Fixed lens vs JVC's?

[ericcosh]

I was wondering if someone could help me with this question? Last night, our group had an opportunity to check out the JVC ProHd camera. One of the things that kept coming up was the advantage of having an interchangable lens versus a fixed lens. My comment was that in the end, it all comes down to glass. That just because a lens is interchangeable, it doesn't make it a superior lens optically.

Does anyone have any information regarding which lens is really better with regard to image? I realize that this might be a mute point until after the release of the HVX but I was interested.

Second question that kept coming up was "how are you going to archive footage from the P2"? We know that in the past, one of the best ways to archive footage was to take it to tape. I've heard some people say that you can back it up on DVD. What is the scoop on this?

[BobDiaz]

At DV Expo West, even the people at JVC admitted that the lens that came with the camera was a "low cost" (cheap) lens. Untill someone publishes a side by side test of the two cameras; maybe test the JVC with the cheap lens and then again with the expensive lens, no one knows for sure.

Archive Footage P2: For small scale producers, a DVD seems like the best answer. This would be a DATA-DVD and NOT the DVD you can play on your DVD player. My computer can burn both 4.7GB DVDs and Double Layer 8.5GB DVDs. For field work, there are PC Laptops for around $1,000 that have a PCMCIA slot, a 60 or 100GB hard drive, USB 2.0 support, and a built-in DVD burner. Not that you would burn DVDs in the field, it takes too long, but could move all the P2 Card data to the Hard Drive of the laptop. Or the other hand, the P2 store drive is small and light weight. With that you could move the data to your desk top and back it up from your desk top.

For Large Scale Producers, burning DVDs will take up too much time. (My computer takes around 45 minutes per 4.7GB DVD.) In the case of massive amounts of data, an archival tape back-up system will work. (ALWAYS double check the data on the archival tape BEFORE you erase it from the hard drive.)

We will soon be seeing Blu-Ray coming out. That will give us 25GB and 50GB backup capacity.


Bob Diaz

[stephenlnoe]

The JVC interchanges lens', the Panasonic has a fixed lens. Whether the stock lens on the JVC is good or bad doesn't really matter. You can change the JVC. This is a great advantage for any camera.

Archiving is an issue. It's been discussed and there are some users who have come up with some solutions which include: hard drives, network storage devices, data tape backups and the like. Archiving is something you'll have to plan for externally from the camera purchase if you decide to go down the P2 workflow path.

[Barry_Green]

The lens on the JVC is unquestionably, unarguably, without a doubt the worst lens ever issued on a professional camera. I don't think even JVC would disagree with that.

The glass in the Canon is astoundingly superior to the JVC stock lens. Astoundingly. And the glass in the HVX is astoundingly superior to the JVC stock lens.

The lens control on the JVC is very sweet, and far superior to the control on the Canon. The HVX zoom ring is about equivalent to the JVC, but the preproduction focus ring wasn't; perhaps the final production model will be a match for it (lacking only hard stops). But the glass is not, in any way, a match for the HVX or XLH1. If Canon would offer their glass in a fully-manual lens body, that would be a sweet lens.

The ability to interchange is a bonus, certainly -- but only if you'll use it. The optional lens for the JVC is $12,000. I doubt very many people would be buying it. Some rental houses will offer it, but that really only does you good if you live in proximity to one of those rental houses, and can afford the rental rate. If you're not going to interchange the lens, a position that I expect a good 95% of JVC HD100 owners will find themselves in, then -- what good is the feature?

Still, I'd rather have the ability to interchange than not have that ability. It just depends on what you have to sacrifice to get it. If having the interchangeability means I'd have to use the HD100's stock glass, then no thanks -- I'd more than happily stick with the HVX's non-interchangeable but far superior lens.

[Stevet]

The optional lens for the JVC is $12,000.

Yes, this lens problem along with the SSE issues pretty much killed the interest for the JVC for me. So to buy the optional lens, it's close to $18,000.00 including the camera- for HDV, no thanks.

Not to mention the jacked up camera you received Barry. Well, I guess sh*t happens.

I do realize, no company is perfect, there will be issues with manufacturing and engineering bugs.

In my opinion, they should of never released the HD100 with the SSE issue. This was one obvious
issue that should of been addressed.

Steve

[stephenlnoe]

Yes, this lens problem along with the SSE issues pretty much killed the interest for the JVC for me. So to buy the optional lens, it's close to $18,000.00 including the camera- for HDV, no thanks.

Not to mention the jacked up camera you received Barry. Well, I guess sh*t happens.

I do realize, no company is perfect, there will be issues with manufacturing and engineering bugs.

In my opinion, they should of never released the HD100 with the SSE issue. This was one obvious
issue that should of been addressed.

Steve
The retail price is $12,000 for the 13x lens. Street price is anywhere from $8K to 10K. There is also an "inbetween" lens being talked about. I offer This PDF (http://www.jvcpro.co.uk/getResource2/d2_lens_combs.pdf?id=6116) on the subject of JVC's lens options up until today.

@Stevet - Out of curiousity, did you get your hands on an HD-100? Or are you basing your opinion on heresay?

[Barry_Green]

Not to mention the jacked up camera you received Barry. Well, I guess sh*t happens.
That could happen to anyone. I will say that the one we used a couple of weeks ago was much nicer. Much, much nicer.



In my opinion, they should of never released the HD100 with the SSE issue. This was one obvious issue that should of been addressed.

Well, that's one way to look at it, but from JVC's perspective that would mean never releasing the HD100 at all. The SSE is an unavoidable characteristic of using two sampling chips to read off the image -- and two sampling chips were required to deliver their chosen "native pixel" 1280-wide CCD. So you make your compromise somewhere or other -- they could have made the chip lower-resolution (under 1,000 pixels across) and never had the issue, but then you'd have people complaining that it wasn't "native resolution."

So JVC made their choice, for better or for worse. And now the customer gets to make their choice. There's always compromises -- if you spend $6,000 you can't expect to get a VariCam. If you spend $60,000 you can't expect to get an HDCAM SR system.

So for $6,000 you can get native-pixel, shoulder-mount, high-def with an interchangeable lens mount. But as part and parcel of that, you'll also get SSE and chromatic aberrations. It's up to each buyer to weigh how much those factors matter. I for one am glad the product's on the market, and I know that several people are just thrilled to death with it -- the problems are not big distractions for those users. I also know the product is selling quite slowly and hasn't been nearly the hit that JVC had hoped for, which shows that perhaps the problems are a factor in a lot of potential purchaser's decisions.

But, the thing is, at least there are choices, at least there are options. Some JVC buyers may point to the limited P2 recording capacity as a reason why they could never work with the HVX. HVX buyers can point to the SSE and chromatic aberrations and use those as reasons why they'd never work with the JVC. But at least there's choices out there. No one tool does it all.

[Stevet]

Some JVC buyers may point to the limited P2 recording capacity as a reason why they could never work with the HVX. HVX buyers can point to the SSE and chromatic aberrations and use those as reasons why they'd never work with the JVC. But at least there's choices out there. No one tool does it all.


Thanks Barry.

Very good points. we all have our own needs and opinions.

For me, image quality weights higher than a storage medium.
I'm sure you feel the same Barry :)


To answer Stephen's question, no I have not actually tried the HD100.

Man, was I excited to actrually give it a try until I heard and saw its shortcomings.
I'm sure with proper lighting you can overcome most of the SSE.

What really turned me off was the mt2 footage someone did of a sunset. I can't remember where I saw this footage, but the person shooting it said he didn't know it was a problem until he later viewed the footage. The problem has VERY noticeable SSE. It looked horrible.

The overall lens image is OK except the heavy CA.

Maybe because we're all tech geeks, I can't help believe there is a solution to using two sampling chips. I'm sure there were some time constraints.

Steve

[stephenlnoe]

What really turned me off was the mt2 footage someone did of a sunset. I can't remember where I saw this footage, but the person shooting it said he didn't know it was a problem until he later viewed the footage. The problem has VERY noticeable SSE. It looked horrible.
I remember that one. It was baaad. If I remember right, it was one of the very first m2t's I downloaded. You probably know (being a tech geek) that JVC is on their 4th firmware and SSE has been (for the most part) eliminated in most normal operating circumstance. Really the JVC is a technical marvel and is TRULY affordable HD production.

It's worth a look Steve, if even just to get under it. It's ergonomics certainly trump all other camera in the price range.

best,

[Stevet]

There's no doubt it's one heck of a decent looking camera!

I've tossed around the idea of buying one to use with the HVX, or possibly buy
another HVX.

[MattC]

I agree with Barry on all points. One of the reasons I love the XL2 is the interchangeable lens feature. But, and this is a big but, Canon already had the lenses that I want and they use outstanding glass. Period. Canon's lenses, whether for stills (digital and film), video or cinema are simply fantastic. I bought all three lenses for the XL2 and I use them all regularly. It is a great feature. But if the lenses sucked, it wouldn't matter if Canon had 20 of them and if they included them all with the camera at no additional cost - bad glass = bad images. Canon, being a lens manufacturer has a potential advantage in being able to provide better lenses for their cameras at reduced cost. Whether this will happen in the HD arena is yet to be seen, but by all accounts the lens on the H1 is very, very good. I have no doubt they will follow up with a manual lens and a wide angle lens - but how long will that take (especially the manual lens) and how much will they cost? It's hard to adopt the system, when the system hasn't been built yet (unlike the XL2, whose system was in place at the time the camera was offered).

The JVC has interchangeable lenses. Great - that's a feature I adore. But I wouldn't shoot with the lens offered, and if I had $12,000 extra to put into the camera, I wouldn't be getting that camera, I'd be getting an SDX900 I think.

Same problem (but different!) with Canon's offering. Not only is there the lens issue (cost of future lenses) but the HDV/HDSDI issue. I consider HDV to be a non-starter for me. But I can't afford to buy a ProHD deck either. If I had that much dough, I'd be looking at a different camera. (Yes, I know there are other options, such as recording to computer, but I don't know if I'm down with that - and don't even get me started on the 24F thing).

So that leaves the HVX. Is the lens on the HVX be as good as that on the Canon? I don't know. I like Leica lenses, but is the lens an "actual" Leica (made in Germany) or is it built "to spec" in asia for Leica and stamped with te Leica name.... Again, I don't know. But from everything I've seen and read, the lens on the HVX seems very nice indeed.

So, if I had the choice between a great fixed lens and a crappy interchangeable lens? It's a no brainer, I would go with a great fixed lens. And this is from a guy who loves the ability to change lenses and use a REAL manual lens. But there is NO substitute for good glass.

Matt

[stabwound]

So, if I had the choice between a great fixed lens and a crappy interchangeable lens? It's a no brainer, I would go with a great fixed lens. And this is from a guy who loves the ability to change lenses and use a REAL manual lens. But there is NO substitute for good glass.

Matt

I second that.

A lousy fixed lens would have killed a camera right off the bat... and the worst thing Panasonic could do is use a lousy lens on the HVX. From what I've seen, the HVX lens is pretty good, covers a great range, so there's no need for lens interchangeability.

JVC uses a lousy interchangeable lens because they expect the customer to spend more money on better lenses... it's a marketing ploy.

I'm happy Panasonic's lens is fixed... if it was interchangeable, I'm willing to bet the starter lens would be intentionally lousy. It's the Kit Lens Syndrome... can Canon or Nikon make crappy lenses? You bet... they're the kit lenses they throw in with their DSLR's.

Another issue which has not been addressed is dirt on sensors, which is a constant issue in the DSLR world. I have to clean my Canon 10D and Sigma SD9 every couple of months... and it's a pain, given the size of the sensor. The 1/3rd size sensor would have been a nightmare... if not impossible.

I am satisfied with a fixed and sealed lens on the HVX.

[MattC]

I don't think even canon or nikons kit lenses are as bad as what's supplied on the JVC, but I could be wrong....

I don't think panny would put a bad lens on their camera. I think if they go interchangeable (new cam) they will do what Canon did and charge more to provide good glass. I have no doubt that "on spec" Canon will deliver the best glass. There's no way they couldn't - it's just the edge they have given their product line, sort of like Panny and gamma curves. But that does not mean that the lens on the HVX won't be, not only good enough, but really, really good.