I want to add another dimension to this discussion. As many of you know,
the 'resolution' is less important to quality once the equipment has reached
450 lines or so rather than the compression itself. DV hits a real limit as to
quality vs. resolution depending upon the codec. Also, the 'interleaved'
pel schemes do create a set of artifacts that are difficult to fix, and using
a 'standard' codec for such a sensor array is probably not the right thing
to do.

I happen to have D9 equipment that even if it is supplied less than full 500+
lines of resolution material, looks MUCH MUCH better than the best DV
stuff (visible only on high-res monitors, such as HDTVs.)

When discussing the differences between the various camcorders, the
resolution is IMPORTANT, but also the codec algorithms and tradeoffs
are also important. It would indeed be a good thing to see unbiased reviews
of the various high-end (e.g. >$2000) prosumer and professional camcorders
that not only test chroma/luma resolution, but also show codec defects or
quantization issues (e.g. DV truncation or banding.)

John "JD"