HD100 in Rome

[videoteque73]

Hi,

I'm pretty new to this forums, I read them, in the hope to understand this "high definition for the rest of us" movement. Today I have been (nearly by chance) in a JVC presentation of the HD100. Forgive my bad english, I am a spanish living in Italy, I don't remeber half the spanish, still didn't learn italian...

The presentation was modest, the model we looked at was a working prototype and the JVC employee told us there are only five models like these in Europe. They hope to receive the production models in July.

The presentation lacked several things, unfortunately. There was a little set on a table with some toys and a "back-focus" checker printed in a sheet of paper. The camera was operated in 30p and we watched the results in an HD CRT JVC monitor... They justified 30p because there was also an LCD and they said it wouldn't take 25p (???). In PAL it can rec 24p, 25p, 30p. What it lacked is that nobody recorded the signal to tape and then watched, we watched the direct output. We hadn't the possibility to try in exterior either.

My conclusions are:

The camera seems to have been THOUGHT well. Not like those camcorder or digital cameras with a lot of gimmicks and no ergonomy. Buttons seem to be where they need to. The feeling is also good, no cheap plastic.

The progresive scanning is also a good pro. I have not tested many cameras lately, but the HD100 was near a 5100 (1/2" 3CCD camcorder interlaced). The "back focus" checker "tilted" in the 5100 monitor, but on the HD100 the image was 100% solid. No edges, lines or interlaced problems. Rock solid images.

The 30p didn't bothered me. I am used to my old AG-EZ1, which in frame mode, recs a sort of progressive, but not very fluid. The HD100 produced a much better motion. I hope in 25p it's more or less the same.

I had a fear and it is called low light. So much has been talked about Sony HDV's lossing sensitivity that I had serious doubts. Some of the people who were there had the same fear, so we tried the camera in dark zones. JVC rates it F8 at 2000lux. I suppose it all depends where do you come from, from my EZ1 the low light performance is good. There are two points to help. Gain is pretty invisible at 3dB and doesn't disturb even at 6dB (direct output, I don't know how the codec handles this noise). I don't remember maximum Gain, but is pretty unusable... The other good point is that there are 1/15 and 1/7.5 slow shutters.

So I survived the low light and progressive motion fears. Also I heard the tripod adapter costs nearly 1000€, but it's for the pro tripods. You can use a normal tripod with it.

They said that the little batteries should last one hour, and the big ones a couple of hours (zoom activity dependent).

A lot of things remain unresolved...

How does the HDV codec work with 720p signals?? Most owners of HDV equipement doesn't complain, so if HDV can take 1080i, 720p should compress much better...

How you can capture the firewire output?? They said most software is compatible but it wasn't very clear to me. If you use the Firestore, they said any editing software can access the files and edit right away(??). The "workflow" hasn't been clearly explained, in any case the JVC employee didn't seem to have actually used a camera or edited something. I may be wrong. So this point remains to be seen.

In any case the demo convinced me pretty much. The talk about Sony's HDV was a little in the funny side, saying that how can you call HD a camcorder with 960x540 pixels CCDs. Etc, etc. But from what I read most Z1 owners are happy. It remains to be seen what 1080p is better, 1080i from 960x540 pixels CCDs or 720p with native resolution CCDs enlarged. Who wants to the test???

This was all!!!

[videoteque73]

I forgot one thing, the camera was a prototype and because of that there was a little vertical line in the middle of the screen. A sort of Triniton monitor line. They said it was because they didn't use a production CCD... Can you home-make CCDs by placing one next to other??

[Barry_Green]

The 30p didn't bothered me. I am used to my old AG-EZ1, which in frame mode, recs a sort of progressive, but not very fluid. The HD100 produced a much better motion. I hope in 25p it's more or less the same.
25p won't be as "fluid" as 30p. 30p is shooting at a faster frame rate, which gives more fluid motion. 25p on the HD100 will give you the same motion as your EZ1 in frame mode. However, JVC has developed what they call a "motion smoothing" filter, which you can optionally engage. It should make the 25p motion of the HD100 even a little smoother than the frame mode motion of the EZ1.


JVC rates it F8 at 2000lux.
Intriguing. That's only about one stop slower than the DVX! That would make it at least a stop faster than the Z1, maybe closer to two stops faster. I look forward to testing this to verify, but if it's legit, that's great news indeed.


There are two points to help. Gain is pretty invisible at 3dB and doesn't disturb even at 6dB (direct output, I don't know how the codec handles this noise).
This will be interesting to see as well. It could go either way. The original JVC HD1 was plagued with very visible chroma noise. However, the Z1 seems quite noise-free, or at least certainly lower noise than other cameras. The new JVC has newly designed chips, perhaps optimized to control noise, I don't know, but the MPEG compression discards high-frequency detail (which noise may qualify as) so it's possible the recordings will be quite clean even with some gain.


How does the HDV codec work with 720p signals??
There are two different HDV codecs, one for 720p and one for 1080i. In my testing, I found that the 720p version holds up better, as 720p, than the 1080i version holds up for 1080i. 720p uses a lower bitrate, but it also uses a lower framerate too. 720p HDV can still fall apart if there's a lot of change between frames, and it still has 4:2:0 color, but I believe the 720p version produces a better version of 720p video than the 1080i version produces of 1080i video.


How you can capture the firewire output??
Many NLE programs are HDV-compliant right now. Apple's FCP5, Sony's Vegas 6, and Avid's Express Pro HD all support native HDV capture and editing. I think Pinnacle Liquid Edition 6 does as well, and I'm sure there are others. Don't know about Adobe Premiere.


If you use the Firestore, they said any editing software can access the files and edit right away(??).
Yes, the Firestore can capture the HDV data and write it directly to its own hard disk. You can then plug that hard disk into a computer and edit right away. Note, you don't want to use just any FireStore, you want to use the one that's sold by JVC specifically for the HD100, because it has a little more integration with the camera (as in, the JVC firestore can send some data onto the viewfinder about the hard disk's status, etc).


The talk about Sony's HDV was a little in the funny side, saying that how can you call HD a camcorder with 960x540 pixels CCDs.
That's a misrepresentation. The Sony's CCDs are 960x1080, not 960x540. And they use pixel shift to get 1440x1080 resolution.


It remains to be seen what 1080p is better, 1080i from 960x540 pixels CCDs or 720p with native resolution CCDs enlarged. Who wants to the test???
I'll gladly test, but I think the test is pointless. The HVX, sampling native 1080p off its CCDs, will deliver the best 1080p of the bunch. Simulating/scaling/etc from a different camera is not going to be in the same ballpark. If you want 1080p, get a 1080p camera. The Sony is a 1080i camera, the JVC is a 720p camera. Use them for what they are intended and you'll get the best results from each.

Thanks for the report!

[mmm]

That's a misrepresentation. The Sony's CCDs are 960x1080, not 960x540. And they use pixel shift to get 1440x1080 resolution.


I guess the 960x540 is refering to de-interlacing in post to produce a 1080p picture. In effect you have to discard one field (540 lines) and interpolate up to 1080 - Making use of only 960x540 pixels.

It is misleading but isn't it true if you want to shoot progressive on a FX1/Z1? Please correct me if I am wrong. How do the various cineframe modes work?

[Barry_Green]

That would be true, yes -- CineFrame 30 and CineFrame 25 do discard one field and field-double the other field to give you a low-res simulation of 1080p.

But why do that? Why not just use the tool the way it's designed (as an interlaced camera) and get 1080i resolution? If you want 1080p, get a 1080p camera.

It's like... if you want to haul around a lot of gear and equipment, you could try putting saddlebags and a trailer on your motorcycle, but a pickup truck or van would do a *much* better job...

Granted there isn't a 1080p camera in the $6000 price bracket (yet), but using a 1080i camera to simulate low-res 1080p isn't giving you actual 1080p, it's just taking the worst of both worlds... I would guess that if you wanted to simulate 1080p, my guess would be that an up-rezzed 720p image is likely going to look better than a field-dropped 1080i image. But that's just raw speculation and guessing, we won't know until the HD100 actually comes out and can be tested.

[mmm]

I would guess that if you wanted to simulate 1080p, my guess would be that an up-rezzed 720p image is likely going to look better than a field-dropped 1080i image. But that's just raw speculation and guessing, we won't know until the HD100 actually comes out and can be tested.

I guess that is what JVC was suggesting in Rome. When do you get your HD100 Barry? Have they given a date?

[Barry_Green]

No date, but I'm first on the list from EVS, so I should get the first one they get...

[Rush]

You got that straight!:thumbsup:

Rep was just here today, and she confirmed mid July.

[Barry_Green]

Mid July? Cool! (er, well, not here, not in Vegas, I meant the date was cool...)

[videoteque73]

I couldn't make some "tricky" questions because I wasn't there as a client, but I was there interviewing to work with them... :happy:

I suspect they were using 30p because is more fluid than 25p.... :evil:

And still don't understand why they didn't rec the signal and show the results or even why they didn't enter in the menus and tweak the gamma and colorimetry for us to see. The menus are DEEEEP!!! :thumbsup:

Maybe because the prototype hadn't everything working...

In any case the low-light response seemed very good to me (but I come from a 1/3 3CCDs camcorder eight years old EZ1). Of course, next to the HD100 there was a 5100 which is (i think) F13 at 2000lux. In the irregular test we did, the HD100 pulled more light in the screen that what you can see with the naked eye, which is good...

I agree with Barry that the best use of it is 720p!!!!

[xray]

//I suspect they were using 30p because is more fluid than 25p//

No, the protype is a NTSC 30p model, the PAL comes later.

If you look at the 720p versus 1080i versus 1080p, the HVX always wins. It has all of them ( if you take the signal as measurement). I already read someone who said he uses the automode for 90% of the shootings. If you take that kind of look to a camera you find yourself uncomfortable with a real lens. It feels 'strange' and you have to hold it 'steady', but for all the rest of us a real lens feels 'normal'. If you absolutely want 1080p go HVX, but for you in Italy you don't need that I suppose.

With PAL 576P 50 you have a smooth -super smooth- signal!

[videoteque73]

HDV is a highly compressed format, that's for sure. Not good for fx-compositing-etc. But it has a good advantage and that's storage price.

If you work with low-budget projects, you can't budget a new hard drive every project you do, as you more or less must do with P2. For example, if you have two hours of recordings for a 20 minute project, when the project ends, what do you do, you throw away all your recordings?? I would want to keep them for sure.

For people working with mid budget projects there is no problem, you budget an external drive for every project!

The JVC is limited in that is only 24P-25P (in PAL land 30P serves little, only light slow-mo). But it seems a nice camera...

[Rush]

You might also be able to catalogue a project using a standard red laser DVD burner in your PC by converting the footage to 720p Pro-HD MPEG-2. There is a new DVD-player made by IO Data for JVC called the SR-DVD100U that will play back Pro-HD content on a standard Hi-Def TV or LCD, and has DVI output. It is a very economical way to get at least Pro-HD quality archive of your HVX-200 footage, and for $400, be able to watch your footage independently of your computer.:)

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/Attributes/press_res.jsp?tree=&model_id=MDL101546&itempath=&feature_id=08

When the blue-laser is more common, you can do a full-res backup on 2-3 DVD's. Hopefully someday soon we will be able to distribute our movies on Hidef Blu-DVD's.

[Ralph Oshiro]

Intriguing. That's only about one stop slower than the DVX! That would make it at least a stop faster than the Z1, maybe closer to two stops faster. I look forward to testing this to verify, but if it's legit, that's great news indeed.Barry: Your posts are typically right on the money, but this just doesn't seem right! First of all, I've never seen published sensitivity specs on ANY prosumer camera. If the JVC HD100 was claimed to be rated at f/8 @2,000 lux, and you're saying that the HD100 would then be "one stop slower" than the Panasonic DVX100/A, that would make the DVX100/A an f/11 camera. From DSR 500s to XDCAM 530s, I've shot with a lot of "f/11-sensitivity" cameras, and IMO, the DVX100 is no where close to that. The noise on my DVX100 (non-A) at 0dB is comparable to a BVW400 at +18dB gain!

[xray]

Barry: Your posts are typically right on the money, but this just doesn't seem right! First of all, I've never seen published sensitivity specs on ANY prosumer camera. If the JVC HD100 was claimed to be rated at f/8 @2,000 lux, and you're saying that the HD100 would then be "one stop slower" than the Panasonic DVX100/A, that would make the DVX100/A an f/11 camera. From DSR 500s to XDCAM 530s, I've shot with a lot of "f/11-sensitivity" cameras, and IMO, the DVX100 is no where close to that. The noise on my DVX100 (non-A) at 0dB is comparable to a BVW400 at +18dB gain!

It is well known that the DVX100 is using an amp internally to boot it's sensitivity. That is where the noise is coming from, it is standard already on 9 db gain. Also, that is why you can not compare the +9 or 18 db gain from a cam like the Sony Z1 or the JVC HD100 with the DVX100. Shooting with the Sony using 9db gain you see no noticeably grain, compare that in the same shoot using the DVX.

[Antoine_Fabi]

"The noise on my DVX100 (non-A) at 0dB is comparable to a BVW400 at +18dB gain!"
dixit NBCshooter

that's about what i see here...with my DVX100A
The DVX100A has a ton of noise. It's probably its only weekness, but it's a major one.

That's why i want to try the HD100 and HVX200 first.
DVCProHD is one thing, a superb codec ! no doubt, but the final image quality must start with a very clean camera signal.

That's why it is very possible that the HD100 will have a better final imagery than the HVX200 even if the HDV codec is not as good as DVCProHD.

Let's hope the HVX will have a better signal/noise than the DVX...

[Barry_Green]

that would make the DVX100/A an f/11 camera.
That is what Panasonic specifies it as: f/11 at 2000 lux. The exact quote from their website is: "Outstanding sensitivity: F11 @2000 lux, min illumination: 3 lux (at +18dB)"


It is well known that the DVX100 is using an amp internally to boot it's sensitivity. That is where the noise is coming from, it is standard already on 9 db gain.
Do you have a reference for that? I know it's well "speculated", but I've never seen any reference to actual proof.


Also, that is why you can not compare the +9 or 18 db gain from a cam like the Sony Z1 or the JVC HD100 with the DVX100
That remains to be seen, at least with the HD100. The Sony's gain is quite a bit cleaner, but I wonder if that's not due to the MPEG compression which performs heavy detail coring to discard high-frequency information (which is what noise is). The low-noise nature of those pics could be not much more than overly compressed video.

I'll have to get ahold of an FX1 again and try it in DV mode to see how it compares, noise-wise, against the DVX...