Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 6/8/2006, 7:39 AM
You may find the review you are looking for here:

FX1 and Z1

I too remember seeing something like this, but I think it was from a user who was looking hypercritically, perhaps at resolution charts. I have the FX1 and haven't noticed any such softening, but admittedly I looked at the results on a high resolution monitor more than a few times. I use it mostly for SD work. Looks like that will continue for quite some time, given the delays in HD delivery formats.
riredale wrote on 6/8/2006, 8:21 AM
Here it is.

Bottom line: an aperture smaller than f4 (5.6, 8, 11) will result in a softer image than what could theoretically be resolved with 1080 lines. Use those neutral-density filters a lot.
MH_Stevens wrote on 6/8/2006, 8:27 AM
The diffraction at small apertures (high f-number) is common with all video cameras. In shooting with these types of camera it's good practice to use ND filters to keep the aperture open to a bout f4. I limit myself to f5.6; this also reduced the cameras high DOF.

If you shoot the FX1 in auto mode you can limit the aperture closing down in the the preset menus.

Michael
Pcamp wrote on 6/8/2006, 9:07 AM
Thanks for the info/replies! Clear now.
Paul
johnmeyer wrote on 6/8/2006, 11:31 AM
I learned a lot from this. Very helpful. Thank you everyone.
Serena wrote on 6/8/2006, 6:53 PM
If you want a more thorough explanation of diffraction limited imaging go to diffraction limits
An every night problem very familiar to astronomers; stars appear bigger in smaller diameter telescopes and in that business you can really view the details of the airy disk (in fact use them to check the telescope optics).
The other side for photographers is that lenses are never fully corrected for optical abberations and cheaper lenses (eg. those on video cameras) give of their best when not fully open (balance between diffraction limiting and optical abberation). The old rule of thumb was best at 1 stop less than max. Of course, zoom lenses even worse problems. That's why an excellent zoom lens costs >> $10K

EDIT: incidentally, don't make conclusions about HDV performance by checking SD downconversions or by comparing ordinary images. This is fair enough for personal evaluation (ie deciding how you want to employ the gear) but your conclusions aren't quantitative and not general.