Guess I could've been a bit more clear with the wording of that... sorry. What I was trying to say is that the FX1/Z1 is more sensitive. As an example, I had the FX7 and the Z1 side by side in a dimly lit room, filming some red flowers. The FX7 required about 6db of gain to be at a fairly matching level to the Z1. However, the FX7 reproduced colors better, even with gain engaged (flowers retained vibrant red color while the white background looked perfect as well), while the Z1 looked washed out and dull in comparison. I still haven't decided which I would prefer - extra gain or flat colors - it's a tradeoff.

I'm still debating whether I'd replace the Z1 with the V1 - again, it's kind of a tradeoff and it's not really meant to be a replacement... as I'm sure is part of the clever planning of Sony. I love a lot of features on the FX7, but that zoom ring totally kills me... it's that bad! If I didn't use the zoom ring so much, I'd probably be quite happy with the FX7 (and V1 for that matter).

-Pasty

It sounds to me like you can tweak the fx7 to get similar results as the z1.

Is that a good conclusion?

Could you get better zoom results with a zoom controller like the Zoe?

I am really interested in the V1 for documentary work.

Hmmm... I don't know... similar results (in terms of color reproduction and overall look ) can be achieved under average shooting conditions, but results are quite different under the extremes.

I don't think the zoom is a matter of having a zoom controller. I mean, you can lock your tripod head in place and get great straight in/out zooms, but once you add any sort of pan/tilt action, the lens gets tough to keep smooth on the long end - partially because the camera is relatively small and light.

I'm sure the V1 would work out really great for documentary work... it's probably actually a very fitting application for it.

-Pasty

Hi Pasty - I'm pretty sure that a 6db difference equates to one stop difference between the two (more or less..). Good to know - thanks for posting.

Hey Stu, I guess the reason I said 6db of gain is because I actually used 3db more and it seemed just under where the Z1 was. I never stepped up to 6db more than the Z1, but I'm sure that would have been a good bit brighter. I guess it's more accurate to say somewhere between 3db and 6db of gain to match them.

-Pasty

Cool thats good info Pasty. 3db equates to half-a-stop and 6db equates to one stop so somewhere between those two sounds pretty good to me.

thanks for the extra detail on that - it's appreciated !

Ok, so here are a couple of grabs for all to check out.

The first is a shot of some brickwork on a church - grabbed at 1280x720, but obviously still shows the crisp details and nice color of the image. Some minor color correction has been applied.

The second (fx7_flat.jpg) is another shot of the same church - it's a smaller grab, but it is just for the purpose of showing the dynamic range of the image. As you can see, detail is held nicely in both the shadows and the highlights of the image... makes things much easier to work with!

And just so nobody is confused, these are pulls straight from the video.

-Pasty

I got my hands on the FX-7 today @ my local Fry's Electronics Store. I purchased a Dv tape and shot some footage with auto settings. I persuaded the sales to un-hook the security device and I preceded to the home theater section and shot some low light footage.


http://www.dvdaction.net/index_004.htm

There's A LOT of grain going on on some of those videos :(

Well...you have someone grabbing a camera in a store, and is unfamiliar with the camera running around shooting at whatever.
do you really expect to see much?
Without knowing exactly what the cam settings are, without knowing if the poster has a particular bent for or against the camcorder, without knowing a lot of variables...it's hard to know much or use the footage as any platform by which to make any comparison.
I've very little experience with the FX7, but have easily 50 hours of footage from its big brother, the V1. If you set the cam to fully auto, it's quite possible to get noisy footage. Shooting the same scene in manual, with some knowledge of the cam provides completely different results.

Sorry Pasty - dumb question - what camera was the *first* picture taken with?? Right one is FX7 i know - just not sure what you used to take the first?

thanks

Stu, I believe that both are the FX7.
One is showing the the quailty of the image and how the details hold up, and the other is to show the dynamic range that the cameras CMOS sensors have maintaining the church top and the color of the blue sky.

That's correct, both are with the FX7 - the first just has some minor color correction.

Are there general guidelines on what to set in manual mode for low light situations?

Am feeling the need to verify the V1's low light capacities myself before committing to a purchase.

Set everything to manual, including iris so it's not adding gain nor adjusting shutter. Set shutter to desired setting of 1/24, 1/30, 1/48, 1/60 etc.
Set aperture to largest point avail for specific zoom setting. Wide is obviously better.
Use gain adjustment to set level. Expect visible noise after +9 to +12dB gain, depending on the shooting environment.
All are pretty standard for any HDV/small sensor HD camcorder.
The V1 isn't bad at all in low light compared to any other small sensor/3 chipper, and although you can induce noise due to low light just as any other cam can, it's a "smooth" noise if you're gonna see it at all. Some manufacturers call this the "film look." ;-)
You'll never see great low light capability out of *any* small sensor HD camera, IMO, simply because of the small sensor size with the number of pixels crammed onto the chip. The HVX looks considerably worse in low light, and they tried improving the low light value by using complex algorithms. JVC and Canon aren't any better. It's not the format, it's not the media, it's the number of pixels crammed on to the sensor. If shooting in very low light is important for your workflow, then budget HD isn't for you. Move up to a 1/2" or a 2/3" sensor. But then your cost significantly goes up, as does the size of the unit.
Bottom line is: None of the single CMOS cams are significantly better worse than the other, and none of the small 3 chippers whether CMOS or CCD are *significantly* better/worse than the others when it comes to light sensitivity. They're all within 1/2 a stop, more or less. Using the low light values of the V1 vs the H1, Z1, A1, or any other small HD camcorder shouldn't be a primary point of consideration, IMO. I'd be looking more at form factor, accessory costs/availability, feature sets, size, and your specific needs first, because those are a lot more important, again IMO.