HV10 has a better picture than the FX1 !

[Mark Hoff]

I always like to see the comparisons between the consumer grade cams and the pro level equipment. It gives people a good idea of just how good a picture quality they can get out of a consumer cam.

That being said, the pro equipment gives you something the majority of consumer cams doesn't. Control. Being a Pro this can be useful and shouldn't be overlooked. This is what it appears they are paying the big bucks for. I'd also suspect durability and equipment maintainablity would play a factor in the equation.

Finally, I think the biggest gap between the Pro and Consumer models that I would like to see filled is low light capability. The pro cams just kill the consumer stuff in this area. It's gotten better in recent years, but this is the capability I long for in a consumer cam.

What good is it if the camera produces gorgeous outdoor video if you're using it 60 to 90% indoors? I find it interesting that most video I take and watch is under these "low" light conditions.

I'd like to see comparisons between FX1 and HV10 under low light conditions.

Mike

[Lee Wilson]

Originally Posted by Mark Hoff

I'd like to see comparisons between FX1 and HV10 under low light conditions.

Mike

Try the third link in my original post in this thread, the FX-1 wins in low light situations.

[Steve Nunez]

The same comparisons and observations are valid in the digital photography realm. Consumer cameras are just a hair under what the pro cameras are able to produce. Canon is arguably the leader in this arena as well and my consumer grade EOS Rebel XT ($799 w/lens) when used with the "RAW" format produces images that are indistinguishable from my Canon EOS Mark II N ($3999 NO lens) using it's "RAW" format! While it's true the "pro" camera shoots faster, faster AF etc.....the end results are virtually identical!

The line between "consumer" and professional" blurs exponentially with each model released. But there's no argument a consumer grade camera/camcorder in the right hands will/can produce "professional" results.

[Stefan Hartmann]

Originally Posted by Lee Wilson

The first linked picture > [url]



Both cameras were on full default auto and stuck on a tripod, the only exception was an ND filter on the FX-1 to match the exposure to the HV10.

.

This is NOT a valid comparison, cause you used the ND filter on the Sony !

Please do it again without the ND filter !
Then we can decide.
ND filters are always bad for image quality,
cause it is another piece of glas, better use lower ISO setting then,
if the picture is too bright !

[Ken Hodson]

A ND filter isn't going to produce any noticable image softening due to its glass alone. If the ND filtration was so extreem as to drop the F-stop out of the sweet spot for the lens, it can result in a softer image.
Do the Sony cams have ISO settings?

[Max Morris]

I have a XL-H1 and I just recently purchased a HV10 3 weeks ago to use as a deck for the H1, since there isn't an affordable deck that will playback 24 and 30f frame rates. Which I think is silly, why doesn't Canon make a deck? I guess they want you to wear out your camera so you can buy more ;)

I have been using the HV10 as a POV camera and I will have to say I am very impressed with the images on this camera, they match up with the H1 very nicely. The H1 has an amazing picture, in my opinion the best in its class.

One of my gripes is: When I am playing back the images for capture in my NLE system I cannot get the second track of audio to play through the Firewire. I am capturing with a Matrox Axio setup and have done every possible way to capture that second track, well everything I can think of :)

I am not the brightest light in the lighting department at Home Depot either.