JVC's new HD250 at NAB2006

Ralph Oshiro

Ralph Oshiro

Veteran
Here it is!

HD250.jpg


HD250 . . . . $8,995 USD MSRP
HD200 . . . . $7,995 USD MSRP
HD100 . . . . $6,250 USD MSRP

According to JVC representatives at the show, both new models are reported to integrate a viewfinder "flip" feature for use with 35mm adapters. Both have 60P acquisition capability. JVC's press release states, "60P provides 60 full frames of information per second, excellent for viewing and analyzing motion, as well as for delivering an 'overcranked' recording for superb slow motion when the final output is 24P." Now, I'm confused, because when I asked the JVC sales rep if 60P meant that it does overcranking, he said, "No." Was he wrong? Can someone clear this up?
 
Last edited:
Well... no, he's not wrong, and yes, he's wrong. 60p means 60 frames per second. But whether that's "overcranking" or "live" depends on how you play it back, not on how you shot it.

The HD250 doesn't have any ability to play the footage back in slow motion like the HVX does. So you'd have to do that effect in post (same as how we do 30P on the DVX and play back in a 24P timeline). So it's not overcranking in and of itself (like the HVX can record at 60 and immediately play back at 24) but it could be used to the same purpose in post. As-is, if you shoot 60p, when it plays back it will play back at 60p and look "live".

Those HD200 and HD250 prices are for body-only without lens.
 
Hey Barry!

So shooting 60P with the HD200/250, slowed to 24P in post, will look like the HVX200's 60P stuff? Or will it look different?
 
It should deliver the same temporal motion sampling. Obviously all other elements will lead to different results (lens, gamma, MPEG compression, etc) but as far as motion performance, it should be the same.
 
HD250 . . . . $8,995 USD MSRP Body Only
HD200 . . . . $7,995 USD MSRP with 16x5.5 Lens
HD100 . . . . $6,250 USD MSRP with 16x5.5 Lens
 
Sigun-
I believe the 250 is really meant as a studio camera inasmuch as it has genlock and an optional studio housing that it slides into. The housing has a 26 pin connector that allows the camera to be controlled from the RM-210 camera control unit. So it's basically an HDV replacement for the old GY-550 that's been around for the last five years. Of course the RM-210 doesn't have SDI I/Os, so if you have an HD switcher you'll have to run an additional SDI cable alongside your 26 pin.
One nice thing about the 200/250 HD SDI outputs is that, unlike the Canon XLH1, JVC has embedded audio in the signal. I'm a little unclear as to Canon's reasoning of only sending video in their SDI outs.
 
They're also producing a magic super 16 adapter. No one knows how it works since it's magic but it could make these cameras HUGE.
 
Why would you think that? ShowScan is 65mm film...

720p60 is the standard high-definition broadcast format. Fox, ABC, ESPN, they all broadcast 720/60p.
 
BobF said:
Sigun-

One nice thing about the 200/250 HD SDI outputs is that, unlike the Canon XLH1, JVC has embedded audio in the signal. I'm a little unclear as to Canon's reasoning of only sending video in their SDI outs.
Click to expand...

i don't know either but the comment that generally followd when discussing the sdi is that "it's good for sports..."
 
Canon only sends video because the Canon is designed to be used in a news studio. It's not designed for recording uncompressed HD through SDI -- if that were the design goal, they would have included audio and timecode.

But the Canon is designed and is appropriate for multi-camera news shoots or live studio productions. For those, all you need is video running to a switcher. Audio in a multicam shoot will be supplied separately. Timecode is supplied by the recording deck. So the camera supplies video. And that's what the Canon does.
 
For the HD250? We discussed it a bit at the DVInfo board and the general consensus was: gotta wait to see it. We couldn't figure out exactly what it does.

A year ago they were talking about a c-mount adapter, which would also have to incorporate an optical element. I guess this other adapter has replaced the c-mount adapter? Either way, until we see it we can't know for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top