On the Road with the HVR-V1U, camcorderinfo.com

[AuditoryVisuals]

Steve Mullen of camcorderinfo.com looks at the V1U (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/On-the-Road-with-the-HVR-V1U-Part-1.htm).

He puts it through a few tests, nothing like their reviews though. It ends when it gets into it. I can't wait untill part 2.

[Emanuel]

I can't figure out those last noisy reviews on V1 progressive mode -- noisy (?) rumors (!)

This one seems an amazing tool. The best 1/3" one.

[Sean Michael]

V1U is 1/4" - three 1/4-inch CMOS chips. :thumbsup:

[androbot2084]

I don't like the Sony HVR-V1u because it does not feature progressive 720p capture at 60 frames per second for the fast action sports. It's interlace 1080i mode is inferior to 720p. It does have a progressive 1080p mode but the framerate is limited to 30 frames per second. The Panasonic HVX-200 is the much better camera in my opinion.

[Emanuel]

V1U is 1/4" - three 1/4-inch CMOS chips. :thumbsup:For sure! :laugh: What a silly distraction indeed! :Drogar-Kriz(DBG): I meant (at least, I wanted to :Drogar-Shock(DBG): ): under 1/3"...

[Kholi]

Yeah... check out the lack of noise in that 320x320 screencap..........

Uhm. Video and Full-res stills, please. I'll judge for myself.

[Emanuel]

The question is: these samples have what I'd call the Cinealta color pattern, very Sonyish -- that's all & period :Drogar-Mark-04(DBG) But those recent news on the progressive mode are quite frightening indeed :(

[Sean Michael]

I was actually favoring a V1 purchase. But recent reports about problems with the progressive mode have me concerned, too.

There's a dearth of first-hand info available on this camera. Hopefully we'll start hearing from US customers soon. I think the V1U ships this week?

[Kholi]

How can you judge from such a small screencap? Am I missing the actual footage here?

[scharky]

I think the V1 sounds like a great camera, but 1/4" chips? Please, as if 1/3" isn't small enough. No thanks.

[Sean Michael]

They are 1/4-inch chips, but they are CMOS which Sony claims has some advantages over CCD (better latitude, reduced power consumption, more accurate color reproduction). So perhaps 1/4-inch CMOS trumps 1/3-inch CCD? That's Sony's proposition.

I have a Sony HC3 Handycam for casual/vacation use. It's got 1 CMOS chip.... Yet color reproduction is excellent (I daresay it's much better than my 3 CCD Panasonic GS-150) and the image quality under good lighting conditions is fantastic. The image degrades quickly as light is reduced, but hey--it's only a consumer cam. I would expect the V1 to vastly outperform it.

But people have been having trouble with 25p on the V1E. It remains to be seen if American cameras will suffer the same problems.

[AuditoryVisuals]

Sean, I agree with you 100%.

And part 2 of this "On the Road with the HVR-V1U" is up. I really like that desert frame. It's so clear without any clipping or shadows. But the other pictures at dusk aren't that much of an improvement over 3CCD cameras.

[Kholi]

Please tell me that because I'm on a Mac, I can't click on these pictures to see full-res?

How can anyone possibly judge ANYTHING from these tiny frames?

[Sean Michael]

Please tell me that because I'm on a Mac, I can't click on these pictures to see full-res?

How can anyone possibly judge ANYTHING from these tiny frames?

They are not full-res on PC either. And I agree, you can't really tell much from the images that we didn't already know.

[Kholi]

Exactly. They're these envelope stamp-sized images that I can garner absolutely nothing from.

What's the use? He can talk about it all day if he wants. I want to see his raw results and high-res stills.

[delaro]

lol that's the weirdest review i've ever seen

[AuditoryVisuals]

They're not at home and it's not a production model. It's just a light test and nothing really "official" as a review.

[scharky]

I'm not questioning the image quality becasue of the 1/4" chips, but if you want to have any control over your depth of field, 1/3" chips are bad enough, but 1/4" chips are like shooting with a consumer camera. Sure it's possible, but why make it even harder to have control in that area.
I do agree, the images are pretty worthless, but that is pretty much what I have come to epxect from camcorder info, personally I feel they are one of the most unreliable sources of information on the web.

[Emanuel]

How can you judge from such a small screencap? Am I missing the actual footage here?I follow your point but all what I could find from my own experience with the F900, this has been the HD queen (I hope the RED will be the king).

Exactly. They're these envelope stamp-sized images that I can garner absolutely nothing from.

What's the use? He can talk about it all day if he wants. I want to see his raw results and high-res stills.On the rest, I can just agree being this reviewer one of the Sony's handyman -- maybe that's there the reason. But don't forget he was who guessed the HVX native resolution...

[AuditoryVisuals]

I do agree, the images are pretty worthless, but that is pretty much what I have come to epxect from camcorder info, personally I feel they are one of the most unreliable sources of information on the web.

What do you expect from a website started by a 12-year-old girl?

[Noel Evans]

Have to agree with that. They carry camera comparisons that are just inaccurate. Those tiny images are completely worthless. They do demonstrate the lack of vertical smear. Thats something that never really bother me much. Film has a more horizontal smear and most laypeople never pick the difference.

[Emanuel]

What do you expect from a website started by a 12-year-old girl?C'mon AuditoryVisuals, you don't have 13 years old... :)