There is some pretty serious misinformation floating around this thread!
First, I think everybody needs to put their Biases aside and look at some cold, hard facts.
Between the two cameras, it depends on what you want to shoot and how you want to shoot and cut it, to make your decision. The XLH1
will give you better overall pixel-by pixel resolution. It's as clear as day, that a pixel shifted 960x540 will NOT look as good as a 1440x1080 native image on screen. Pixel-shifting does not create extra pixels, it upsamples.
So, if you are going for the details, go for an XLH1. Also go for an XLH1 if you want to use different lenses and higher quality glass, and (on the stock lens) have a longer zoom reach. 24F is essentially about as close to progressive as you can get from interlaced CCD's and its very hard to tell the difference between 24F and 24P native. Go for the XLH1 if you don't want to dish out money on solid state and prefer the ease of HDV.
Go for the HVX200 if you want slightly better lattitude, 4:2:2 colourspace and less compression artifacts. If dealing with fast moving things, this would be the natural choice.
- Canons 1440x1080 is not real 1080i....real HD 1080i is 1920x1080 and 1440x1080 is CONSUMER HDV and not INDUSTRIAL HD!!!
- 720P is REAL INDUSTRIAL HD as the resolution 1280x720 is real HD standard
Umm, funny thing here but, 1440x1080 is actually HIGHER than 1280x720 (which is upscaled for 960x540 anyway). Im totally lost as to how you can possibly see 720 as being of better pixel resolution, or did you fail at math? :shock:
From my personal experiences I have been using HDV cameras now for a while, and have had far less issues from them as I was originally warned about. Of course solid-state is the way of the future, but its not for everyone, and if resolution or lens options makes you swing toward the XLH1, I for one don't think you need be afraid of the consequences at all![/i]