DP of "24" hit tv show does a adapter and camera shootout

[kidtexas]

Is it unbelievable that others might pick one of the 4 cams over the HVX for their purposes? I am admittedly inexperienced, but without at doubt, the JVC produces a far better image than I have the skills to take advantage of. Likewise for the HVX.

Low-blow comments about SSE from the moderator of this site do a good job of presenting an "unbiased" atmosphere. But looking at the name (DVXuser) maybe unbiased isn't want you want.

You guys are funny. Both of these cameras (HVX and JVC) are very nice. I would love to have an HVX, but the cost for the workflow to be efficient was too high for us. As a result, I am loving having a JVC - it is simply an amazing camera for the price. For the loads of money we saved over the HVX, P2, and appropriate field and archiving equipment, we will soon pick up a Firestore - the IDX battery kit was already free. Of course, this is still cheaper than the HVX, which is letting us budget for other necessities of film making.

On the other hand, the guy on DVinfo.net who does animation and already has the impressive IT backup scheme - the HVX sounds like a perfect fit. As I'm sure it is for many others.

Pick whichever one suits you and go shoot.

 

[D_and_G]

Hey kidtexas, did you notice a lot of pink and purple CA?
I saw some of that Pappas seaside footage, and it was REALLY awful in many shots. Did you notice any really noticeable CA?

That's the one thing about the HVX that seems less "obtrusive" if you will. I don't know if its the richer colors, but it seems more blended.

Oh well, I'm going to New York, so I look forward to having more time with the HVX. If anyone is doing a filmout showing next week, I'd love to see some footage. There's free drinks in it for ya :beer: (and i'll throw in a Romeo Y Julieta)...

Cheers.

 

[mmm]

Hey kidtexas, did you notice a lot of pink and purple CA?
I saw some of that Pappas seaside footage, and it was REALLY awful in many shots. Did you notice any really noticeable CA?

From the 4 or 5 HD100 I have handled at shows and at dealers, they have showed a real mix of lens quality. One was absolutely terrible. Had I have bought it, I would have returned it as unacceptable. Another was very clear of CA, even at full telephoto. But like I said, I have only used a handful of cameras.

I may (finally) get around to buying one next week but won't leave the dealership without testing the lens first.

 

[donatello]

"This camera and its sales seem to be such a success without much magazine or media fanfare. I do think there's also a much aligned biased against our bias for this camera."

i guess it's all where one is sitting ..from my observations i find the aligned bias against ALL the other camera's not the HVX200 .. for months before and after the HVX was released they have spread the bias against any/all HDV camera's. most expected the HVX was going to be the camera that killed all others hand size camera's - there would be a night/day difference between the camera's ...
seems in the end the camera's are all very close ... bottom line choose the right one that works for you & your project.
i have 2 shorts coming up ...after reviewing my test this morning .. i've decided to use the HVX on one and the sony for the other .. hvx because of progressive /image/size of camera .. sony because of size/image & i want that 1080i vivd real look it does so well ...

 

[bvalente]

I am so glad to see the M2 get it's well earned kudos..... it is an amazing product for guys like me that can't afford to play with the $200K set ups. Thank you brian Valente !!
Aloha
-A

Hey, Redrock is not just me - I'm on the visible part. If you read the article you'll note the "genius from texas", and I am *not* in Texas (that would be James Hurd).

But seriously, it's great to see an article pull all this together and provide more perspective.

 

[StMad]

I really don't think there's a need for the defensive reactions and damage control posts (and smackdowns). The HVX isn't perfect. It produces some beautiful images and you can ask for little more in this price range. Like all cameras it seems to have it's own set of issues. I know when I buy a JVC or HVX in the coming months it'd be nice to find constructive workarounds quickly, and not have to wade through negativity.


That said, I'm appreciative of what this site offers - it's a good resource.

 

[J.R. Hudson]

I agree StMad

That is something we are trying to curtail as we speak; people can bring something to this community or they can continue to be negative pills to the board and we all know where the negative pills end up

In negative Pill purgatory, thats where.

-

There are many wonderful tools on the market at nice prices; whether its the Sony's (See Macgregors work), the Canon's (THe HD one I mean). the JVC (I like what I have seen so far) or the HVX...

Choose your weapon and go to battle with it. If one of them isnt your bag then move on.

I'm going to start handing out the TROLL of the WEEK trophy again if people dont start behaving themselves!

-

It seems we cant get a thread started without someone chiming in on the limitations of a camera moreso the positives. Bob submitted a nice montage of the Distillery District and sure enough; someone has to chime in with a comment on the noise that showed up in the dark part of a jacket on an out of focus E.C.U.

Gimme a poo pooing break, will ya ?

-

Hopefully your P.O.V is contaigous; it'd be nice to get a more positive vibe back to this place

 

[kidtexas]

Hey kidtexas, did you notice a lot of pink and purple CA?
I saw some of that Pappas seaside footage, and it was REALLY awful in many shots. Did you notice any really noticeable CA?

Yeah, there's CA evident at full zoom. It's pretty easy to stay away from it in my case. Stay below 50ish mm and it is pretty manageble. Just move the camera closer. The wide angle is a bit harder to work around - it's not as wide as the HVX. I've not used it, but the other Fujinon lens available for the JVC looks pretty amazing - its wider, minimal CA and breathing. About $9k though.

For what amounts to about an $800 lens, it seems decent to me. At SD resolutions, it seems like a great deal. It breaks down in some areas for HD, but there's a reason it came with the camera for essentially free and HD lenses cost so much. For our budget, it is perfectly acceptable.

Ask more in the JVC forum.

 

[D_and_G]

Cool.

Yeah, if I went JVC I would purchase the M2 and a set of Nikons with it, so that's great news from you.

With careful planning any of these cameras could produce good footage, if not great.

I'm going to be testing the HVX in N.Y and I'll try to get a HD100 with it (a DP is bringing it, so we'll see). I've seen impressive footage from all the cameras, so I'm not to worried (just curious) :beer:

BTW - Love your moniker "kidtexas", sounds like it'd fit right into the upcoming "superhero fest".




Cheers.

 

[Mitch_Ives]

I must say I'm impressed with JVC's responsiveness to the HD100's problems (firmware to fix SSE and working with their customers to lessen the CA issues). That's kind of what I'm hoping that Panasonics user base does - find ways to limit the 1/3rd chip limitations (noise) et al. which is already happening on this wonderful forum.

I'm hoping that Panasonic discovers some firmware change that helps the noise levels at some point. I thought about stopping at one camera until this improves, but in the meantime I need to get work done, so two HVX's it is... besides it's such a pretty picture and doesn't stumble like HDV with things like smoke...

 

[Mitch_Ives]

Barry had a camera. I did not. They were without insurance. I had it to cover Barry and his camera.

If I could add another perspective... let's not forget ALL the other markets. The number of people doing "other than film" outstrips the number of people doing major films or broadcast televison shows. For us, it's all the other features that make a difference. They were right, the variable frame rate feature of the HVX is huge and useful to many of us. Real progressive is another. The design of the lens stage that eliminates the breathing in other cameras... am I the only one that saw that as a major determining factor? Lens breathing will affect EVERY one of my productions and limits my creativity.

At the end of the day, they were mining a very narrow vein... for the rest of us, it's the Swiss Army Knife of small HD cameras that we're looking for. Besides the damn picture is gorgeous...

I've been doing this awhile, and have been "on point" more often than most, using technolgy that is just emerging. This isn't my first rodeo and while I found the JVC a promising camera, it's the HVX that I actually bought... twice in fact.

I think we're getting a bit "granular" here, when what we need is a "bigger picture" view...

 

[CineAlta]

the variable frame rate feature of the HVX is huge

Well, to be perfectly honest, I may have the unpopular position, but I don't do many slow- or fast-motion effects. But it is handy to have it available.

 

[Mitch_Ives]

Both of these cameras (HVX and JVC) are very nice. I would love to have an HVX, but the cost for the workflow to be efficient was too high for us. As a result, I am loving having a JVC - it is simply an amazing camera for the price. For the loads of money we saved over the HVX, P2, and appropriate field and archiving equipment, we will soon pick up a Firestore - the IDX battery kit was already free. Of course, this is still cheaper than the HVX, which is letting us budget for other necessities of film making.

On the other hand, the guy on DVinfo.net who does animation and already has the impressive IT backup scheme - the HVX sounds like a perfect fit. As I'm sure it is for many others.

Pick whichever one suits you and go shoot.

Exactly. For me, the "Conforming" required to work in Native wouldn't fit our workflow. In addition, the limitations of the MPEG-2 based HDV had other challenges for us. We ocassionally have to shoot in environments where hazers or smoke are present. HDV falls apart there... ugly doesn't begin to cover it.

 

[Justyn]

The skillset of the HVX sets it apart... as well as the buzz and mojo that this camera is generating.. that it is the one on the top of the pile now with everyone else throwing stones.. So, I'll do the same. I know 3 people who bought the JVC. One, an underwater DP/camera man and he's selling his 5 JVCs to buy 5 HVXs..

my 2nd friend has already sold his JVC.. and the 3rd is attempting to sell of his JVC with little interest... Just no mojo to the camera but for those on the fence... jump to it. We do all have our needs and requirements. Like if I were shooting all ENG and all news.. and sports, then I might consider the Canon... But, I need something that's maybe not the master of any one thing, but it can pretty much perform everything well... That's what I want.. something that delivers a lot of options and will be viable for broadcast and distribution. Film outs are a nice fantasy to have.. but it'll be strickly home video for most of my crap.

I'm happy with the HVX and all it brings... like my first gigs. I'm going to be shooting some racing and the client called for slow-motion and wants to do a timelapse of the stadium filling up before the race.... Now these options are helping to establish a mode of operation and workflow...

To be able to shoot something and show it back to the client in an instant...and offload it with minimal effort... Priceless.

 

[evinsky]

I've been under the weather with some food poisoning for the last day, sorry I didn't chime in earlier. I had also contacted been contacted to do this test with them. And I was interested but the whole sense of "Avoiding bias" really got in the way. The magazine and the show refused to pay a rental for my time but most importantly they refused to provide insurance or even a guarantee that nothing would happen to my personal property (HVX). I might have been OK with this except that I would not have been able to operate the camera. Taylor insisted that it had to be their deal. In the end I determined that the test was not a fair comparison, mostly because the people testing it were not interested in a broad range, emperical test but more as a specific test for a given situation appropriate for their needs, which is fine. But the risk for me and I believe for Panasonic too was too great. They could have literally crashed my camera through a window and handed me the pieces with nothing more than a sorry.

As to the JVC, it's a great camera but there are some important differences that make both systems very complimentary. Remember JVC and Panasonic are sister companies. They are both owned by Matsushita.

Pick one or the other on it's strengths and how well each works into your style or workflow.

JVC: Pros
Interchangeable lens
Slightly better DR (than the HVX)
Long record times

JVC: Cons
Coke bottle lens (Hopefully replaced soon)
HDV, 4:2:0 colorspace
No native 24P editing (This is really the deal breaker for me)
Strange highlight rendering past 105IRE (Mauve?)

From my testing there is not a visable difference in noise or recorded detail between this camera and the HVX.

 

[CineAlta]

Remember JVC and Panasonic are sister companies. They are both owned by Matsupoo pooa.

Wow, I had no idea. All this time, I thought they were rivals. I have always favored Panasonic. Do they share technology? Wouldn't Matsuschita Electric want to consolidate their R&D and manufacturing arms for maximum efficiency, by sharing? Good to know.

 

[Rhydon]

From my testing there is not a visable difference in noise or recorded detail between this camera and the HVX.

You gotta be kidding. I have frame grabs from my HVX running 720p and 1080p and they dont hold a candle to the HD100's 720x1280 frame in recorded detail.

 

[Barry_Green]

Wow, I had no idea. All this time, I thought they were rivals.

They are. Welcome to the wonderful world of broadcast. I'm not sure of the exact relationships, but I think Panasonic is a 100% Matsu subsidiary, and JVC is something like 51% owned by Matsu?

Do they share technology?

Sometimes. And sometimes they're bitter rivals. For example, the Panasonic DV2500 deck (I think that's the model number) is identical to the JVC BR-DV3000; only difference is the color.

And JVC's "Digital S" (later renamed D-9) video codec is none other than DVCPRO50. AFAIK they're bitstream identical, although the tape format is completely different.

So sometimes things align. And sometimes they go the exact opposite way (such as DVCPRO-HD vs. JVC's HDV format). It's an interesting and confusing relationship; I'm sure it makes sense to the Matsu bosses, but down here on the ground level it's a bit confusing! rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[Barry_Green]

You gotta be kidding. I have frame grabs from my HVX running 720p and 1080p and they dont hold a candle to the HD100's 720x1280 frame in recorded detail.

Then something's wrong, because I've shot plenty of frame grabs from both and they're very comparable, with the HVX having an advantage in vertical res and the JVC having an advantage in horizontal res. They net out about the same, as the resolution chart shows.

Don't forget that the JVC is grossly oversharpened by default. You have to turn the edge enhancement down to "MIN" to get it under control, and even then it's still more sharpened than some of us prefer, but "OFF" is truly off, which seems too far. At the 4-cam comparison we really wished there was a setting between "MIN" and "OFF".

If you're looking at the stock edge enhancement the JVC can look sharper, but it's not resolved detail, it's artificial edge enhancement. Jack an HVX up to +7 (maximum edge enhancement) and it'll look about like the JVC at default edge enhancement.

 

[J.R. Hudson]

You gotta be kidding. I have frame grabs from my HVX running 720p and 1080p and they dont hold a candle to the HD100's 720x1280 frame in recorded detail.

Show us the money.