Is the V1 higher rez than Z1?
 

Ok, i know that the Z1 has 1/3" chips and the V1 has 1/4" chips...that aside, a test claimed that the V1 resolves 800tv lines. I'm not sure what the Z1 resolves? I know that cameras shouldn't be compared based on shooting charts but....has anyone tested these two cameras for a comparison? I am between these two cameras, perhaps waiting until next month will provide more answers.

V1 is better
 

I've watched 1920x1080 test video of a FX7/V1 and I have hundreds of hours of FX1/Z1U footage, and the FX7 is *much* less pixelated and of better image quality than the FX1/Z1U. If you look at still frames (or video) you'd want the V1/FX7 as your camera!!

I recommend - stay away from the Z1U and go for the V1 any day, to anyone. The resolution is simply sharper and more pleasing to look at.

My Z1U footage, while HD, is blurry and pixelated in comparison. More camera induced (CCD) noise, which is turn is then compressed by the HDV codec = worse image on the Z1U.

FX7 all the way. I urge someone else to post stills/footage.

Robert thanks for your feedback

I shoot lots of SD where I have to hand off the tape right away. I want the 30p and HDV for other stuff but the SD pays the bills. Did you get a chance to see how it performs. Specifically 4:3 SD.

Sony V1 Review
 

Jerry,

I haven't tested SD with the Z1U nor a FX7/V1.

Try reading this article - I recommend it to anyone interested in the FX7/V1:

http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=141

so Sony is still tweaking the camera. :-) that could be encouraging.

Please re-read the article. It's fraught with inaccuracies (the HVX is "almost uncompressed?!!")
Additionally, in the middle of the article, written in late September, he's sure the pre-production model of the V1E is not going to change much, but 2 weeks later it's updated to indicate that the camera was a pre-production model and is different.
He's referring to the V1E, not the V1U. Different camcorders. The V1E doesn't have 24p, whereas many of your posts, Alex, are relating to 24p. It's very important to note dates, differences in cameras, and the source of the information.

He's testing a European Sony V1, in 25p mode.

He says Sony updating the camera.

Steve may be testing a camera closer to production version. and thanks, I did notice the reviewer was talkinag about 25p not 24p. Sony's 25p enhancements likely apply to 24p, but we're speculating about alot. I enjoy seeing the latest images.

Until the camera is at release 1.0, who knows what new and exciting things Sony may document / release. I see no "Functions" and "Design" section on their website as of this writing. I wonder what they are waiting to formalize there. a new DVCAM HD Format for the DVCAM Cassette? probably not, but its open season on speculation. :-)

Alex,
your "speculations" are about to end much of this thread in the Area 51.
1. HDV is what it is. there is no development of, nor sensibility in, an "HDV DVCAM" format. HDV is a 19/25Mbps format, can't be changed and be called HDV. The V1 is fully developed. There were some preproduction models that were lent out, foolishly so, IMO, as it's allowed this sort of ridiculous speculation and inaccurate reporting to happen.
2. FWIW, VASST released a training DVD on the V1U nearly a month ago, and the unit that will ship isn't any different than the units used to produce this training DVD. *Nothing* in the cam can change in terms of features, only tweaks to what is already programmed in the software, and that does not include dropping in new features at the 11th hour, particularly a radical format change.
3. The features of the camcorder are *well* documented. Both by Sony and others. Because you can't find it doesn't mean they're not there, and doesn't mean that there is more "development" transpiring. I assure you it is not.
I'd like to urge you to read/study the various camera formats so that you might better understand how/why they work the way they do, and perhaps get a feel for how camcorder manufacturers do what they do. It might also help you ask better-informed questions?

Is this now Area 51?
 

Ha ha ha. Spot, he’s not asking questions notwithstanding the question marks: he’s making statements. You know that. Right Alex? Even more likely he’s just wanting to communicate. Make his voice heard: right Alex?

Oh to be a moderator at DVINFO!

Spot, I for one, and I just know I’m not alone, truly appreciate your input here. Just wanted to say that, and now I got the opportunity.

Cheers mate. Keep up the (grueling) good work!

Bob, I was struck by the frame grabs from the German site. Is the FX7 THAT much less grainy than the FX1. Some of those shots were striking in how much more grainy the FX1 was than the FX7. It almost made me think that the FX1 wasn't adjusted properly. Granted the FX7 was darker, but I'd take those shots over the FX1.

I think the grainy differences are due to the different sensor types....

but, I'm seeing the same thing... the V1 has much better detail.
There is one picture with shopping carts and a wire screen around them...

In the V1 grab you can see the wire screen easily, on the Z1 grab the screen is so mushed you wouldn't even know there was a screen there...

That shows that the V1 has much better resolution than the Z1

I do agree with that - it's really quite striking how much better the FX7 is compared to FX1.

The German test results from Wolfgang really do seem to tie in well with the comments from Robert so i'd say there's no unit problem or anything - it seems like a genuine very significant step forward from the previous genereation of cams FX1/Z1. (as good as those cams are).

I went to Sony Style today here in N.Y. I was able to play with their FX7, but this time I got to shoot in to their Home Theater area with the camera as well as the well lit main area of the store. In the Home Theater area I was able to turn the lights quite low and test low light. To be honest, I was a bit disappointed since the grain was pretty evident. I shot in both HDV as well as DV. My overall impression of the camera is it really is quite good, but still in very low light, you're going to have to expect a fair amount of grain. What I saw on tape was quite different than those grabs I saw on the German site. The camera was in full auto mode. Frankly I don't undertand the almost total lack of grain in those grabs and the results I saw today. I'm still thinking of the FX7 as a substitute for my VX2000, but frankly it's really no match under those conditions for the VX2000. I had with me my Canon HV10, but Sony didn't allow me to shoot with that camera in their store, only the FX7.

Once I left the store I took out my HV10 and shot some footage. I have to tell you, I think the HV10 has a lower noise floor than the FX7....I really do. Yesterday I shot with both the FX7 and my HV10 in a local high-end camera store. Although there was no area to test low light, the HV10 looked a bit cleaner than the FX7. Obviously the FX7 is intended for an entirely different purpose, but the results were still there.

I'm guessing that the grabs were shot with a low or zero gain setting. With the FX1, unless you actually select gain on the three way gain switch, the camera will automatically add gain, whether or not you are in manual on aperture and shutter speed. It was my understanding from one thread, that the same occurs on the FX7/V1U models too. So you can't just shoot it on auto..

Your VX2000 (I have one too) in manual mode adds gain after the aperture is opened wide.... So this is different from what you are used too.

In any event, neither my FX1, or from what I hear, the FX7, has the low light umph of our VX2000's.. I have the FX1 too, and can tell you that from experience.

Some good points Chris. But let me ask you this, I too owned the FX1 and never got grain to the extent that showed up on that German site with the frame grabs from the FX1/FX7. Have you ever gotten video noise that bad as showed up in those grabs? I found those shots very odd.