It does 1080i with 24 frames enbedded in that 60i stream. So technically it is 1080i.

However it is the belief among many that the CCDs in the HVX really do not resolve enough lines to be considered a true 1080P camera. The CCDs are really better matched to the 720P format, as most have noted. Setting the camera to the 1080P setting doesn't really increase the image quality to any noticable degree and just takes up 2.5 times as much space.

Still it technically does 1080i in addition to 720P. Prior to the HVX200 the Varicam (Panasonics flagship camera) was a 720 only camera.

The HVX doesn't use HDV, but DVCProHD.

I was responding to the post that said Panasonic does 720P.....didn't realize we were only discussing HDV. In that case Panasonic doesn't do either!

:)

I know we are/were veering dangerously off-topic but thanks for the info Marty. Its wierd that Panasonic made that CCD choice. I wonder why they did that? Must have been a price point thing, I dunno. At first I was really jazzed about the HVX until I read the reports of the low(er) image res. If they had put in CCD's similiar to the XH series cams it would have really be tough to beat. Why do you guys think they did that? It seems like they shot themselves in the foot.

Considering that Panasonic sells the HVX200 faster than they can make it, they most definitely have not "shot themselves in the foot." What they've done is hit one out of the park. It's an incredibly popular camera. If there was some big issue with the image resolution, then they wouldn't sell as well as they do... or they would be flooded with returns. But the fact is that Panasonic can barely keep up with the demand for it.

Now... can we bring this back to the Canon XH A1? Thanks in advance,

Well if I could have returned the HVX200 I would have. While there is nothing "wrong" with it technically, it really pales in comparison with the H1 when it comes to sheer resolution. I think Panny kocked it out of the park by having a P2 workflow and true variable framerates and not neccesarily by having high res CCDs. If that kind of stuff is important to you then Canon seems to have that nailed....(bringing back on topic.......). If the A1 would have been available when the HVX200 was released I think it would have hijacked a lot of sales.

So, Chris.....how sturdy would you say the LCD hinge is on the A1? Since you have handled it I thought you might know. Also....do you have any idea on when the WA adapter will be available? Is is shipping with the cameras (time-wise) or is it coming later? Several images and a review have been done with the attachment so it seems they may be pushing it a bit....

Thanks

The LCD hinge *seems* fine to me but I've handled it for only a few minutes... no idea what that translates to over time. My understanding is that the WA adapter will ship at the same time as the camera.

Ok that makes sincce then...I read more I think about 1080i than any other.thanks
Jerry

I just ordered the XH-A1 and want to know what the "WA adaptor" you guys are talking about. Thanks!

Wide Angle adapter... see http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=76940

Speaking of wide angles...Cavision has a small mattebox that will mount to a 72mm (or other) lens without the need for rods. They also have a "W" version, for 16:9. Since the A1's not out yet, I know nobody knows if that or any other matte box works OK without vignetting at the wide angle, but I was wondering if anybody had figured out which matte boxes might work at the wide angle of the A1's lens, since it's wider than the H1.

We struggled with the decision between the HVX and the H1. And we went with the H1 for a couple of reasons.

1) The 24F mode looked and performed like true 24P so we felt comfortable with it.

2) The resolution was superior to all cameras in its class.

3) We were already comfortable with the form factor (being XL2 shooters).

4) HD-SDI output options.

5) Picture quality and custom preset tuneability.

I saw a movie projected in a theater shot with the HVX and also saw the camera in person, and I really liked it. The footage looked great, and there are some things about the camera I really, really like--especially slomo capability. However, I had to decide against it because of the P2 workflow. For the type of stuff we do, the data handling and archiving would be way too time consuming and take extra personnel, not to mention the expense of getting enough media to make it work. So along with your list of H1 features, I'd add the fact that it records to DV tape as a plus.

Sorry if it sounded like I was ragging on the HVX200. I take back the foot shooting comment, it was more of a toe-shoot. I think the HVX is an awesome camera, the footage from its looks really good, and in some ways its way more advanced than the A1/G1 (P2 cards, variable frame rate etc.). But with the release of the A1/G1 being similiarly priced and in that same size/form factor as the HVX I just am curious that if Sony and Canon have access to higher res ccds for cameras at this price range, why a similiar technology wasnt available to a big hitter like Panasonic, especially on such an advanced camera? Whats up with that?