Faced with the nasty choice which of the two devices (after I can not afford the Z1 :-) Find Unfortunately, no comparisons of these two fish bone, ... anyone has experience? How much worse the image quality due 3CCD (at FX1) versus CMOS sensor (with A1)??
Antwort von Jan:
a not too bad in the last test was Videoaktivdigital.
Whether it be needed over a wide range of functions, such as eg AE 1 DV / DVCAM playback, XLR connectors, the "better" pseudo "Progressive Mode - Cineframe 24 / 30 P (25 P of the FX 1) etc
As far as I know is synonymous with the AE 1 as the Z 1, the switch between 1080/50i and 1080/60i - for professionals who travel synonymous in the U.S..
Between CMOS vs. CCD gibts so many disagreements.
Since you can for one or other eg advocate CMOS - less power consumption, Less heat than the CCD, so less noise-which is still controversial - others claim that a CMOS rushes significantly more or HOTPIXEL / Verstärkerglühen (more digicam with long exposures with higher gain-s.rechten screen shows a flat, purple discoloration)
In VAD, the FX 1 came away not so very well, but there are synonymous AE 1 contentiousness eg the cassette compartment goes down to - an impertinence for "professional" film-makers stand in such an expensive action.
Well FX 1 owner gibts so few here that are usually quite happy ...