monday see if I can get some answers.

I dont test viewfinders at work only the cam resolution and light sensitivity plus customer requested evaluations. My own fun work is wildlife or wrecks underwater with occasional surface wildlife or documentaries. Ive submitted Z5 footage to the BBC for ENG use and they have not returned it.

Its a good camera with issues like any other. I just explain to my customers how they can use it, if it works for their requirement and how to get around issues. Its not my main field though and there are other guys at work who do it day in day out. I specialize in other technologies and kit but we have to be able to adapt.

I was in the post headings trying to dispell the myths floating around that all Sony CMOS cameras are unuseable. If you want to see good films, look on Phil Blooms website using the EX1, it uses mostly the same processing that the Z5 and 7 use yet he has produced world renowned films irrespective of rolling shutter, skew and wobble.
Many people do not know what it is and do need to be educated but at the same time we are scaring them away making it out to be more than it is! The older CMOS cameras were horrendous but they have improved and we cant tar the new ones with the old brush.
Remember when CCD was being reviewed years ago and everyone complained about CCD pixel bleeding on high contrast point light sources! All kit has problems its how you use it that matters.

The Z5 and z7 and even probably!!!! the EX1 viewfinders are all RGB where as the flip screens are LCD finepitch screens. Its the viewfinder which translates to RGB dots on panning.

Ill try not to be wrong in future but irrespective Its a stunningly good viewfinder and flip screen and whatever technology it uses it does a job and well too.

I have some documentation on the screens here somewhere and when I find it Ill post a description and reason for the RGB response in the flip screen. I wont commit anymore until I know since you guys seem intent on shooting me down inflames :-)
It doesn't really matter if its OLED or not so long as it does what it says on the tin does it!

My comments were it was good...

Just finding one doc now it says nowhere that the EVF or electronic viewfinder is LCD it only says the flip screen is XFP LCD!
Sony also says :

The 0.45 inch 1.1cm type XtraFine EVF (Electronic View Finder) has approximately 1,227,000 pixels (852x3[RGB]x480). This device has three independent LEDs for Red, Green, and Blue colours. This technology allows users to monitor objects with remarkable colour reproduction accuracy and high resolution

RE OLED, I can tell you how it works but I dont know if they use it...

This link shows all stuff about Sony using OLED and winning awards at NAB and IBC but they are low resolution 11" units for accurate colour reproduction on the back of HD broadcast cams compared to EFP LCDS.

OLED viewfinder - Google Search
Ill talk to the Sony product manager when I get a chance but Im away for two weeks from Monday.

December 25th, 2008, 08:44 PM	#16
Robin Burrows New Boot Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Worcestershire England Posts: 22	4:2:2 and SR12 rolling shutter Yes Tom, I am aware that it does this but there are issues with it and for what I want which is underwater or confined space use trying to get nano flash units in a housing or attached to the camera and then get cheap enough and large enough flash to record for hours or weeks is a no go at the moment. This is a shame as underwater is where the colour space would make the most difference! for Full NAT Geo or BBC filming at the moment the only options are the FW 900 or 700 type cameras which you need a mortgage for the camera, lens and housing, lights and lens. For shoots abroad where your in jungle or out of the way. To be able to send HDV tapes back to base to be rolled, pulled and edited as you go its very easy to copy the tape, keep one in sealed bag and post the other back to base. Until full HD gets like this It wont be feasible for most the sort of stuff I do. With reference to the previous comment on rolling shutter and the SR 12 most of these cameras not only scan lines slower from the CMOS block (hence show movement worse) they do one line or a few lines at a time hence if you move fast, in the time it takes to scan, while you have panned across your fence post the camera has turned it into a set of stairs with each step one line up. The newer more expensive cameras scan faster so you have to pan faster to move it enough for each line to saw tooth but also handle more than one or many lines at once so you get a block of straight then a step then a block of straight so its not so exaggerated. Also some camera manufacturers put in a false motion blur so that if you pan it too fast you don't see the skew more a blurry picture. I do agree that most viewers who are not camera crew will not notice the skew, wobble, or flash effects. As I said you need to weight it up from the film and users point of view. Unfortunately for professionals you may find the company contracting you out will not buy the footage if they notice it and do not like it! As i mentioned before you can get global and rolling shutters on all types of sensor with big enough processing and storage but if you had a global shutter and the flashes went of it would wipe out your frame not just a few lines. Is this worse? This is turning into a talk on rolling shutter in general now though and started off being a Z5 talk with a bit on its heavily reduced rolling shutter effects from the V1 and SR12. What I was getting at was I do like the Z5 and newer cameras improvements in rolling shutter, wobble and light handling especially over the V1 and its ability to film high intensity light sources its amazing. Try filming a sunset or sun rise, or the sun glinting or glaring off the sea. A reflection of someone or something in a window or mirror or car headlights coming towards you. CMOS does do a very good job of this. No more pixell bleed, blooming and vertical bars from point light sources. They were controllable before if you know how and could get enough light to adjust shutter and aperture but never went away unless you camera cost the earth and was top of the range. Now anyone can do it. with or without general ambient light, ND filters and lots of playing. Ill enjoy the day when the EX1, Z5 and Z7 combine with newer processing, cheap large capacity solid state memory and large chips. Ill be in my element on land and underwater. Maybe 4 years time....

December 27th, 2008, 09:31 PM	#30
Robin Burrows New Boot Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Worcestershire England Posts: 22	Viewfinder Well it looks like I am wrong, and if so I will apologize but due to the info in the book and a Sony OLED display winning awards in the same doc, I got confused. It is stunningly good yes we all agree on that, I was of the oppinion that the viewfinder was fine pitch LCD and the flip screen OLED but that is a minor fallacy not intended to confuse. Both the EX! and Z5 and Z7 all have a way to go to get where we want them to, Rolling shutter is a pile of rubbish but if you know how to use your tools it is perfectly acceptable. Ill ask Sony about the LCD screen on Monday see if I can get some answers. I dont test viewfinders at work only the cam resolution and light sensitivity plus customer requested evaluations. My own fun work is wildlife or wrecks underwater with occasional surface wildlife or documentaries. Ive submitted Z5 footage to the BBC for ENG use and they have not returned it. Its a good camera with issues like any other. I just explain to my customers how they can use it, if it works for their requirement and how to get around issues. Its not my main field though and there are other guys at work who do it day in day out. I specialize in other technologies and kit but we have to be able to adapt. I was in the post headings trying to dispell the myths floating around that all Sony CMOS cameras are unuseable. If you want to see good films, look on Phil Blooms website using the EX1, it uses mostly the same processing that the Z5 and 7 use yet he has produced world renowned films irrespective of rolling shutter, skew and wobble. Many people do not know what it is and do need to be educated but at the same time we are scaring them away making it out to be more than it is! The older CMOS cameras were horrendous but they have improved and we cant tar the new ones with the old brush. Remember when CCD was being reviewed years ago and everyone complained about CCD pixel bleeding on high contrast point light sources! All kit has problems its how you use it that matters. The Z5 and z7 and even probably!!!! the EX1 viewfinders are all RGB where as the flip screens are LCD finepitch screens. Its the viewfinder which translates to RGB dots on panning. Ill try not to be wrong in future but irrespective Its a stunningly good viewfinder and flip screen and whatever technology it uses it does a job and well too. I have some documentation on the screens here somewhere and when I find it Ill post a description and reason for the RGB response in the flip screen. I wont commit anymore until I know since you guys seem intent on shooting me down inflames :-) It doesn't really matter if its OLED or not so long as it does what it says on the tin does it! My comments were it was good... Just finding one doc now it says nowhere that the EVF or electronic viewfinder is LCD it only says the flip screen is XFP LCD! Sony also says : The 0.45 inch 1.1cm type XtraFine EVF (Electronic View Finder) has approximately 1,227,000 pixels (852x3[RGB]x480). This device has three independent LEDs for Red, Green, and Blue colours. This technology allows users to monitor objects with remarkable colour reproduction accuracy and high resolution RE OLED, I can tell you how it works but I dont know if they use it... This link shows all stuff about Sony using OLED and winning awards at NAB and IBC but they are low resolution 11" units for accurate colour reproduction on the back of HD broadcast cams compared to EFP LCDS. OLED viewfinder - Google Search Ill talk to the Sony product manager when I get a chance but Im away for two weeks from Monday.

December 26th, 2008, 02:19 PM	#18
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	It would appear you are correct Tom. From the Sony website: Display LCD Screen : 3.2" wide Xtra Fine LCD™ display1 (921k pixels) Viewfinder : 0.45" Xtra Fine (16:9) Wide LCD1 (1,227k pixels)

December 26th, 2008, 02:30 PM	#19
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	I was kind of thinking he meant "OLED-Like"? Regardless, the resolution of the viewfinder is extraordinary in this price class. I've never seen anything close. Jeff, does it hit you when you use the viewfinder...more rez than you've seen before?

December 26th, 2008, 04:54 PM	#20
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Oh yeah. You've heard me complain about some things with the cam. However, on the subject of the viewfinder: I was stunned. It really is WYSIWYG. Gorgeous. Beautiful. It's fantastic. It's high rez. If you're looking for a cam that gives you exactly what you see in the LCD, this is it. As much as I loved the VX2100, which I have sold, BTW, the viewfinder left much to be desired. The good thing is the footage always looked better than I expected, but the uncertainty drove me crazy.

December 26th, 2008, 05:56 PM	#21
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	Nice to hear Jeff. That's so important for me and yes, I too have the VX2100 and I know exactly what you mean. You really can't judge from the 2100's viewfinder what the footage will actually look like. The other thing I don't like about it is the fact if you're just slightly off-axis, the image becomes distorted. I never had that with the VX2000. Go figure.

December 27th, 2008, 12:41 AM	#22
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	I agree, I found I liked the viewfinder better on my PD150. I actually liked the images from my PD150 better also, but that doesn't even make sense, I know. I kept one PD150 just because I like it so much.

December 27th, 2008, 02:29 AM	#23
Uli Mors Major Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Germany Posts: 565	I am considering a Z1 or Z7 or Z5 at the moment , too. I am a XDCAM HD shooter and do a lot of weddings too. For receiption and dancing I´d like to have something HD-like for handheld work. Up to now I used a vx2000 - perfect for this kind of work - but not HD of course. I have access to EX1 , Z7 and FX1 - so I did some test shootings at some weddings end of this year. a) I´d prefer a CCD over CMOS - flashlights look horrible , especially if you slow down footage in post... All other footage looks fine. b) I´d prefer CMOS over CCD - at the moment , Z5 & CO. seem to be better in lowlight (rarely lit dancing etc.) c) size & weight: EX1 is a wonderful camera - but too heavy for unintrusive handheld work, thats why I consider to go for Z model d) Z1 runs out, prices are considerably cheaper now (last weeks to buy one!) e) Z7: I shot some great moments in virtually dark situations (candle lit...) and was impressed - couldnt make such shots with my xdcam hd f) I am not sure, but probably dont need interchangable lenses - so my choice could be Z5. In a few weeks I can work with a Z5, need to know how it feels and how "manually" the lens operates. In the end I will have to decide if I go for a cheaper "old" Z1 or with a new "rolling shutter" Z5. uli

December 27th, 2008, 07:55 AM	#25
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	Uli, in looking at several Vimeo projects from the HDR-FX1000, I'm of the opinion that although the flash impact on rolling shutter isn't wonderful, it can be worked around. My wife was totally unaware of the effects until I pointed them out...she just thought a flash had gone off and the picture was momentarily effected just as would a CCD. I think her reaction would be very typical of a bride or other customer. Of course if you decide to use slow motion in post while the flash is going off and the result is particularly bad, that might not be a great editing decision. It depends on how bad the effect is and how important the moment is. But most of the clips I saw were not nearly so bad as flashes went off. As I said in another thread, let's face it, even with CCD the impact of flash photography is not wonderful. Having now seen the low light capability of the Z5/1000 with their CMOS sensors, I really think that needs to be factored in relative to the noisier imagery of CCDs under the same lighting conditions. You pick your poison.

December 27th, 2008, 11:38 AM	#27
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	Well it turns out that Robin's comment about the OLED in the Z5's viewfinder may not be entirely inaccurate. I pulled this from the Z5 pdf document and it's obvious there IS something different about this viewfinder other than its high resolution: "The 0.45 inch-type XtraFine EVF (Electronic View Finder) has approximately 1,227,000 pixels (852x3 [RGB]x480). This device has three independent LEDs for Red, Green, and Blue colors. This technology allows users to monitor objects with remarkable color reproduction accuracy and high resolution*9. The EVF has a selectable display mode between Color or Black and White. The XtraFine EVF displays virtually 100% of the picture area at a color temperature of approximately 6500K."

December 27th, 2008, 04:05 PM	#28
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	I saw that yesterday Ken, however in two other places in the same .pdf the viewfinder it is referred to as LCD. It was Alister Chapman, a very respected and in-the-know DVInfo member who called me out on the claim I made about it being OLED, trusting what Robin had said. I even apologized for not independently checking it out before posting the misinformation. But even so, there is some doubt I have now about it NOT being LED, since as you noted I have never seen a LCD viewfinder's stated resolution to include using all the RGB primary color pixel points in the resolution count. The resolved image size is 408,960, not 1,226,880. To do so makes about as much sense as blinking three times and tripling the number. But there is another disclaimer in there, something about seeing the RGB primaries under fast panning, which does not describe a phenomenon I've heard about for LCD. That too makes me think it actually could be LED or even OLED. Even at 408,960, that's way better than my EX1 viewfinder which is (I can assure you, LCD) something over 250,000. So maybe if Robin really knows something about this, he will post a link to an article, data sheet, blog or whatever that said it used OLED in the viewfinder, or point us to those awards he said it has won.