JVC GY-HD250U new 60p HDV

  • Thread starter Thread starter khina
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it will still be 4:2:0 to tape which won't outperform the HVX in terms of color sampling. And if anyone thinks that the HVX isn't 4:2:2, I can say from practical experience this afternoon that it's a world apart from color correcting 4:2:0 material.

I can't and won't go back to CC'ing 4:2:0...
 
I can only hope that they improve the LCD on this. We shot with the JVC today and it was just as crappy as the HVX or in so many ways.. worse. Also, when the LCD is out the Viewfinder didn't work.. or atleast it was set up like this and we were going hard today so we didn't change it. The footage debate will have to wait though.. so we'll see that soon.
 
Three weeks-old news...

There is an other cameras' forum out there [EDIT -- it's done], so next time it would be suitable not here [EDIT -- HVX news!] please!
 
Last edited:
The thing is, this doesn't really adress any of the problems i have with JVC's current camera. The colors still will look not nearly as good as the HVX200's (or even a DVX100A from what I've seen), it will still have 4:2:0 color, it will have HDV recording with a weak codec. Honestly, I don't see how this announcment makes it outperform the HVX200 at all (or really anymore than the HD100 does).
 
David, Everyone gets upset when someone posts untrue statements in the HVX forum, so I would think the same applies here. Your statements about the HD100 are just untrue.

I'm too tired to post corrections but there are plenty of scientific papers on why the JVC codec does not suffer like normal HDV. Some that even might even show it's better than the Codec the HVX uses.

I've used both cameras, I had both cameras on order, I gave up my HVX when it came in and purchased the HD100. So from first hand experience your statements are not true.

But then again we all have our opinions and that is what makes us unique. :)
 
Hmmm..

Interesting...

We all have choices. We bought the HD100 and have not looked back.

The more I use the JVC, the more it blows me away.
 
The HD250 looks interesting.
I have a feeling it's going to be priced near the Canon XLH1.
I'm looking forward to seeing what this camera offers.

The HD100 will still remain one heck of a good deal.
 
I think I'm going to start a website called guess what camera shot that clip. Then I'll challenge people to guess the right camera. If they do they win a prize, if they don't they make a donation. Then maybe people will be more cautious with their facts.

When the HVX resolution is challenged (the specs are actually out now) everyone says that it's the image that counts not the specs. However, as you can see above they have no problem using the 4:2:0 or HDV spec to try and claim that a camera is of lesser image quality. You can't have it both ways. Remember the claim that the HVX uses lower res chips so it can have better low light capability, yet so many people complain about noise? Is that the image or the specs winning that one?

As I've said a million times I have no blind faith or brand loyalty. I don't have an agenda, I don't work for a manufacture. I research, I do my own tests, and use my years of experience as camera person, lighting person, 3D matte painting supervisor to determine what tools to use. The HD100 has its flaws and I hope the next rev fixes some of them. This is true of any camera and anyone that says otherwise is a farse and anyone that blindly ignores their cameras faults will never be a talented professional. You must understand your tools to use them correctly.

I had a hard time saying no to AVS in SD when they called to tell me my HVX was in. However, as much as I was intrigued by the HVX I needed a different tool. I'm sure the next person in line was happy I passed though ;)
 
Last edited:
full rez, why did you opt for the hd100 over the hvx200?

for me, it was the price of p2 and the expense of an lto archiving system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top