-
JVC GY-HM700 Camera
Had a chance to demo the new JVC GY-HM700 camera yesterday. This is the camera that uses SDHC cards to record to and records in a FCP native QT format.
I’ll have to admit I wasn’t expecting much, but I was more than pleasantly surprised! I actually had the salesman come by to demo the JVC HD monitors and hadn’t paid much attention to this camera. Considering the price range ($7-8,000) and what appears to be a nice workflow with FCP, I looking further into a couple of these.
Anyone actually using on day to day yet. Your thoughts on the image quality and workflow would be appreciated.
I did do a search here on the forum and have seen the threads, but none with real world day to day experience with the workflow with FCP. Can it be as easy and fast as it appears?
For background info we currently are using Sony XDCam HD F335’s.
Thanks!
-
8 Replies
-
Hi Drew,
I haven heard any feedback from the camera.
The codec is EX-1 and the workflow as easy as with the SONY EX1/3.
The only advantage of the SONY’s may be that those use 1/2′ CMOS, while the JVC use a 1/3 CCD.
But with the CCDs you will avoid any Rolling Shutter problem.
The machine looks great and I think that JVC is a honest company.
Also you will be able to record in SDHC cards instead of the expensive SxS.
People have been talking about in the SONY CineAlta forum, but as I said nobody had reported yet about this camera.
If you are already working with XDCAM this camera may fit you really well.
rafael -
the JVC GY-HM700 Camera is a great camera. I have had mine about 10 days, i got to tell you so far I am extremly satisified with it shot a short film for the 48 hour and I LOVE it it is smooth so far
Kent Stipp
Life Begins at 155mph
Ki PRO Lens to Post
3am Studios llc.
3amstudios.org
Sharedsummitsfever.com -
[Rafael Amador] “The only advantage of the SONY’s may be that those use 1/2′ CMOS, while the JVC use a 1/3 CCD.”
I don’t consider that an advantage at all. CMOS and rolling shutter are just plain unacceptable to me. Gimme 1/3″ CCDs any day. Besides, the most important thing is the LENS…not the sensor.
I saw this camera at NAB and really liked it. GREAT lens on it.
Shane
GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Hi shane,
I have the EX-1 since more than one year and not a single problem with the famous Rolling Shutter.
No problem with flashes, neither with fast movement.
If there would be any issue with CMOS, I don’t think PANASONIC would mount them in their new P2 line.
I just mentioned that before nobody else would mention it. People was very scared about this when SONY released the EX-1. I haven read just a single complain in the CineAlta forum.
A good lens will be always better than a bad one. A 1/2′ CMOS will be always better than a 1/3′ CMOS.
rafael -
[Rafael Amador] “If there would be any issue with CMOS, I don’t think PANASONIC would mount them in their new P2 line.”
HA! That HPX-300 has that issue…boy howdy. And yes, the EX1 and EX3 have that issue. I guess you either don’t notice it or don’t go much movement. I went to NAB and wiggled all these cameras…oy.
RED has this issue. ANY CMOS has this issue. But, it is less evident if you shoot properly.
Shane
GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
I’d really have to see how bad the rolling shutter is before saying that I would prefer the worse low-light performance and less DOF control of 1/3″ chips over the 1/2″ chips of the SONY. I know some very happy EX-3 owners who don’t see the rolling shutter as a problem for them at all, but I also know a number of shooters who went from 2/3″ SD cameras to 1/3″ HDV and really don’t like the low-light gathering ability of their newer cameras.
Ed (who owns a 1/3″ chip JVC HD-110 and hates its low light capabilities!)[Shane Ross] ”
I don’t consider that an advantage at all. CMOS and rolling shutter are just plain unacceptable to me. Gimme 1/3″ CCDs any day. Besides, the most important thing is the LENS…not the sensor.I saw this camera at NAB and really liked it. GREAT lens on it.”
[Rafael Amador] “The only advantage of the SONY’s may be that those use 1/2′ CMOS, while the JVC use a 1/3 CCD.”
[Shane Ross] “[Rafael Amador] “The only advantage of the SONY’s may be that those use 1/2′ CMOS, while the JVC use a 1/3 CCD.”
I don’t consider that an advantage at all. CMOS and rolling shutter are just plain unacceptable to me. Gimme 1/3″ CCDs any day. Besides, the most important thing is the LENS…not the sensor.
I saw this camera at NAB and really liked it. GREAT lens on it.”
-
[Shane Ross] “CMOS and rolling shutter are just plain unacceptable to me.”
You mean like in this picture?
Arnie
Post production is not an afterthought!
https://www.arniepix.com/ -
[Shane Ross] ” ANY CMOS has this issue. But, it is less evident if you shoot properly. “
Careful — both the SII and Phantom camera both have CMOS chips and rolling shutters and there is no issue with rolling shutter curvature- note that some Phantom cameras can shoot over 1 million frames a sec.
Phantom was the first professional camera to have CMOS and a rolling shutter and they have no issue at all. –
now they do cost a tab bit more
a big tad more gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production WorkflowsCheck out
https://www.aja.com/kiprotour/Inside look at the IoHD
https://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up