ABout the Duart tests
 

In those screenings, all the PD 150 were PAL, I got that. But the DVX100, was it the NTSC version or the PAL version? I'm thinking about buying it, and I was thinking about the PAL version, but it the NTSC looks that good, since i'm in NTSC land, I won't bother again with PAL
Thanks
Philippe

Yes, the DVX100 footage they showed was NTSC, and it looked better than the PD-150 PAL that they showed (particularly "Chelsea Walls" and "Tadpole")

wow,
do you attribute the quality of the DVX 100 NTSC to the camera itself or to the fact that tadpole and Chelsea walls were poorly shot? Or both?
I don't doubt that the DVX is an amazing cam though, but it must be even better than what I thought to transfer better than PAL mini DV
Philippe

Probably both. The folks at DuArt said they had to do LOTS of work on the final look of "Tadpole", because it was shot with such poor lighting. "Chelsea Walls" was a bit better, but showed a lot of detail loss in the wide shots of building exteriors, and edges looked quite jagged.

The DVX100, although not perfect, showed much better color and detail, and fewer jagged edges in the fine detail. Though I think that the PD-150 was not used to its full potential in most cases (except for "13 Moons", which looked great), some of the DVX100 footage was shot without any consideration of exposure settings, lighting, or composition, and it STILL looked better than the PD-150 (more detail and better color with less noise).

To me, at least, the DVX100 consistently produced better looking (more film-like) images than the PD-150 when transfered to film by DuArt labs.