-
JVC NEW HD LINE
Anyone get a close up look at the new HD Stuff from JVC?
-
13 Replies
-
Yup, was at nab. I didn’t like it. Lots of reasons. Very consumer, very noisy, pore lens, and I don’t like the 25mbit/s format. The live video out looked great, but tape playback looked like digital satilite breakup over most of the screen at the slightest hint of movement.
I am buying two of the pany hvx200, a real compressed hd format that I can edit over FW at about the same (interum codec) file sizes, and without the LONG MOG crap.
Adam
-
Pardon me, mistyped, Long GOP, I meant to say.
Adam
-
No doubt…I totally agree. Why go HDV when you can go full HD? Panasonic and the P2 I think hit a home run. Thier booth wasn’t over exciting, especially compared to mister king kong Sony, but what they had to offer got my attention. I think P2 might not outsell XDCAM, but it will be the better of the two tapeless formats.
Marc Rolph
Producer/Director
Mississippi State University -
Can’t say I agree with much of this. The JVC camera is much better designed, has controls in all the places a professional full body camera, with a real lens on the front with proper focus and exposure controls and a broadcast rocker switcher. What Panny was showing was a blown-up DVX100, with all the poor controls, no real manual exposure and a horribly embedded TC preset deep in the menus. I thought the picture quality looked excellent, and I especially like that it shoots 720p60, which in my view is an excellent format. JVC uses a short GOP with motion interpolation, and I thought the playback on moving images and camera motion was very good. Not to mention you don’t need $2k to record eight minutes of video.
All the best,
Tom
-
[Marc Rolph] “Why go HDV when you can go full HD?”
When you do finally see HDV edited on FCP 5 you will understand why your thoughts may be overly critical of HDV image quality. Apple and Sony were together ALL over NAB and using the Sony HDV semi pro camera, the actual picture was beautiful. My own angst against MPEG-2 starting material was changed with this experience. FCP 5’s ability to edit accurate MPEG-2 long GOP was nothing short of fabulous!
While you will always find better lenses and consequently better looking uncompressed HD with a much more costly setup, the HDV concept looks almost as good for way less money.
-
I agree, Tom. Add to that the fact that the JVC deck accepts full-size DV cassetes compared to the mini, 60 min. load on the Sony.
-
But you’ve got to agree that Panny has the right idea in offering recording to 100 & 50 Mbps formats. Most of us are still amazed that reasonably-professional looking pix can be acquired at 25 Mbps. So now we’re going to accept a format that squeezes 4 times the pixels onto the same bandwidth? You don’t get something for nothing. [discussed heavily elsewhere] There’s another aspect of HDV that isn’t brought up often – tape dropouts. You get a tape dropout on anything-GOP and you’ve lost more than the single frame we’re used to losing.
Now if only JVC had added the recording format options the Panny has, I think we’d have an awesome unit. Give me the option to record to miniDV tape HDV/DV, or plug in some solid state memory for recording 50/100…. yeah, baby.Bob Woodhead / Atlanta Gun fer Hire / http://www.Woodhead.Net
Quantel-Avid-FCP-3D-Crayola
G5 DP 2G, 10.3.4, 3.5GB RAM, FCP 4.5, Aja IO, Huge 320R [raid3] -
JVC is going to offer a hard disk based recording device that will record simultaneously with the tape in the camera. One thing that got my attention that made the JVC better than the other competitors was the fact that the Analog Component out of the JVC was PRE the HDV compression, whereas the Sony/Panasonic’s output were post the HDV compression. Meaning that you could purchase an SDI converter from AJA and have uncompressed HD coming out of the JVC (with a great lens, etc.) to record into whatever you like. That to me was the biggest feature that it had over the other two.
The JVC costs a bit more, but the compression is the same as Sony’s, plus you’re getting a real lens on the JVC that you can switch out later, you can bypass the HDV compression if you wish, you can offer clients SD, HDV, or HD in the same camera. I think that is great.
Jason Wietholter
(918) 381.6350
http://www.aviproductions.com -
Totally concur Tom – I went back to the JVC booth Thurs. morning when it was peaceful in the hall and got a real good look at the JVC and talked with the rep who shot all the demo footage – this is a GREAT camera. The included lens is very acceptable and designed for the format – Fuji and Canon have mores lenses coming including a Fujinon Wide Angle HD zoom fon under 10 grand which could turn this camera into a real powerhouse. The JVC has all controls in the right places and the overall design is outstanding – very balanced and very “pro”.
My only gripe is that the image on the built-in LCD and the viewfinder looked quite poor compared to the external monitor which looked fantastic. I hope this is a prototype problem that will be fixed when the camera is released. If you look at the LCD on the FX1 or Z1 the image is crystal clear and is easy to focus – not so with the JVC’s at NAB. I wouldn’t hesitate in shooting a 24p project with this camera.
This is not to say I don’t love the Panasonic concept but we need to see footage to verify its worth. If it’s anything like the rest of the Panasonic HD line – it will be a real winner.
Lance Bachelder
Southern California
Cow Forum Host- Magic Bullet -
Ditto on the viewfinder. Very contrasty and harsh, although I must admit that I didn’t play with the settings.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up