On Sun, 15 Apr 2001 13:47:38 -0400, "Alex Legrault" wrote:

>Someone in this NG mentioned that cameras claiming capable of shooting
>Progressive Scan are in Reality "non-interlaced scan" instead of
>"Progressive Scan". They just contruct a single frame from only one of the
>two fields of video, causing a drop in vertical resolution because only half
>of the lines are used.
>
>Putting S/N ratio, luma and bandwidth numbers apart, DV claims 500 lines of
>Horizontal resolution, if the above statement is true, then resolution drops
>to 250 lines if a video is shot in "non-interlaced scan" In other words, the
>video should look soft like a conventional U-matic 3/4".
>
>Q1: I would like to know if the Canon GL1 shoots a true Progressive Scan
>video?
>
>Q2: Does anyone know if the JVC DV-500 can do true Progressive scan?
>
>Q3: At what IRE % the zebra pattern triggers on the Canon GL1?

The above questions are not answered in my reviews, but
what is said there may be more relevant to a choice...;-)
(If you are concerned about image resolution, the
GL-1 would not be my first choice in its price range...)
The reviews are at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm )
I would be surprised, though, if the GL-1 were not true
PS-mode - though this does not mean that resolution is
not somewhat reduced in PS mode compared with interlaced
mode... Switching to a shutter speed below 1/60th (if
this were possible with the GL-1) would likely result in
halving the vertical resolution, though...