It is extremely confusing...

I see a better resolution from the H1 (from the charts i've seen so far), but i really prefer the overall image rendition of the HVX...

Time to take a coffee break i guess...

yep...

It is misleading to say the HVX looks bad...
It is misleading to say the H1 looks bad...

They both look really good.

But from what i've seen, the HVX has an image i prefer, it looks @#@# full, rich.

But it subjective.

All those numbers, rez...color sampling....etc...

So my final judgment will be made with my eyes !


and i dont understand why posted rez charts from the HVX have a 1882X1040 dimention ???
and another one at 1911X1040 ????

ALL the other charts i can compare to are, or 1920X1080 or 1280X720.

I will really wait for a side by side comparison.

I am seriouly beginning to think that rez is a small (though important) part of the equation.

I'd more or less agree, but given the amount of control that it offers over the image, and the ease of sharing settings, I wouldn't surprised to see that change.

Personally, I plan to shoot as flat as possible (regardless of what camera I settle on) and grade in post, so the most lattitude wins.

Steev,
No it's still in the running. The variable frame rates alone make it a viable contender. I'm just staying open minded until enough real testing has been done on all of them. The only one dead out of the running is the Sony.

There will be no clear overall winner for ALL shooting conditions, because every camera has to do concessions in specific areas to perform better in other areas.

...that's the nature of things.