Don't the sensors on the V1 have more resolution. I understand that the Z1 has something like 960 x 540 actual resolution which is interpolated up to 1440x1080 but that the V1 has 1920x1880 resolution and actually has to drop pixels to meet the 1440x1080 spec. I couldn't care less about 24p and low light is really important to me. The extra resolution looks like a good arguement for the V1.

On the other hand, the Z1 should be taking a bit of a dive in price on the used market, and boy does it look good.

No PAL/50Hz in the V1 ??

What's this, you mean there will NOT be a 50Hz version?
We just ordered one locally, this could be interesting.

Or you mean we'll get a 50Hz version that has no 60Hz,
how about 24p or do we only get 25p down under?

Bob.

edit:

Also can someone explain the differnce between CF25 from the Z1 and 25p from the V1?
I don't mean how it's generated, that I know, what I mean is how it's written to tape. I think I've read that Vegas at the moment cannot ingest 25p from the V1, why?

Of course there is a 50Hz version...just not announced in Oz yet. The V1E is expected to ship at the same time as the V1U, but don't know the announcement date for Oz....
You only get25p down unda...Sorry! (or not?) I'd MUCH rather work with 25p vs 24p...;-)

Thanks,
can you answer this,
What's the difference between how the Z1 writes 25p (CF25) and the V1. I got the impression there's some difference between how it's written to tape.

Bob.

They're different. FWIW, I'll have one with me when see you in a few weeks in Sydney...I'm pretty sure it will be a 50Hz model.
Progressive acquisition, written as straight progressive. No field transfer modes.

Kool,
what's happening with you and Sydney?

Bob.

I arrive on the 8th, speaking at Tropfest on that Sat...New Magic is bringing me in again. Not sure of the "where" tho.
Planning on spending Sat afternoon and Sun jumping, hopefully shooting some locals in the process.

If you are going to be shooting some locals, you better fly out of there fast!!!

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

>>>I understand that the Z1 has something like 960 x 540 actual resolution


No, as I remember the CCDs are 960 x 1080, with pixel shifting giving the 1440 x 1080. Spot?

You are correct, Serena.
Sensors are 960 x 1080, with horizontal pixel shift to 1440, so the information recorded to tape is 1440 x 1080, PAR of 1.333

Thanks -
v

From what I gather the pixel arrangement on the V1 means that they get the 1920 res by using a slightly different method than the normal pixel shift. I could be wrong though (and usually am!)

One thing I am loving about the V1 is the incredible way that it handles colour and detail in highlights. It is simply astounding. In the Sony literature they boast about the ability to handle highlights really well. They aren't exagerrating! For once the camera is doing exactly what it says in the brochure.

The question I have is, when will this ability be on its high end cameras?!

SimonW, that a fair question. But the new CMOS camera push is really about pushing HD to the consumers. Sony will sale more HD tvs and products(including software and movies) vs commercial tv boardcasting, HD boardcasting is behind the curve at this time. The PSP3 will help, but the new series digital cameras and CMOS movie cameras will push the "Jones" to buy. Even the NYTimes is preaching the wonders of the HDV and HD tvs.

>>Sensors are 960 x 1080, with horizontal pixel shift to 1440, so the information recorded to tape is 1440 x 1080, PAR of 1.333

Does my cheaper HVR A1 do this as well?

The video presentation is pretty cool to explain how the sensor works.

Sony On Its New HVR-V1U CMOS Design, and Why MPEG-2 Isn't Going Away

Cool video presentation. I like the internal processing at 1920 x 1080 4:2:2 ; the sensor is still 960 x1080 but hoizontally interpolated to double horizontal resolution. I wonder how that quantifies on resolution tests. Perhaps somewhat akin to reconstructing analogue audio from 3 digital samples of a waveform. The video speaks of taking data from the bits of pixels hoizontally adjacent to each other in the diagonal pattern, but obviously that's not possible (each pixel must be taken as a whole). Pity that the 4:2:2 data can't be output, but internal processing from that to 4:2:0 should give higher colour resolution. The 0.25 inch chips don't help for those wanting shallow DOF! Sony says the diagonal pattern allows bigger pixels in a smaller space, so good for sensitivity, but since the chip is smaller is the final sensitivity better than the Z1?
Very interesting development.

EDIT: I note that Spot has said (above) that the V1 isn't as good in low light.

Actually, the difference between 1/4 and 1/3 chips doesn't make any discernable difference with regard to shallow DOF. That was one of the first things we checked.

While the cam isn't great in low light, neither is the Z1.
The 4:2:2 *can* be output, via component or HDMI output, as a 1920 x 1080 signal.

When I heard of the 1/4" chips several months back, I was extremely skeptical. "Extremely" might not be a powerful enough word. When we shot for 18 hours straight with this camcorder in timelapse mode, all auto excepting manual focus, I was "extremely" surprised at the quality. No, it's not a Z1. Not designed to replace or compete with, but rather compliment or provide a lower cost alternative to, the Z1. But it's a very fine camcorder. I had to chuckle, 2 weeks ago a well-known camcorder evangelist for a non-Sony manufacturer was beating the hell out of the camcorder based on specs, charts, whatever.
Then he got access to a pre-production V1. Now he's singing it's praises both privately and publically. Funny, but I expect more of those sorts of comments.