I tested the EX1 at two weddings recently plus did some side-by-side comparisons to an FX1 at home, and the EX1 is clearly better in low light in a way which will matter to wedding videographers. Whether it's enough better to justify the higher price compared to other HD cameras will be something we each have to assess for ourselves, with due consideration for working that cost into your business plan. But I'd say that any wedding videographer shooting in HD should take a look at the EX1 as a useful tool for dark churches and receptions, plus the image quality is excellent in other regards as well. Anyone who springs for at least one EX1 will be better off than competitors who don't, so a couple thousand extra (plus memory cards) may not be a bad investment in that regard.

Kevin, would you be willing to do a quick sensitivity (low light) comparion with the FX1?
Set both cameras at their lowest gain setting, match the overall exposure and record the f-stop for each camera.

Someone on another forum did a test comparing the EX1 to a PD-170 (the low light champ) and found them to be VERY CLOSE. They thought the EX1 may have had a VERY SLIGHT ADVANTAGE! They also felt the EX1 had LESS NOISE at +18dB gain.

The EX1 wast tested at 1080p30 1/60 shutter, F1.9, 0dB gain (and then +18).
Both cameras were pointed at the same image and was examined in the viewscreen (in which the 170 looked slightly better in low light) but video had reveled the EX1 was actually slightly better.

(not sure if this was off the card or HD-SDI out though)

Mind you, it's just one person's testing but I do think it's noteworthy. The person is a wedding videographer now moving into corporate work.

I don't have the EX1 available right now but I can tell you there's a qualitative difference between the two cameras in low light which may transcend simple technical comparisons. With the EX1 you get much better shadow detail than the FX1 can produce in dim lighting, even with both set to a similar exposure. On the other hand, the EX1 yields more obvious image noise at high gain than the FX1, so you can't push the EX1 as hard that way (which is okay given the greater inherent sensitivity). Bottom line is that the EX1 at 0-9db produces images more like the way things look to the human eye than the FX1 can produce at any setting in a dark room. I don't think numbers alone can express that.

hold yer horses
 

After reading thru 5 pages of testimony, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the new CMOS HDV camcorders coming from Sony that will address the low-light issues as well as record onto tape, hard drives, and memory cards simultaneously. Not surprisingly, the EX1 has been released before these wedding cams, perhaps coming in February in two sizes: a chopped off Z1 size and a shoulder mount that can take a three hour tape. These camcorders will solve the archive issues and injest issues, but with 1/3" chips will probably not be as sensitive as the EX with 1/2" chips. They will also have the ability to mount different lenses, which the EX cannot.

Sounds like Swiss Army knives for wedding pro's. There won't be any advantage in lower cost, however, with the shoulder mount cam going for about $10k. These cams will also be able to record in SD, which the EX cannot.

So maybe the EX is ahead of its time for events.

BTW, I don't think 1080p will last more than a few years. 3D and holographic projection are not too far off...

I like some of the features of the upcoming cameras but can't see paying the same price as an EX1 for something with a smaller sensor - and hence probably less low-light response. I'd say Sony has mixed up some of their features choices and relative pricing, but maybe the market will vote otherwise.

Given all the confusion involved in the current HD transition, I suspect it will be a long time before consumers are ready for anything else. If anything it will take at least another 5 years just to get HD delivery and displays in most homes, so allow a generation or so after that to move on to the next big thing.

It's actually a DTV transition. HD is just a byproduct of that.