Sure, Sony could even use 3 of the CMOS chip used in the HC1. My understanding is that CMOS chips are inherently configurable to operate progressively. But Sony has shown great resistance to implementing progressive scanning and true 24-fps operation (as opposed to the abomination known as CF24) at the consumer level. Because the popularity of JVC's HD100 and Panasonic's HVX200 has demonstrated the market demand for 24p-capable cameras, Sony may change its position. But I wouldn't hold my breath.

FX1 on sale at the Apple Store for $1995
 

holy cow! 1995 free shipping at the apple store. Not sure if this is a price
mistake or not. Too bad I don't need another one.

Too bad I don't have a credit card right now. Wow.

Ditto for me: I just paid $1350 for an HC1! Anyway, here's the direct link for anyone who wants the best deal yet on a decent HD video camera:

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL...D?find=HDR-FX1

I thought you were smoking crack or getting a head start on april fools, but here it is (while it lasts):
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL....8.25.7.11.0.1

What a deal...

www.philipwilliams.com

[EDIT]Hey wait a minute, are we even supposed to mention the Apple store here?[/EDIT]

[DOUBLE EDIT]Dang, Kevin beat me with the link while I was typing...[/DOUBLE EDIT]

oh. dear.
ummmmm, it's not April Fool's...not yet anyways.

Bah my order was cancelled.. Apple said they ran out of stock and won't be selling it at their store again.

Pat,

Sad to hear as I was ready to order tomorrow. Oh well, I was hoping for the PAL version anyway.

I'm holding out for a 1/3" 3CCD, handicam-format XDCAM-HD.

Variable frame-rate, progressive scan, 4 24-bit uncompressed audio channels, random-access recording media.

Yum, yum!

I have NO inside information on this. But if you look at the gap between the Sony Z1 ($4,700), and the XDCAM F330 ($16,000), I could see a market at, say $8,500. That would place it in direct competition with the Canon XLH1, and I dare say a prosumer XDCAM at that price-range would clean Canon's (and everyone else's) clock.

Not really. With third-inch CCDs, it would offer nothing over the HVX. Now, if there were an $8,500 HD D5 camera that supported 10-bit 4:2:2; supported 1080p24/30, 1080i, and 720p24/25/30/50/60; had variable frame rates; had dual-link HD-SDI (12-bit 4:4:4); had half-inch CCDs/CMOS chips that were natively at least 1,280 x 720; and had a removable lens -- that would clean everyone's clock.

There is technology out there that could allow a cheap 1/3rd inch sensor with 16 stops and a picture better than the HVX. But as far as I know Sony would have to buy it in. Plus, 35Mb/s variable MPeg2 compared to 100Mb/s HD DV, I don't know. But I agree on the need for 10bit on all prosumer and above cameras.

I say Yum as well.

I think they should replace the Z1/FX1 series with a hard drive version of this, and not increase the price. Then Sony could crow that they are giving quality and value compared to their competitors.

Oh, I don't know. I'd be pretty happy with Z1 CCDs that recorded to XD-CAM disk format. I wouldn't even insist on completely variable framerate, as long as it did honest-to-God 30p (as the F330 does). Throw in 4 channels of uncompressed audio, and I'd choose that over the HVX. Especially when you factor in the cost and capacity of XDCAM media vs. P2 cards.

Well, nothing's forcing P2 -- there are other storage options for the HVX than P2.

No options for the HVX that I know of, that are viable and affordable now for in-the-field, run-'n'-gun documentary or ENG shooting. Which is what I'm interested in.

P2 cards are too small and too expensive. Disk recorders are too unreliable. Laptop solutions like DV rack need AC power for long shoots and can't very well be strapped to your shoulders. As for the Z1, DV tape is fine and proven, but I'd love to have random-access and faster than-real-time file transfer for editing.

XDCAM would fit the bill, but the $16,000 PW-F330 is too rich for my blood (though an amazing price for a full-featured ENG camera!), and I prefer to use a more compact camcorder. If I were doing all studio productions or feature work, I might be singing a different tune.

Sony should also add true 24p and make the current Z1/FX1 zoom lens removable. Then it should reduce the price of both cameras -- $750-$1,000 for the FX1 replacement and $1,200-$1,500 for the Z1 replacement.

I'd settle for a fixed-lens version of the XDCAM HD cameras at around that price, provided it had a 1/2" sensor with good low light capability. But that's not a replacement for the FX1, which so far has no meaningful competition almost 18 months after it started shipping. I'd expect the FX2 to either be something similar to what it is now with a slightly better sensor, or if Sony wants to be clever they could offer MPEG4 recording to off-the-shelf flash memory cards at data rates around 15-20 Mbps, giving us a "poor man's" version of the HVX200.

I reckon Kevin makes a good point - that Sony's FX1 is still lacking any decent competition from Canon, JVC or Panasonic even after all this time. Because of this I'm still surprised at its amazingly low price (less than the PD170 in many places) and feel that Lawrence has it all about-face. Sony could in effect increase the price and still rope in the filmmakers, because without competition and with such a fine product the balance is a bit one sided.

Sony are selling bucketloads of Z1s. A dealer I spoke to at the Video Forum in London said ten Z1s went out the door for every interchangeable lens JVC. These massive sales mean more money for R & D, and I too feel that the three CCD era is coming to an end.

The prism block is a bulky, expensive and complex solution to a problem inherrent in the CCD, and the CMOS chip will take over, I'm sure.

tom.