More "still" frame comparison
 

Since there has been discussion between the HVX200 and EX1, I thought it would only be fair to show the "still" frame comparsion against all 4 cams in the article.

Funny thing, but I'm noticing that the better the resolution / lower artifacting (EX1 visibly leading), the more "flat" the label looks (the air bubbles underneath get sort of ironed out), which seems not right - assuming it's the same bottle, shot at the same time with all 4 contenders...

What you are seeing is the noise and artificial enhancement outlining the label's flaws, including some compression artifacts. The EX1 clearly shows it has the edge in actual detail, and best of all, minimal ringing from the sharpening effects (This sharpening is adding info that was not there, after all, that how it works.). The EX1 has an overall very accurate image.

Sure thing Steven; if I mentioned the "illusory" details is because it resembles me the discussion on the perceived resolution differences between the interlaced and progressive modes of the V1E (after the firmaware fix) - just like here, one could see more "details" in the interlaced picture than in the progressive one. Closer examination proved they were not real details; I remember this convinced me stick to my V1E...

I was expecting the EX1 to do well. The most interesting thing for me about this comparison is how well the Canon chips hold up... the HVX provides no competition.

At least in interlaced mode, there isn't much in it between the EX1 and G1/A1, although the Canon colours seem a little off (easy to correct in cam).

I believe your correct in 1080i, but it appears the EX1 is a bit cleaner and should yield better latitude. Other than that, I thought the G1 1080i frame looked great.
IMO, It's apparent that HVX200 users should probably stay away from 1080.
The HVX200 at 720P is at its best. I'm sure most HVX users know this and want 720P for it time based capabilities.
Having said that, i've seen some real nice looking stuff come off the HVX200.