HVX200 vs JVCPROHD

[Editor321]

First time poster, long time viewer.

OK, Ive been racking my brain for about a week on which camera to pursue. I would like Barry G or someone in-the-know to make sure I have all my facts straight here. As I do with any tough decision, I write down positives and negatives.. .............Sorry If this post is redundant.

HVX200

Positives
1. Shoot in both 1080i and 720p /24p

Negatives
1. Architecture of camera
2. P2 in terms of cost and length of recording. Not efficient..
3. Can only shoot in HD with the P2....and only SD with minidv-Tape

Note: So the camera really cost about $8,000 if you are want to shoot in HD...well ofcourse or Ill just stay with my DVX.

JVCPROHD

Positives
1. Can shoot in HD on MiniDV tapes. (personally, Ive never had a problem with mini-DV tapes. Cheap and it does the job) Efficiency to me is a huge priority. So, with the JVC at $6,295, I get to shoot an hour of HD at 720p compared to spending $8,000 to shoot 10-20 minutes of HD, downloading to laptop and reuse (20 minutes downtime). Or spend another $1,000 to get another 4gb P2 to use in tandem.

2. JVC is better looking...this camera looks like a porsche with a porshe engine. The HVX looks like a Hyundai but has Ferrari engine.......Ive read too many articles where camera cosmetics are important to the "actor", "crew", client", etc. Not a real big deal, but image has it's place.

Negatives:
1. No 1080i for higher resolution


Synopsis - I value efficiency, I need to get in and out of shoot with a quickness and not be concerned about how much length I got when doing retakes. The P2 tech just seems too impractical at this point to shoot in HD. P2 is not something that is going to save me time....Just the opposite.

MiniDv IMO was not broken......Hell, you can use a minidv tape 20 times without drops and can get cheap at your local Walmart.

I would pay for P2 if it was feasible in terms of cost and practicality...But at this point, is just not. Correct me if Im wrong

So my real question is, how much better is 1080i over 720p and is the higher resolution worth all the known in-efficiencies of P2. As you can see, I'm leaning towards the JVC.

Now, if I can record HD with minidv on the HVX200....the HVX is going to be apart of my collection..hands down.

[reservoir]

I knew this thread was *BOUND* to happen!! I'll take Jarred and Barry's advice from the HVX200 article and remain silent on the issue until we see some footage.

I think most would agree with this logic.

~reservoir~

[author]

Well put, Editor321... and, additionally, the JVC HD100 is scheduled for June/July availability whereas the Panny won't out until "last quarter," whatever that may mean.

So, from at least my point of view, I have to ask where's the benefit of waiting longer for Panasonic and paying more for a camera that, in some respects, does less?

Guess I'm leaning toward JVC ... but, of course, I'm watching events from NAB closely.

Regardless of all, it's durn NICE to have these choices.

--Ralph

[mikkowilson]

"Most of us" ... "Remaining Silent" ...*cough* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!

;-)


- Mikko.

[Joe]

You are missing the real difference. JVC is a HDV format camcorder. The Panasonic HVX200 is capable of DVCPRO HD a much higher picture quality.

[Barry_Green]

The JVC also doesn't have variable frame rates, and (most limitingly) can't shoot "reality"-looking footage in 60p or 60i. That's a serious drawback. If you're only ever interested in shooting 24p or 30p, it may suit just fine, but if you're looking to get paying work shooting events, conventions, reality TV, news, things like that... the JVC can't deliver the look.

But they'll sell a ton of 'em.

[Glenn_Gipson]

Boy, the HVX is really gonna hurt the HD100's sales, as a lot of folk will be holding out for the HVX200...no matter how good the HD100's image is. But JVC should have got it right the first time with the HD1, oh well, too late now.

[princigalli]

HDV sucks. The compression is really bad. Also, the JVC with its hige lens is as big as a studio camera. Not practical at all. I am sure they will sell some P2 backup devices just like the ones you see now for CF cards, not needing a laptop. Also, I think you can use a hard disk, and the camera is still smaller than the JVC.

HDV sucks.

[Jaime Valles]

Some things not on your list:

1) HVX can record HD directly to *ANY* off-the-shelf Hard Disk, not just to P2. You want to record long takes of 1080? Just plug in a cheap 120GB Firewire drive to the camera. Thats 2 hours of 1080 material, 4 of 720, 8 of SD (I believe).

2) HVX can do 1080 at 24p, not just 1080 interlaced. This is the biggest factor for me. 1080/24p in DVCProHD that can record direct-to-Hard Disk, as well as P2, and also SD to tape. It's the best of both worlds.

[Neil Rowe]

"hdv sucks"... lol i wouldnt quite say that.. id say it "bites dog butt".. which is similar.. but it involves a dogs butt.


lol anyway.. im not being totally serious.. HDV is ok for people that HDV is ok for.
..as for me, its not ok.

[redindian]

nobody seems to mention that JVC has INTERCHANGEABLE real MANUAL HD lenses!
The quality of the image is as good as the glass in front (not to say HDX is made of window pane glass - but it doesnt look like it has manual controls)

[Jaime Valles]

nobody seems to mention that JVC has INTERCHANGEABLE real MANUAL HD lenses!
The quality of the image is as good as the glass in front (not to say HDX is made of window pane glass - but it doesnt look like it has manual controls)

Sort of. But my DVX footage looks a heck of a lot better than XL1 footage with 16x manual lens.

I'm all for a good lens, but I'll take DVCProHD, 1080/24p and recording to P2/firewire/usb2 drive ANY DAY over HDV at 720p.

[goober542]

so you can go buy any harddrive get a firewire enclosure and plug this bad boy up and record?

Whats the use in p2 get a harddrive

[goober542]

oh yeh what is filter diameter?

[Editor321]

JRV3034...see thats just it...99% of my shooting is on the move..Im not going to be able to plug any firewire connection to my camera...I need the mobility.

Barry G....the JVC doesnt have as many framerates, which is why I still go back and forth on this decision. I love what Panny has done in given us all these options..

"HDV sucks"...well, I have seen Sony HDV on videos and reality television...and it's pretty awesome footage.

P2 P2 P2 P2......is my hangup I guess. Panny gave us the world and said, "but, you have to buy our expensive memory cards". Panny will make more money on P2 cards than they will in HVX sales. Guranteed.

I can see replacing these bad boys either through damages, or losing - misplacing every 6 months....And at $2,000 a pop....wow. I mean, it's the size of a credit card for crying out loud. The card will undergo being changed out and moved around, and downloaded, and uploaded, etc.

I have two 60 min. minidv tapes with footage that I havent even uploaded yet. Conveniatly, they are just sitting on tapes in my closest to be uploaded at my leisure. I cant do that with P2 cards because the real-estate is too valuable. Every 15 min of recording would require me to upload the p2 cards. And doing this at the shoot is not an option.

But, Im a penny pincher...you guys with big budgets can afford 4 or 5 32gb P2 cards for as much or more than the camera itself....

[Digigenic]

so you can go buy any harddrive get a firewire enclosure and plug this bad boy up and record?

Whats the use in p2 get a harddrive...oh yeh what is filter diameter?

The direct to disk option for the HVX has yet to be officially confirmed, though there are strong reasons for asserting it will have the option.
Regardless, the use of a P2 drive is above and beyond everything, it's a little a head of its time, but within a year or two, if you own the HVX, there's a 90% chance you'll be utilizing the P2 drives, I still can't believe it's actually there though, it is the future...but it's here now :)

Oh, and I believe the lens diameter of the HVX is said to be 82mm.

[Phooey]

nobody seems to mention that JVC has INTERCHANGEABLE real MANUAL HD lenses!
The quality of the image is as good as the glass in front (not to say HDX is made of window pane glass - but it doesnt look like it has manual controls)

Not to diminish the importance of good glass, but a fujinon lens on my camera phone isn't going to give me a good image. Still I want to see the results. Looks like FCP5 is set to handle HDV pretty good. But still. My eyes must see.

[Barry_S]

It's way too early for any pronouncements on the quality of JVC's Pro HD flavor of HDV. Considering that Panasonic is pretty good about release dates, I'd sure wait for a head to head comparison of image quality between the two cameras. It will only be a few months between the camera releases. If you absolutely need to use a super telephoto lens for something like wildlife work, the JVC seems appealing. If the HVX will indeed record directly to off-the shelf HDDs, then I'd be hard pressed to find many other other reasons to pick the JVC. If the HVX doesn't support direct to HDD recording, then the JVC may be more affordable out of the box for HD recording. However, there's no getting around the fact the HDV data stream is capped at 25 Mbs. So the JVC will be delivering a much more highly compressed flavor of HD with significantly lower chroma sampling. This may not matter for less demanding applications, but again, show me the direct comparison of image quality and workflow. I like JVC, but they have a tendancy to go 80% of the way with their products. Let's hope they nailed this one because it's great to have a choice and for some users, the interchangeable lens is a necessity.

[Zig_Zigman]

Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?

[TiVo]

-and (most limitingly) can't -shoot "reality"looking footage in 60p or 60i. That's a serious drawback-

I thought the JVC couls shoot 720 60p

[DavidNJ]

10 years ago, I bought a Supra Twin Turbo when the dealers couldn't give them away. I thought it was the best car in the class.

Currently, I use a JVC DV300, always envying the DVX. Really, really envying the DVX, especially the 100A, which came out the following year.

Now this! First, Pansonic, with the DVX and SDX has a reputation that is beyond reproach. JVC, mired it older cameras, has a reputation desperately in need of repair.

By supporting DVCPro50 and DVCProHD, Panasonic is putting a very high quality image on the recording media. If not a high resolution image.

By using HDV 720p, JVC is providing a full resolution image with an easily managed workflow. And some features that seem very interesting (the earpiece and the attention to focus assist). The 16x lens seems ridculously long (7.3-117 for a 1/3" camera? it sounds like a 2/3" lens!) and maybe too 'pro' a size and a look (you did have a permit and insurance, didn't you).

Someone has said they wanted to see footage. I want to see the footage after it runs through the editor, and on an HD monitor or on film. Who really has the best resolution? Does the HDX200 really provide the color it promises? Does HDV lose too much for moving images? Can we really work in DVCPro50 and DVCProHD with our current equipment?

Damn, don't you hate it when MB and BMW introduce new cars at the same time!

[Barry_S]

If I was Canon and wanted a dog in this fight, I'd think I'd license *both* codecs. How about cam with multi-format P2 plus an HDV tape drive. More likely, they'll be late to the table and come in with a me-too product.


Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?

[reservoir]

If I was Canon and wanted a dog in this fight, I'd think I'd license *both* codecs. How about cam with multi-format P2 plus an HDV tape drive. More likely, they'll be late to the table and come in with a me-too product.

....As the trend has always been!! :huh:

But don't feel too sorry for ol' Canon....they've still got their awesome DSLR's and Lenses to keep them afloat!! :)

~reservoir~

[redindian]

Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?

If canon can take the positives of HVX200 and mix it with positives of HD100 - they will knock both off.

A Canon XL3 with interchangeable lens which does
1080/24p/30p/60i,
720/24/30/60p
in 4:2:2

for $6,999

Basically take HVX200 and put a interchangeable lens mount for $1,000 more.

that wud be the last camera I buy before a full frame 4:4:4 comes out in 2008/9

[Daniel Moore]

Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?

I read somewhere that 50 mbps HDV would give 166mbps ________ (whatever codec it was) a run for its money. It seems to me that with a better compression system, more information could potentially fit into a usable bitrate. And if not limited by such a low bitrate (19 for 720p?) would MPEG really look that bad?

How hard would it be to implement this, with say, hot-swappable hard drives? That would be the last camera I would ever buy, even though I'm broke and don't have anything worth filming.

[mr._guiyotinne]

I must remember that what JVC is selling with HD100 is a standard lens (it looks they are speaking about a standard definition), and HD lens they offer is around 6000$ alone...

At least i read this everywhere they post an interview...

[reservoir]

I must remember that what JVC is selling with HD100 is a standard lens (it looks they are speaking about a standard definition), and HD lens they offer is around 6000$ alone...

At least i read this everywhere they post an interview...

See...that's the part I DON'T understand. HD is HD, right? But HD with an HD lense is better?

In other words, can my feeble eyes tell a $6,000 dollar difference in the picture? I mean come'on!! I'll save my extra 6k and buy cool accessories for the HVX.

~reservoir~

[Aaron Koolen]

If canon can take the positives of HVX200 and mix it with positives of HD100 - they will knock both off.

A Canon XL3 with interchangeable lens which does
1080/24p/30p/60i,
720/24/30/60p
in 4:2:2

for $6,999

Basically take HVX200 and put a interchangeable lens mount for $1,000 more.

that wud be the last camera I buy before a full frame 4:4:4 comes out in 2008/9

I don't know where they'd get 4:2:2 from though. They are part of the HDV consortium so I'd thing they'd go with that (4:2:0). If not, do you think Panasonic would license them their DVCPro codecs, only to bring out a better camera?


Aaron

[mr._guiyotinne]

Well, i have a question here... a film camera has a better resolution than HD ,or am i mistaken? If photo lenses are as good as get an images to these cameras, what make HD lenses so pricey? I know they aren´t cheap video lenses... Controls, well, HVX looks will have them manual (what we want) and auto too, and will be a truly HD lens, just fixed...

Then why so much buzz around interchageagle HD lenses... I´m with Reservoir, these 6G can make my HVX ready for war... and to record hours and hours on HDDs! Mattebox, Follow focus, whatever you think about... And then they will have to pay for it too.

I see no point on JVC. My pocket is already sold.

[Editor321]

The extra lens is not needed for HD... Quotes from JVC article.

"Still on the subject of lenses, JVC introduces a new patented feature called HD Focus Assist which not only makes focussing even more precise, it also reduces the time needed to achieve focus. It works by exaggerating in the viewfinder the edge detail of the part of the subject that is in focus".

So..take it or leave it.....Not so with P2 cards..you will need them for HD for HVX. So I would hold on to that extra 6K for about 3 cards.

JVC article cont'd (which may be the ultimate reason I get the JVC)
"One obvious benefit is that recording durations, in both standard and high definition, can be longer than the 60 minutes of the miniDV cassette. The hard disk can be set to record either sequentially or in parallel with the tape cassette. It also allows automatic buffering of seconds or even minutes of video so that the start of the action is always captured. Time-saving is another advantage of the removable disk, which becomes an operational NLE source within seconds of being removed from the camcorder. There is no other system available at any price level in high definition video that offers this rapid editing facility."

"The GY-HD100's HDTV recording format is selected from 720p/25, 720p/24 and 720p/30 and the 625 PAL recording format from 576i/50 and 576p/25 in either 4:3 or 16:9. From the progressive 720p native recording, the on-board converter provides in real time a further array of signal types from which to choose. These signals are not only delivered in realtime but also free from artefacts. In high definition they are 1080i/50, 1080i/60, 720p/60 & 720p/50 and in standard definition 625 PAL they are 576i/50 in either 4:3 or 16:9."


1080i/60 for JVC? Wouldnt that get me the "reality" look as well as the film look with 720p/24???

[mr._guiyotinne]

Editor, HVX will be capable of recording directly to normal HDDs, so with 360 Gigs HD you can get three hours of 108024p/60i. I hope it´s conffirmed by now or i will be foot in mouth...

[Shaw]

Yes, but do you plan to spend a bunch of money on hard drives (which you could probably use in place of p2), a computer, and a HD capture card? You'll need a hell of a lot more room than DVCproHD, that's for sure and it's not a run and gun setup like most "reality" applications are.

[melyncolly]

There has to be some advantage of P2 technology that myself, and a lot of posters here, are missing. Completely off the topic of HVx vs. HD100...

why should i drop another few g's for a couple of P2's to only get 16 minutes of footage max (to say i bought two P2's) when im staring at an external 250gb HD (hard-drive not Hi-def, like that would make sense ;) i bought for just over a hundred and fifty bux?!!!! Why would anyone buy a P2 besides the fact that it has a direct slot and is smaller to carry around. Im sure some "Genius" will mass produce an external hard-drive mount to the HVX200 for convenience, but i have to be missing something here...I have to be?

(this is of course direct firewire to and exHD is actually confirmed in the near future)

[Phooey]

mainly stabiliity. It will not drop frames. HD is a sustained data rate of 100mb/s. If you're recording directly to a hard driive and something goes wonky, you're out. Record to P2, and transfer to a Hard Drive, it could slow down to 2mb/s and go back up to 300 mb/s and your fine. Hopefully a record direct to Hard Drive will be there and will work well. I would like to see that option. For filmmaking I will not cry if it doesn't.

Also, with P2, you can pre-record and loop record.

[kyle_doris]

there is just no comparing these two cameras for me. options. options. options.

it's really hard to even compare them in my eyes. the variable frame rate + having a tape transport for me makes it impossible for me to ever consider wanting a different camera.

[Editor321]

Bro...If you have the cash...they certainly have the options.

[kyle_doris]

i'm just saying for my work, which isn't really payed work. and doesn't require to shoot for long periods of time.

i just see this HVX and i can't even fathom that all these options are on it. i honestly would have gasped @ saving and spending 6,000 dollars on a camera when i got my DVX. but i would sell my DVX and save money for this thing in a second now. it is just THAT exciting. i still can't believe it will have variable frame rate. that just blows my mind.

[Barry_Green]

1080i/60 for JVC? Wouldnt that get me the "reality" look as well as the film look with 720p/24???
No, because it's not shooting 1080i. It's shooting 30p, and then converting that to 60i. So you'll have a 60i-compatible signal that looks like 720/30p footage.

I've gone over this with JVC. I talked with them at their booth. There is no "reality look" on tape, in high-def.

[Barry_Green]

I thought the JVC couls shoot 720 60p
It cannot record 60p. It can output raw 720/60p on the component outputs, but you can't record it. So unless you're in a studio doing live switching/broadcast, it does you basically no good.

[Barry_Green]

Also, the JVC with its hige lens is as big as a studio camera.
Actually, it's *tiny*. With its "huge" lens, it's still smaller than an HVX. Overall it may be an inch longer, but it's just a tiny, tiny camera. The main body of the camera's about as big as a man's hand (well, a reasonbly large man's hand, that is). It's really, really small.

If people were expecting a Betacam-looking shoulder-mount camera, they're in for a huge surprise (well, make that a "tiny" surprise).

[Barry_Green]

nobody seems to mention that JVC has INTERCHANGEABLE real MANUAL HD lenses!
The quality of the image is as good as the glass in front (not to say HDX is made of window pane glass - but it doesnt look like it has manual controls)
The JVC does indeed have interchangeable lenses. However, how practical is it, considering the price range?

Right now there are two lenses available: the one that comes with the camera, and an optional wide-angle lens. They haven't released the price of the wide-angle lens yet, but they have said that it by itself costs more than the whole camera+lens bundle!

So that will rule out "interchanging lenses" for probably 95% of the users. Which leaves them with the stock lens. And as you say, "the quality of the image is as good as the glass in front". JVC values the body of the camera at $5,000, which could be read to say that they're valuing the lens at $1295. That's less than Canon's 16x manual lens for the XL2. And that's a standard-definition lens! How good are you expecting a $1300 high-definition lens to be?

I will defer to the footage -- as soon as possible we'll compare footage and find out what *really* matters. But if you want to argue specifications, the lens doesn't seem to be an overwhelmingly big selling point, at least on paper.

[kyle_doris]

i'd be hard pressed to believe that JVC is suddenly using comparable gamma curves to panasonic. and honestly, that is more then half the battle with all this stuff (for me personally).

and yea, that JVC camera is so small why would you ever need to hold it on your shoulder?