http://www.genkosha.co.jp/vs/sp/200712/

Arigato Sasaki San!! I have attached the English translated page link below.

This has comparisons bet 4 cams:
1. Sony PMW EX1
2. Sony Z1j
3. Canon XH-G1
4. Panny HVX 200

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.genkosha.co.jp%2Fvs%2Fsp%2F200712%2F&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

English "translated" link:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=www.genkosha.co.jp/vs/sp/200712/

Nice camera, the EX1.

The EX1 colours are slightly towards green (or G1's toward red). The G1 picture is also definitely brighter, but this - like the colour - is all tweakable. The most striking difference in EX1's favour is the latitude - just compare the blown-out mirror reflection in all the G1's images.

Otherwise - especially, resolution-wise - I am a bit disappointed; in 60i the differences (even with the HQ mode) are not knocking-out. Unless I don't know where to look; which characters exactly do they mean in the wine label? In 30p, the brick is more detailed with the EX1, so are all the characters on labels. But this was to expect, the Canon's F mode being just a nice hocus-pokus!

i think the resolution is pretty impressive (just look at the 1080p and the wine label), although these images do seem to have a bit of edge sharpening on (when you push them you can see the black lines around high contrast areas)

What is impressive is the noise, or lack of, in the shadows. If you push the shadows up the detail still present is very impressive (the folds in the background being visible) which also means the MPEG2 is doing a great job of not throwing away shadow detail. Compare to the HVX and see how the compression macroblocks there. That should ignite a nice MPEG vs HVX compression war!

It's difficult to know about the latitude from these because who knows what has happened to the BMPs. There's certainly more there and because of the shadow detail, you can expose for highlights and pull the image up without it falling apart too much.

All I can say is "wow!". The EX1 1080 30P looks great !
The compression artifacts from the HVX on the wine label are horrible.
Look at the transparent curtain and compare.
This is "day and Night"

IMO, It's obvious that the HVX200 has VERY noticeable edge enhancement.
If you were to turn this down, it would look EXTREMELY soft compared to the EX1. The clarity difference is amazing.

You're right about the labels. This REALLY shows you the natural look the EX1 is able to render.

It would of been nice to know all settings used.

This is making the wait even harder!

Paul,
The HVX's blocking in the low levels was ONE of the reasons we did not go with it. This was even pointed out when the initial clips from the HVX200 were starting to appear. And this was using their MXF files.
IMO, you really need to crush the blacks in this cam.

You guys are obviously right that when compared with the HVX, the EX1 shines much more than against the G1 -especially in 60i. BTW, in all this noble company, the good old Z1 is not bad at all...

The EX is much better in 60i- I never shoot the HVX in 60i.
but 30p- I prefer the image from the HVX.

Need to see motion.

Need to see motion.
Absolutely - and how that hard edged video will respond to a 35mm lens adapter.

Vince

Absolutely - and how that hard edged video will respond to a 35mm lens adapter.

Vince

You're right about that. From what I'm hearing is that the 35mb stuff holds real well!

but 30p- I prefer the image from the HVX.


Which images are you comparing?
If it's the 30P images here, please explain. Please highlight the benefits shown in the HVX samples here.
Future samples may show something different.

The EX1 still images here are FAR superior in rez, noise, compression artifacts, latitude, details in black, and not to mention the color is holding REAL well.
In these samples, what we were surprised with is how well the 720P image looks

At least, this is what these are showing.
It would of been nice to know cam settings for all, but this aside, this is what we found with the HVX200 so it compares to what we've shot here.

If you have other EX1 vs HVX200 samples, please share.

Sony has really NAILED it on this one!

Nice comparison. Nice camera the EX1. I wish I had the money now to order on. Oh well I'll wait for the EX2.

Stelios

Yes, it is quite the comparison. The Z1 does not look that bad. Not at the EX1 level, but holds up well.

You know the more I look at this, I believe the HVX200 would of looked better if they had turned down the sharpness.
Granted would of looked real soft, but it would of help lessen the effects of the noise and compression artifacts.

It's silly to judge cameras on frame grabs- but IMO- looking at this one frame -side by side- the 30p HVX image that looks more pleasing to my eye.
It also looked more pleasing to my co-worker.
We both agree the Sony looks better in 60i and 720p.

I own a HVX. I have an EX on order. I plan to use both- each for different types of jobs.

the 30p HVX image that looks more pleasing to my eye.

WOW, please share with us what elements were more pleasing????

I agree about moving images.

A bitmap still comparison? Between video cameras? Oh well.

The EX1 does look better, but what did we expect comparing 1/2 inch latest generation CMOS with 3 year old 1/3 inch CCD technology. I certainly hope that it would look better. That's like saying my Intel dual core processor computer runs faster than my Intel Pentium 4 computer. You think? Wow I never would have imagined.

But, my crazy old fart cynicism aside, I really want to see the EX1 live and in person. Not the Ashley Simpson on SNL version. I'll take U2 on SNL all of the time.

Cheers.

Created this bitmap from the bitmap 1080 30P samples of just the wine bottle alone and some of the curtains in the background. The HVX200 is on the left, the EX1 is on the right.

Created this bitmap from the bitmap 1080 30P samples of just the wine bottle alone and some of the curtains in the background. The HVX200 is on the left, the EX1 is on the right.

Yeah, I experienced something similar when I visited my ophtalmologist and she gave me the right glass...:)

Before and after....

Hi,

Can some with the skills - color correct the 30p 1080 EX1 and match the color output of the 30p 1080 HVX image?

Thanks,

Mark

The EX1 pic looks sooo much better than the HVX shot. This might be silly to ask, but I will, just in case: Are you viewing the pictures full rez? For instance, if I resize my browser window the pictures can get auto-scaled to fit and if I shrink them to about 40% I can get the HVX pic to look pretty close, just with less latitude, but that lends to a higher contrast look that could be a matter of taste. But at full rez, there's no contest.

When looking at the 1080/60i shots I actually preferred the look of the G1, but at the 1080/30p the EX1 shot simply outshines the rest.

It would have been nice to have seen a 720/30p shot in comparison.

Anyone fancy a can of fuzzy navel!

Paul.

I thought the G1 held up fairy well myself. The EX1 HQ images are really good.

But at full rez, there's no contest.

I'll say. The EX1 looks more like a DSLR image especially dynamic range where the HVX looks like a $100 digicam uprezzed and sharpened to ugliness. I'm still hacking away with my DVX as I bailed on buying one of the first HVXs.

I shoot some with a friends HV20 when I need HD for clients. But the EX1 keeps interesting me (although, if an HV30 with full manual control was released, it would be very tempting as the HV20 image is better than G1/Z1 in both resolution and dynamic range.

But the EX1 looks like the best HD image I've seen (based on this and other early shots) for any sub $10k cam. Maybe even sub $20 (I don't count Red or SI there since by the time you actually have a shooting system, you are well over $20k.)

True,
A coworker should be getting his RED in December (total investment including needed extras closing in on $30K). He is also very interested in the EX1. He thought the comparison today showing still frames was something he would of expected while comparing to a camera such as RED.
I think you may find that a few who were "on the fence" with this purchase may be climbing over it soon.

I know what a lot of us are thinking, what about the moving shots. Well, if it holds up this image as well as I'm hearing the 35mb stuff will, it's going be excellent.

I wonder if it will have less of a CA problem than many of the three chip cams have? (The HVX actually handels chromatic abberation quite well.)

The EX1 colours are slightly towards green (or G1's toward red). The G1 picture is also definitely brighter, but this - like the colour - is all tweakable. The most striking difference in EX1's favour is the latitude - just compare the blown-out mirror reflection in all the G1's images...Piotr,

I think the lattitude benefit may be less than the shots seem to show, b/c, like you pointed out, the EX1 had a significantly darker exposure than the G1 did.

According to one early review from Nigel Cooper it performed very well in the CA depatment.
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=171

OK
Got home and looked at the frames again - this time- full rez- on a JVC HD studio monitor.
Sony Ex- 1080 30p is much better.
Now I'm digging it!

Here's another quick glimpse from the 720 60P BMPs posted from the link earlier.
The HVX200 is on the left, the EX1 on the right.
The 720P is a lot closer, although the EX1 has the edge in this shot for rez, noise, and laititude.

IMO, the 1080 stuff from the EX1 is in another league over the 1/3" cams.

It's kind of funny how even the 720p from the EX1 has more natural detail then 1080p from the HVX200.

One thing these images do show us is that for 1080i shooting there seems to be very little reason to have a 1920x1080 image. The Canon 1080i image looks almost exactly the same as the EX1 1080i image in terms of detail. I'm pretty impressed with what Canon did with those cameras. Of course there is nothing wrong with having 1920 but in a way it almost seems like a waste for interlaced shooting. The encoder ends up having to work a lot harder for something that pretty much looking the same as if it were 1440.

I do agree that for 1080p shooting 1920x1080 does have an advantage mostly due to there isn't as much filtering going on to reduce interlace flicker.

EX1 latitude is very impressive. Look at the highlights in the wool cap; you can see every thread whereas on the other cameras, they are blown out to varying degrees. I disagree that the G1 is over-exposed, if only by 1/3 stops. (not enough to say its latitude even comes close.)

I think the still photo comparison is not fair against the HVX, as its chips resolution is clearly much lower; fast movement and comparing the XDCAM HD encoding with that of DVCPRO HD will be of much higher relevance.

This is why in my first impression post, I only compared the EX1 with the Canon, the latter keeping up surprisingly well in the 60i mode!

Can't wait to compare the EX1 side by side with my V1E...

I can't tell the difference, which is good news as it means i can hang onto my A1 and spend my money on something else, without feeling like i'm missing out. The thing i'm really looking forward to is going tapeless, but i think i can wait a bit longer, and it'll be interesting to see how Canon, JVC, and Panasonic respond to this camera.

I looked at the EX's 1080p output compared to the EX's 720p output.

I resized the 1080p in photoshop to 1280x720 to compare the two.

The 1080p does look a bit better.

The extra resolution shows up in sharpness as well as the appearance of tonal gradiations.

But, given this is a motion medium, I do not know how much this will translate to the end viewer on a television set.

Thanks for the links!

I can't tell the difference, which is good news as it means i can hang onto my A1 and spend my money on something else, ...

I can see quite a sharpness difference between the EX & the G1 in 1080p as well as the EX in 720p.

The EX frame looks a lot more refined to me.

I wish they were exposed the same to tell any lattitude differences.

Based on the overall exposure, I believe it was fair. The mid tones on all the images look the same. It's obvious the EX1 blows them all away here on latitude. The HVX200 the worse. The G1 held up fairly well, but still not as well as the EX1.
On the EX1, the guy's cap maintains excellent detail while the highest IRE stuff on the car in the mirror still maintain some detail.
I guess they could of dropped the levels on the HVX until there was some detail on the car in the mirror that matches the EX1. If this adjustment was done, the overall image would of been underexposed and the image would suffer even more from what you're seeing now (especially in the shadows -noise & detail).
Then some would complain that the image was darker than the EX1 due to the overall exposure was not the same.

Oddly, this test seems to show a lot.

I am SURE the EX has better lattitude. But, the exposures in the comparison are not the same. The EX is at a lower exposure than the others, which favors the EX when it comes to highlights.

Reading more about this camera, I have no doubt that it has significantly more lattitude.

But look at the dark colored balls. The HVX and G1 show more differentiation between them. Does that mean EX crushes the darks? If the exposure is the same, then you'd have to say "yes." I just think the EX's exposure was set lower.

Well, that's certainly not what I'm seeing. I've seen the HVX200, it's not that great in low light.
Actually, look again, the blacks are crushed on the HVX200. This is the first thing you notice about the image.
In fact so much that the contrast has affected the label on the bottle. The G1 does not have this problem as well as the EX1.

To be fair, we don't know if each cameras curves were used to maximize latitude. But face it, the EX1
has 1/2" sensors. I'm a hard sell for the HVX200 since we got rid of it for other cameras.
Check out what Brian from Redrock Micro had to say about the EX1:
http://redrockmicro.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4521

Steven,

Just looking at the pictures in the body of the article, it's clear the EX is underexposing (by comparision).

And if you download the G1 and EX 1080 30P images and switch between the two, you'll see the EX is significantly darker.

That said, yes, I do absolutely agree the EX has considerably more lattitude. I just feel this comparison makes the G1 and HVX look a little worse than they actually are.

EX1 1080p30 blew away the competition! These sensors are what 1080p60 need! in 4:2:2 is even more awesomer for that. And heck, 4:4:4 in 1080p60 over Dual 3G HD-SDI would be awesomest!

Just looking at the pictures in the body of the article, it's clear the EX is underexposing (by comparision).

And if you download the G1 and EX 1080 30P images and switch between the two, you'll see the EX is significantly darker.

That said, yes, I do absolutely agree the EX has considerably more lattitude. I just feel this comparison makes the G1 and HVX look a little worse than they actually are.

Agreed. I think everyone will agree that the EX1 is certainly stronger in the area of resolution. But not that much better than the Canon. I have to give credit where it's due. Look at the BMP's and compare the area of the green bottle near the leaf and lower left FIOS label. The Canon actually does a better job there than the others. Overall, the EX1 looks excellent, but it doesn't leave the Canon in the dust. Nobody sits and looks at stills from these cameras and we've all seen great imagery from all of them. Don't get me wrong, I have an HVX and I'm on the list for my EX1 but it's not a Canon killer or HVX for that matter.

Well, it's true -, "beauty is the the eye of the beholder"
The 1080ii stuff was close with the Canon, but the EX1 latitude was better.

The EX1 1080 30P was in another level from the other cams

True, but there are a few lingering ?'s about the EX. One is the preponderance of green. I know it can be toned down in the camera, but may be a result of the ClearVid sensor, which uses more green and less red and blue pixles than other types of sensors. I'm not so sure if this doesn't have some drawbacks.

Another is the EX's slightly more "processed" look, to my eye. Totally subjective, but the shots do look a tad more "video" to me and lacking of some depth. Now that could be a result of the exposure and having fewer hot highlights, but again the ClearVid requires some extra camera processing to make it work properly. So maybe that is causing a slightly more processed (again, very subjective) look.

I'm seeing absolutely none of what you mentioned.
Actually the EX1 1080 30P has the most natural look out of the frame stills.

I've seen you make this reference before.
IMO, these are not good examples for the other cameras. The EX1 1080 30P is in a COMPLETELY different league. It has FAR less noise and artifical detail and ton a lot more detail. I'm not finding this image below subjective, that's for sure.

Woops meant to write:
HVX200 on left, EX1 on Right

http://members.cox.net/vx2000/HVX200_EX1_Bottle.bmp

True, but there are a few lingering ?'s about the EX. One is the preponderance of green. I know it can be toned down in the camera, but may be a result of the ClearVid sensor, which uses more green and less red and blue pixles than other types of sensors. I'm not so sure if this doesn't have some drawbacks.



As far as I know clearvid is not used on the EX1. Clearvid and CMOS are not the same thing. There would really be very little reason to use clearvid on this camera since the chips are native 1920x1080 to begin with. The EX1 will use a straight ratio of aligned RGB pixels from the chips so there should be no larger amount of green pixels used. Adjusting the color in the camera should fix the green tint.

Thomas,

You may well be right about ClearVid's pixel strategy not being used on the EX1. Reading up on it, it has an Exmor sensor. Which may or may not (I can't find out for certain) use the ClearVid pattern.

Recanting my post. I had the HVX image and the EX image mixed up. Ignore me, sorry.

I'm seeing absolutely none of what you mentioned.
Actually the EX1 1080 30P has the most natural look out of the frame stills.

I've seen you make this reference before.
IMO, these are not good examples for the other cameras. The EX1 1080 30P is in a COMPLETELY different league. It has FAR less noise and artifical detail and ton a lot more detail. I'm not finding this image below subjective, that's for sure.

HVX200 on Right, EX1 on left

http://members.cox.net/vx2000/HVX200_EX1_Bottle.bmpSteven,

Look at the Rasta shot at 30P for the G1 and the EX. To me the G1 looks more natural and less plastic. Perhaps it's due to the highlights being hotter, which actually adds some extra depth.