one more question about pixels

[filmtovideo]

I have the money and my vendor, who is trustworthy and will sell me any
camera,
keeps saying to me "but the Canon has 1440 X 1080 while the Panasonic has
960 X 540". Now he's a smart guy and knows about spatial offset and all
sorts of mitigating factors but he clearly favors the Canon although he likes the
Panasonic and says that it's a great camera. I am surprised
that he seems to lean toward Canon here but respect his opinion.

I went back and read through all the old threads I could find on here, including
the 15 pager that started in 2/06 when the pixel specs. were made public and
ran to 7/06. I pretty much agree with the person who said "pixels/smixels" the
footage looks great.

Just to doublecheck and get the latest info.. I care 99% about shooting dramatic
narrative looks- like -film "films". How has the 960 X 540 worked for you,
especially
if you do dramtic films but anybody else too.

Also, one poster said that with the 540 the Panasonic's 4:2:2 would end up
being the same as the Canon's 4:2:0 color information in the vertical direction.
Do you agree? If so, has it made a difference to you?

 

[esperman]

The Canon does has more rez, but it's also interlaced and uses HDV compression.
Both cameras have pros and cons. I recommend borrowing or renting each camera and see what fits you best.

 

[Barry_Green]

The HVX footage looks fantastic. If it has the feature set you want, what do you care whether some salesman is interested in playing "my pixels are bigger than yours" or something?

The image from all the small HD cameras looks very good. You should be deciding based on actual features that make a difference, rather than obsessing about pixel count or how large the digital zoom is or any other statistic like that.