V1u review, article, footage, grabs

I just love the fact that Sony gives the man a 'not-yet-out' camera to test and the guy jumps out of a plane with it!!!

I love it!

but yeah, the images are video-ish
 
I can't tell if it's good 24p or not, looks nice for what it is but so does the FX1/Z1U/HC1/HC3/A1U/SR1/UX1!

But besides that, did anybody else notice the slight image ghosting as the person swooped down and then back up? It's shown in one of the stills as well. I hope that was just a fast motion error.

In any case, I think the V1U looks great, I'd like to see more tests besides people jumping out of planes, but yeah, I feel pretty positive. The dream though would be to have the same V1U quality in a small A1U-esque package, maybe even Canon HV10 size! That'd be an instant buy for me.
 
With all due respect to Douglas, he's used or tested probably all cameras money can buy, Viper and F900 included (and he is also a successful musician), but I feel some of his statements are a little bit too bold and there's a pinch to much of excitement there :)

There are no full 1080p camcorders in this price range available yet and V1 does not offer full 1920x1080 resolution at the imager because there are simply not enough sampling points. It's the image processor that generates that raster through interpolation algorithm. In effect, it's similar to pixel shift, but it won't go as far as 1920x1080 with 960x1080 sensors.

Saying that, I repeat based on specs and first images, Sony V1 promises to be very, very good camcorder.
 
The ghosting is probably not present in the original footage (at least, I sure hope it isn't!) I would presume that the ghosting was present due to the way the footage was handled in post.

That said... the HD100 can deliver similar ghosting so I guess it's possible. That's what I thought of on the first shot, but the second shot makes me think that it's not in the original footage. It looks too much like a pulldown error in the post process. The JVC ghosting is always red-tinted, whereas this ghost is clean and original-color. So again, until we see evidence otherwise, I don't think the ghosting is in the original footage.

I would imagine that if someone were to import the original .m2t files into something like After Effects and remove the pulldown from there, they may have better luck; AE will properly strip out the pulldown.
 
This review strikes me as blatantly Sony-biased. He claims that it's the first camera in this price range to offer a 1920x1080 imager which isn't true. He doesn't mention any of my bigger concerns like if this HDV codec is as crappy as Sony's last or if more image tweaking options and some decent cine gammas and cine colors have been added. Not to mention the picture look like utter crap.
 
I am pretty sure they even say that the double image is from pull down not being corrected. From the proper footage (which is posted with cinefrom) seems to be alright.


Let's not totally bash this thing. A lot of us are extremely negative on Sony, we'll wait for more.

At least they're giving us progressive 24fps chips?
 
I'll wait until I have it in my own hands to test and decide, but I'll say this:

Is that slow-mo footage a mistake? Or a joke? I have never, under any circumstances, seen a worse-looking clip from any camcorder.
 
The slo mo is horrendous. There's GOTTa be some mistake. I don't think ANYONE would post footage like that actualy knowing what it looked like.
 
Very interesting review - thanks for the link. The fact that Canon was left out of discussion bugs me a little bit since reading the article left me under impression it's the game between Sony, JVC and Panasonic only. Well, good thing is the review is based on practical experience with all compared camcorders.

Imo, this review is much more believable than commercial ads from Sony's website. At least the results are consistent with majority of tests and opinions from other users, e.g. with regards to JVC's image quality ranked slightly higher than HVX200 and high quality of HDV compression.
 
Playing the footage back straight from the V1 using both a high-def monitor and my standard Sony 28-inch CRT television set, I was pleasantly surprised. The 1080i footage is about as close to the Z1 as you will ever get. I did some A/B monitor switching between Z1 footage of the same kind of subjects in the same location at the same time of year, last year, and the new V1 footage shot on Sunday (working on a Sunday, I know…). There really was nothing in it, they are characteristically identical with similar detail preservation, definition and overall sharpness. Playing back the 1080p (Progressive) footage looked a little different. The colour saturation and contrast were about the same, only the overall sharpness of the 1080i was not there. However, this is a characteristic of progressive footage, it does look a tad softer due to the way it works, this is why motion such as sports programmes always looks nicer in progressive as opposed to interlaced as it renders movement in a different way. Overall I liked the progressive look. I’ve been leaning towards progressive for about 6 months now, which is the only reason I sold my two Z1s.
Click to expand...

This doesn't sound like a true progressive chip to me.
 
I think he means that the motion is not as sharp in the progressive format because of the lower frame rate.
 
Last edited:
^
We'll see. Previous Sony cameras have lost resolution in their attempts at progressive. Lets wait for some more footage.
 
Barry_Green said:
I'll wait until I have it in my own hands to test and decide, but I'll say this:

Is that slow-mo footage a mistake? Or a joke? I have never, under any circumstances, seen a worse-looking clip from any camcorder.
Click to expand...

And I thought it was just my eyes. The stills are horrible also. This is why as a manufacturer I too would be reluctant to have early footage releases. But it begs the question why dont they (company) shoot some scenes in perfect conditions for their cam and release that?

Im not buying this cam, and am not even in the market for it, but I am 100% sure images coming from it would be a lot better than this if used properly. Although one thing did bother me a little, the colour is shite (once again could be settings).
 
Is it me or does it seem like we dis every new camera that comes out and of course when it does come out it pretty much works as stated. The HD100's SSE being an exception. This has always been funny to me. I understand the fuss over the Z1 and FX1 for not having 24p considering this is now almost a standard feature on a modern prosumer dv/hdv camera, not to mention the fact they lied about it and tried to make us think it was real 24p, but going after a camera for ghosting (which, mind you, the reviewer openly states is caused by the NLE) and image quality we all know we won't be able to truly check until the camera drops to the market is almost laughable in this day and age.

I know it's cool to bash Sony, I do it myself and with good reason but this does sound like a good camera and two working reviewers, DSE being one of them seem to like this camera. So what gives? I doubt Douglas would lie or just make stuff up about image quality, I mean it is his name on the line. He may be wrong about some of the innerworkings of the camera but I'd like to think this famous (at least in these parts) videographer would know a good image when he sees it. I wouldn't base a purchase on his or anyone else's opinion alone but sheesh.

-Nate
 
Last edited:
Nathyn said:
Is it me or does it seem like we dis every new camera that comes out and of course when it does come out it pretty much works as stated. The HD100's SSE being an exception. This has always been funny to me. I understand the fuss over the Z1 and FX1 for not having 24p considering this is now almost a standard feature on a modern prosumer dv/hdv camera, not to mention the fact they lied about it and tried to make us think it was real 24p, but going after a camera for ghosting (which, mind you, the reviewer openly states is caused by the NLE) and image quality we all know we won't be able to truly check until the camera drops to the market is almost laughable in this day and age.
Click to expand...

I think most of us realize that the ghosting is an NLE issue. That doesn't change that the slow motion looks lousy. And yeah we won't truly know what the camera is capible of untill it's out but, in general, early footage tends to look much better than this. It seems like it has the same video-ish colors and gamma of other Sony's.

I know it's cool to bash Sony, I do it myself and with good reason but this does sound like a good camera and two working reviewers, DSE being one of them seem to like this camera. So what gives? I doubt Douglas would lie or just make stuff up about image quality, I mean it is his name on the line. He may be wrong about some of the innerworkings of the camera but I'd like to think this famous (at least in these parts) videographer would know a good image when he sees it. I wouldn't base a purchase on his or anyone else's opinion alone but sheesh.

-Nate
Click to expand...

Who says we are accusing him of lieing? "[he] knows a good image when he sees it?" Are you implying we should overwrite our own opinions for his because he's a well known reviewer. I'm looking at the images and I'm not blown away (and it has nothing to do with the ghosting). More so, he say apparently liked the Z1 and says this produces images just like it. Many of us dont' like the Z1's image however. The Z1 got a lot of good reviewers but I still wouldn't ever want to use it. Since when does being un-biased mean we have to agree with whatever a reviewer says even if it goes contrary to what we think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top