Adam Wilt's V1 review is online at DV.com

John Hewat · November 17th, 2006, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Sony has confirmed 960x1080.

Pardon my ignorance in this matter, but can someone explain this to me?

The camera is 1440x1080, so... what's the 960x1080 mean exactly?

What is an "effective pixel"?

And if I bypass the compression and record straight via HDMI to my PC do I get 1920x1080 or do I get some other strange combination of numbers?

Heath McKnight · November 17th, 2006, 11:23 PM

Like the Z1/FX1, the sensor size is indeed 960x1080, but thanks to pixel shift, non-square pixels and more, it goes to 1440. I'm still getting my head around the engineering of the V1, but from what I understand, it's a little different than the Z1/FX1, but still produces a great picture!

heath

John Hewat · November 17th, 2006, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heath McKnight

...the sensor size is indeed 960x1080, but thanks to pixel shift, non-square pixels and more, it goes to 1440...

Yet I can get 1920 through HDMI? Man, every now and then I feel content that I am on top of the technical mumbo umbo that goes on with these cameras but then I realise how little I understand...

Heath McKnight · November 18th, 2006, 12:10 AM

You and me both, my friend. The HVX goes from 960x540 to 960x720 and 1280x1080.

heath

Tony Tremble · November 18th, 2006, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

I don't know where that link was but I can email the pdf to you?

That is very kind of you to offer.

I was really only interested to see if there is any mention of CINEFRAME MATRIX in the manual. I wonder if there is if you could paste the section if it exists?

---
I have just pre-ordered a V1e....Roll on Dec.

What really swung it for me was the latitude this camera has. Thanks to Steve Mullen for his excellent article on latitude in the HDV@work series.

Latitude for me is far more important than raw resolution and I hasten to say the FX7/V1 looks no slouch in that department either. I think the improvement in latitude that the FX7/V1 offers sets itself apart from the competition for me by moving away from the contrasty look of video. This is overwhelming more important to me than slightly less light sensitivity.

The camera may not be any good for those that want to shoot chain link fences in the dark but for all others this should a fine investment.

TT

Thomas Smet · November 18th, 2006, 07:19 PM

One thing that still concenrs me is how good the mpeg2 encoder in the camera is. You can have detail up the wazoo and great latitude and such but if the encoder isn't very good then the video will have a lot of compression artifacts. The problem with detail is that it is harder to compress. I personally wasn't very impressed with the mpeg2 encoders in the older SONY HDV cameras. Canon seems to have one slick encoder in their cameras which is something that makes me very happy. With HDV I am more concerned about how well the image will compress in the camera.

I have heard nothing about how much better the new encoder is.

Boyd Ostroff · November 18th, 2006, 07:28 PM

The video which Sony showed on a 40 foot screen at the press conference was really impressive. I shoot a lot of nature scenes with my Z1, and have always been a little disappointed in shots that have a lot of foliage detail. The V1 demo reel had some landscape shots which I thought were stunning, and I don't think my Z1 would have handled those scenes nearly as well. There was one shot of a field with tall grass blowing in the wind which really made an impression... You could see every blade of grass.

Marcus Marchesseault · November 19th, 2006, 03:29 AM

"Latitude for me is far more important than raw resolution and I hasten to say the FX7/V1 looks no slouch in that department either. I think the improvement in latitude that the FX7/V1 offers sets itself apart from the competition for me by moving away from the contrasty look of video. This is overwhelming more important to me than slightly less light sensitivity."

I tend to agree. I have mine on order from B&H. I am interested in low light sensitivity, and I think the progressive shooting with 1/30th or 1/24th shutter speed may help in some circumstances. I think people have been barking up the wrong tree for a few years thinking that other features (I won't mention as I don't want a flame war) give a cinema image quality. Resolution is fairly important, but most people watch their movies on a good ole 640x480 television these days (in the U.S.). It is the origination quality that makes the difference and people are fairly happy with the quality of DVD movies on a CRT television. The originating production quality and usually the use of film have been the deciding factor of quality in the past and now the new HD cameras with decent resolution and higher exposure latitude are closing the gap. I saw some film clips that were originated on a 2K camera and shown upsampled on a 4k projector and they were absolutely perfect. I dare say it was better than film!

I can't wait! :) The FX7 images really have me sold and the V1 should be even a bit better with more image controls like knee and black stretch.

Vlad Manning · November 20th, 2006, 04:36 PM

I agree that the biggest IQ improvement still to be made is DR, but Adam Wilt's pre-review leads me to not get overly excited about this camera, yet:
"Dynamic range and noise on the prototype looked roughly comparable to those of the Z1, but I'm withholding detailed judgments until a shipping version of the camera is available for test."

If there was a solid 1-stop extension in its highlight range, that could make up for a stop or so loss in sensitivity, but something tells me we won't be getting that until the 1/3" version of this chip. -Still, ANY improvement in DR is welcomed.

Steve Mullen · November 21st, 2006, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlad Manning

If there was a solid 1-stop extension in its highlight range, that could make up for a stop or so loss in sensitivity, but something tells me we won't be getting that until the 1/3" version of this chip. -Still, ANY improvement in DR is welcomed.

Using the same "tricks" as we have used on the HD100, I am sure the latitude is very wide: KNEE = LOW and STRETCH = ON. But, it may not be wider than a Z1. But the CMOS image has less contrast than the CCD image so it seems wider -- more natural.

The CINE MATRIX has no "matrix" control other than Color and Hue. This will work fine for those of us who want to leave COLOR alterations to post where one can experiment. For those who lug a monitor into the field and feel safe making a comitment to a look during shooting, this is going to be a "missing feature."

My sense of the V1's size and cost means it is a "gun & run" HD camcorder so I'm not surprised that it has exactly the feature it has.

November 17th, 2006, 11:23 PM	#17
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Like the Z1/FX1, the sensor size is indeed 960x1080, but thanks to pixel shift, non-square pixels and more, it goes to 1440. I'm still getting my head around the engineering of the V1, but from what I understand, it's a little different than the Z1/FX1, but still produces a great picture! heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 18th, 2006, 12:10 AM	#19
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	You and me both, my friend. The HVX goes from 960x540 to 960x720 and 1280x1080. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 18th, 2006, 07:19 PM	#21
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	One thing that still concenrs me is how good the mpeg2 encoder in the camera is. You can have detail up the wazoo and great latitude and such but if the encoder isn't very good then the video will have a lot of compression artifacts. The problem with detail is that it is harder to compress. I personally wasn't very impressed with the mpeg2 encoders in the older SONY HDV cameras. Canon seems to have one slick encoder in their cameras which is something that makes me very happy. With HDV I am more concerned about how well the image will compress in the camera. I have heard nothing about how much better the new encoder is.

November 18th, 2006, 07:28 PM	#22
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	The video which Sony showed on a 40 foot screen at the press conference was really impressive. I shoot a lot of nature scenes with my Z1, and have always been a little disappointed in shots that have a lot of foliage detail. The V1 demo reel had some landscape shots which I thought were stunning, and I don't think my Z1 would have handled those scenes nearly as well. There was one shot of a field with tall grass blowing in the wind which really made an impression... You could see every blade of grass.

November 19th, 2006, 03:29 AM	#23
Marcus Marchesseault Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 1,961	"Latitude for me is far more important than raw resolution and I hasten to say the FX7/V1 looks no slouch in that department either. I think the improvement in latitude that the FX7/V1 offers sets itself apart from the competition for me by moving away from the contrasty look of video. This is overwhelming more important to me than slightly less light sensitivity." I tend to agree. I have mine on order from B&H. I am interested in low light sensitivity, and I think the progressive shooting with 1/30th or 1/24th shutter speed may help in some circumstances. I think people have been barking up the wrong tree for a few years thinking that other features (I won't mention as I don't want a flame war) give a cinema image quality. Resolution is fairly important, but most people watch their movies on a good ole 640x480 television these days (in the U.S.). It is the origination quality that makes the difference and people are fairly happy with the quality of DVD movies on a CRT television. The originating production quality and usually the use of film have been the deciding factor of quality in the past and now the new HD cameras with decent resolution and higher exposure latitude are closing the gap. I saw some film clips that were originated on a 2K camera and shown upsampled on a 4k projector and they were absolutely perfect. I dare say it was better than film! I can't wait! :) The FX7 images really have me sold and the V1 should be even a bit better with more image controls like knee and black stretch.

November 20th, 2006, 04:36 PM	#24
Vlad Manning New Boot Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: US Posts: 19	I agree that the biggest IQ improvement still to be made is DR, but Adam Wilt's pre-review leads me to not get overly excited about this camera, yet: "Dynamic range and noise on the prototype looked roughly comparable to those of the Z1, but I'm withholding detailed judgments until a shipping version of the camera is available for test." If there was a solid 1-stop extension in its highlight range, that could make up for a stop or so loss in sensitivity, but something tells me we won't be getting that until the 1/3" version of this chip. -Still, ANY improvement in DR is welcomed.