hvx vs jvc hd cam

[b boy]

hey guys. i'm really looking to get my hvx in nov. i was talking to a friend today and he was telling me that the hvx can only give true high def when it's using the p2 card. he was telling me that jvc high def cam is better cause it displays true high def with out a card. i need to know some more info on the hvx from the people who has one. i'm looking for good and bad reviews. thanks guys.

[mikkowilson]

Take a good read around DVXuser and you will learn a lot about these cameras.

Yes it's true that the HVX only records HD internally to P2 cards, but it's also true that those cards support about 32 different formats & framerates with quality 2 times that of the JVC in SD and 4 times in HD.

- Mikko

[ozduc]

he was telling me that jvc high def cam is better cause it displays true high def with out a card.

If you record an image to tape with the JVC it is not really "true hi-def". It is HDV which uses an Mpeg 2 form of compression or GOP. Both of these cameras have HD component out which does allow you to record uncompressed HD to an external workstation. The signal that is recorded onto the P2 cards in the HVX200 is DVCPro HD which is a less compressed form of HD than HDV. Do some research and educate yourself on the various workflows and camera capabilities before you buy.

[b boy]

that's why i came here. right now i have the dvx and i love that cam. it's just my friend, he his the jvc and he loves it. i will look in to it some more before i buy

[DavidBeier]

First off, I think it's silly to argue what is "true HD" and isn't. Here is a brief rundown of the two cameras and how P2 works.

Despite what some may say, both cameras have the same amount of detail. The JVC looks sharper because it uses more artificial edge enhacment which gives it a sharper but more digital look. In terms or detail, they are about the same.

The JVC has the advantage of interchangible lenses but considering those new lenses tend to cost more than the camera, I don't know how much of an advantage that will be.

The HVX200 has the classic panasonic film look that we all love of about the DVX. It's subjective but the gamma and colors just look more filmish to me and many others. The HVX200 also has variable frame rates for true slow motion and timelapses.

Now, as far as the recording medium goes, it is as follows. The JVC records HD to mini-DV tapes in an HDV codec. The HVX200 records to P2, laptop, or hard drive as DVCProHD.

HDV-Records at 25mbs per second. Because of this compresses color to 25% of origional size. Also uses interframe encoding which means that it only records some frames and the rest are generated. This leads to motion artifacts and requires more CPU horsepower to edit. I also limits what you can do in post production. But hey, it's cheap.

DVCProHD-Recordds at 100mbs per second. Only compresses color by 50% and has no motion compression for pure frames. Easier to edit and lets you do a lot more in color correction. Also, because of more color information, gives you a cleaner image with more color detail.

As for the cost, yest P2 is expensive but consider this: If you are recording to tape, you'll want to capture into your computer using a deck. If you just capture with your camera you can wear down the head and turn it into a 6k paperwieght. Not good. An HDV deck will run you about 2k. That's about the same amount it would cost to get a FS100 (portible hardrive for the HVX200 that can record HD) and more than it would be for a few P2s or a laptop. None of these things can be worn down through capture because there is no tape. In the long run, the costs are the same or cheaper.

[MrPolarBare]

I have an HVX200. I would recommend the HVX200 over the JVC based on features, performance etc.

I strongly disagree that the JVC isn't true "HD" because it uses HDV as a format. HDTV has to due with resolution. HDV is definetly a Hi-def format. The compression might suck when compared to the Panny, but that doesn't mean it's not HD. Some Panny naysayers would argue that the HVX isn't true HD because of the low-res CCDs.

There are many pros/cons when weighing in on these two cameras. Here are a few pros that each camera has, that the other doesn't...

Pros for JVC...
Shoulder-mount (if you like that sort of thing)
Shoots HD onto inexpensive MiniDV tapes
Interchangeable Lenses

Pros for Panny...
Variable frame rates
1080p
4:2:2 color compression
P2 Cards (expensive, but if you have the money, you'll never want to go back to tapes)

When I review these cameras it seems like Panny is the clear choice. The features it has over the JVC really put it into a different class.