I am happy with my camera. Right now everyone is just getting familiar with both of these cameras ( the EX1 and the Z7) and I'm sure that the results we are all getting will only improve with time and experience.

I find that I am going to be changing the way I shoot dramatically. The Z7 has way more depth of field than I expected and while this is good, I am going to have to be a whole lot more aware of focus. There is just so much tweaking you can do on a camera like this. I am just starting to realize how much work is ahead in order to make the most of it.

"The Z7 has way more depth of field than I expected . . "

You do mean "more depth of field"?

so is it the Z7, Z1, or F7??

I'm looking at a clip of the Z7 compared to the EX1

no offense, but 3+ isnt much of a comparison... try 9+ or 12+ for somethng a lil more accurate...

I mean I cna get a Canon A1 @ 12+ to give me the lux of a DVX@9+ but the image is so grainy that i dont know how people can call it usable.

The other thing is today you've got to look at the image on a big screen. The V1 uses level based dynamic noise reduction which produces very blocky noise. Thankfully the EX1 produces noise that looks no bigger than a pixel per noise unit. Yeah I made that description up as I can't find a better way to describe it but there's a difference between the look of the noise from a V1, HVX and the EX1. I've found the noise in the blacks in the V1 can make it hard to do much with the image in post and because it's so blocky it doesn't diminsh in downscaling.

Bob.

That's the trouble with designations that just change a number; definitely talking about the XDCAM EX1 compared to the HVR-Z7U . So easy to slip an "F" in place of "Z", or a "V".

In terms of DoF it is a 1/3 inch CMOS sensor, so should have the same DoF as the Z1 and less than the V1 (1/4 inch sensor).

more than likely, as its a removable lense, the distance between the head element and the CMOS is not as close as one would find on a fixed lense.
In turn, DoF would seemingly be shallower, however in actual fact, it probably is not.

>>>not as close as one would find on a fixed lense.<<

I don't understand --- would you like to expand your argument?

Its not an arguement, its a fact.

If a CMOS is lets say 3mm from the first lens element, and then you have another camera with teh same spec with a removable lens which is about 5 to 10mm away from CMOS, then the distance between the 2 will determine zoom range (crop/mulitplier), Which is the way an EF adapter behaves with a Canon XL or a crop DSLR camera behaves with a full frame lens.
The distance between the first elemetn and the sensor will determine the zoom ratio, hence the multiplier we see with EF adapters and APS DSLRs.

All this plays a major part in how DoF is percieved as the further away the lens is from the sensor the more precise focus needs to be, with HD even moreso, in turn, the perception of shallower DoF is seen, however the only physical difference is the distance between sensor and glass.
Zoom factor, be it physical glass (ie 20x optical), or sensor to glass distances (EF, or mountable lens) , will always play a part in how DoF is managed.

Throw on a DSLR lens and you have even shallower DoF... this is not only because of the adapter increasing distance from the sensor (ie adding the multiplier.. that is... an inherant zoom) but also the lens itself is designed for more precise DoF control.
The larger the sensor, the shallower DoF.
OR in this case, the further away the lens is from the sensor, the higher the zoom in turn inherantly increasing DoF due to this zoom/crop factor

On your 5d, you'll note the DoF check button on the left, just under your lens release. Easy to use, works a treat.
Add an extender to your 5d, and notice the automatic zoom increase. All you did was further the distance from teh glass to the sensor, nothing more.. so your DoF inherantly decreases simlpy becuase its already zooming.

Video cameras dont have this obvioulsy, but then again, video sensors werent designed for this kind of intense shallow DoF as DSLRs. Hense the 7.6+ multipler on 1/3rd sensors..
50mm turns into 380mm

Whatever the reason, I know that I am getting much shallower depth of field than I thought I would from the Z7. Not as shallow depth of field as the Letus adapter stuff I see on Phil Bloom's stuff, but pretty amazingly shallow none-the-less. On my HVR-A1, pretty much everything in frame was somewhat in focus. Shooting on this camera is very different.

That's an interesting way to say that the longer the focal length the less the DoF.

Yes, a 1/3 inch sensor, for the same FoV, has a shallower DoF than a 1/4 inch sensor.

So far I found the Z7 has the same real world sensitivity as the Z1 http://www.wedvidpro.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5019

One thing I've noticed is that I can get a lot more brightness at 24p than at 60i. That's something you can't do with a Z1.

"So far I found the Z7 has the same real world sensitivity as the Z1 "

Well that sucks...