4-cam comparison -- initial response

Barry_Green said:
Part II (continued):
The JVC can't shoot "reality" footage. It can't deliver the "video" look in high-def. I know a lot of people are looking for film simulation only, so the restriction on frame rates may be okay for them, and for a film-looking camera the JVC does fine -- but for event shooting, for convention work, for news and sports and other things that are traditionally shot "live", the JVC is limited.
Click to expand...

Wow! I've been using the JVC camera at a major concert event, several corporate shoots, even a wedding (white dresses and nasty lighting are a good test). I, and my clients love the footage. As for the notion that "reality" requires crappy looking interlaced footage... I (like millions) have to disagree. Remember "we always do things the same way... right up until it changes". I can't wait until "reality shows" are no longer a reality.


Barry_Green said:
The HVX, on the other hand, records on interchangeable reusable memory cards...
Click to expand...

Barry, you're starting to sound like Panasonic. The HVX looks like a good camera, but Panasonic lost a lot of credibility on their DVD when they actually tried to pitch the P2 card as being superior for archiving? I about died when I saw that. It IS the achille's heal (currently) for that camera... the only one as near as I can tell. I spoke to some of my contacts at Panasonic and even they agreed that that part was ill advised.



Barry_Green said:
And on the JVC there's a further complication, which is the issue of split-screen. It happens. It will always be there lurking in the background, threatening to pop up and ruin a shot. You cannot always see it in the viewfinder/LCD, but you can see it when you play the footage back. There's never been an image artifact like it. It's a dealbreaker for many of us. It doesn't happen often, but when it does happen, it's nasty.
Click to expand...

I got to tell you Barry... I know some people have seen that, but I've had two different cameras (one from a dealer and one from JVC) and I have tried my damnest to find that and have failed. I have intentionally shot things that no one in their right mind would ever do and still can't find it. I've tried every technique described on this forum and still can't find it. Is it possible that it is no longer an issue?



Barry_Green said:
FCP doesn't support 24P from the JVC, and I don't think any editing system natively supports the 24F or 30F modes from the Canon. You have to use workarounds and plug-ins to get any of that to work, something like Lumiere or Cineform or XDVHDV or whatever.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't plan on that being true much longer...


Barry_Green said:
Everyone recommends using an HDV intermediate codec -- you can't (or shouldn't) edit in the native HDV codec, it's slow and any sort of transition or re-render causes a significant drop in quality (see Adam's article on editing HDV in DV magazine a few issues ago for more on that).
Click to expand...

Well, it isn't everyone, because I disagree. Adam and I tend to agree on most things, but we have disagreed on rare occassions... this is one. I still respect you Adam (your intellect is extra-terrestrial in depth), so no worries, mate. Look forward to seeing you in April at NAB or the ProMax, FCP meetings, etc.



Barry_Green said:
there's still the whole "conform" process -- if you want to render back out to HDV tape, an Apple FCP system takes a massive amount of time to render back out. Massive. I've heard of 20 minutes of rendering for a 30-second spot (others can confirm that or rebuke it, I don't have a Mac yet so can't verify). And you'll never have any sort of firewire preview with HDV, it just cannot ever be, because of the GOP nature of HDV footage.
Click to expand...

I can. I haven't personally seen that long a time, but it depends on how many edit points, etc. Conforming is the cost for avoiding the dreadful cross-compressing of the intermediate codec to M-JPEG. I loved M-JPEG when I was using analog.

I noticed you haven't mentioned the final DVD quality for those that go that route. You may feel differently about native in time.

As for firewire preview, who the hell needs that. If we are serious about working in HD (any form), we have monitors for that. At the very minimum, have someone show you desktop Cinema preview in FCP. Better yet, edit on a 30" and watch all your video in the Canvas on a 23" at 100% size, full quality. If anyone is about to tell me how important a tube monitor is, consider this: Sony and Panasonic have already discontinued theirs... JVC just canned the 19" Hi-def monitor... which leaves only a 17" HD monitor... anyone want to guess what it's lifespan is. We're all going to be on LCD's or Plasmas very soon.

Barry, I always value your thoughts, and I know this will probably come across wrong, but in spite of your considerable knowledge (which no one denies), I'm betting your tune will change a bit in time... but then I've been wrong before... :-0

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the fact that the HVX still looks like a good camera...
 
Knock Out Films said:
Barry, I'm surprised you didn't mention the varible frame rates. We finally get film-quality slow mo, not an interpolated NLE thingy.

Maybe you didn't mention it because the other cameras don't even have it. :)
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm waiting to see the SD 480/60P mode of the JVC do slo-mo. I wouldn't hand it to the HVX just yet...
 
FullRez said:
I'm curious - why didn't Panasonic really make the product shine by offering HDV in addition which could be recorded to tape like the DV fomats?
Click to expand...

Actually, I (and the others) were asked in a closed door meeting if we thought they should develop an HDV camera...
 
Mitch_Ives said:
Actually, I (and the others) were asked in a closed door meeting if we thought they should develop an HDV camera...
Click to expand...

I guess the answer was no?

It would have saved the HVX. HD two ways. I mean it's a no brainer. Tape for HDV and P2/Hard drive for DVCPRO HD.

A little too late.
 
Blaine said:
I see the tape as the backup to the HD. I like the idea of redundant systems when I'm doing something I feel is important. But I can see where the P2 cards, being an integral part of the camera, might be less prone to the failures an external HD can experience due mainly to connection problems. I can see the capacity growing fairly quickly. I can still remember buying my first 20MB hard drive for $600. A month ago I got a 1 GB memory stick for $39 with a $20 mail in rebate. Memory is becoming so cheap, it only makes sense that the P2 cards will follow suit.
Click to expand...

Blaine, I'd like to hear Barry's (Jan's... hell anybody's) thoughts on this. In our discussions with Panasonic, after they explained precisely what speed chips were required in a P2, the fact that it takes two, the card structure, etc... we sort of understand why they cost so much and then came to the conclusion that this rapid price drop may not happen anywhere near as fast s people are thinking.

Fast dropping prices requires massive consumer level demand and high production yields. The Panasonic engineers (to their credit) indicated that the fast speed chips they use aren't in any consumer use... not even high end digital cameras. That may have already changed (I don't know), but without massive consumer use and better yield rates is it reasonable to expect fast drops? It didn't sound like it was fair to expect this short-term from Panasonic.

It would be nice if other companies would use P2 as well, but we know how that goes...
 
FullRez said:
I guess the answer was no?

It would have saved the HVX. HD two ways. I mean it's a no brainer. Tape for HDV and P2/Hard drive for DVCPRO HD.

A little too late.
Click to expand...

Hell, who would listen to me anyway. The truth is, they've asked a lot of people that question, so it wasn't a secret. Having said that, we all felt they should continue with the HVX... we did ask for a real video lens like the JVC though... (hey, we couldn't help ourselves).

As usual, Panasonic continued to impress us with their objectivity and openess. And anyone who thinks the HVX won't be a good camera probably hasn't used a 100a. Even some high ranking contacts at JVC were quick to point out how good a camera the 100a is... especially at it's current price point.

Isn't it nice to be forced to choose between so many good cameras? Personally, I'm going to go with my ex-wife's philosophy... "why can't we have both"... I intend to.
 
FullRez said:
You know, the more I think about this P2/Hard Drive workflow the less I like it. Sure tape based systems are prone to dropouts but HDV to tape uses a ton of error correction and with decent tape you should be fine. After all how long have we been shooting on tape?

What if you have a glitch while recordind to a remote hard drive? Imagine shooting an action sequence with bumps, etc. One little hickup in the line from the camera to the hard drive and who knows.
Click to expand...

Does anyone know if the two P2 slots on the HVX can be set up to mirror? If so, then we could connect two HD drives and record the same info to both simultaneously. That would certainly reduce the likelyhood of any lost data.

Barry, Jan, anyone?
 
Mitch_Ives said:
I've been using the JVC camera at a major concert event, several corporate shoots, even a wedding (white dresses and nasty lighting are a good test). I, and my clients love the footage. As for the notion that "reality" requires crappy looking interlaced footage... I (like millions) have to disagree. Remember "we always do things the same way... right up until it changes". I can't wait until "reality shows" are no longer a reality.
Click to expand...
What I mean was that you cannot shoot that "reality" look. Obviously you could film reality events, but you cannot deliver that same "live" look.

but Panasonic lost a lot of credibility on their DVD when they actually tried to pitch the P2 card as being superior for archiving? I about died when I saw that. It IS the achille's heal (currently) for that camera... the only one as near as I can tell. I spoke to some of my contacts at Panasonic and even they agreed that that part was ill advised.
Click to expand...
I had nothing to do with that, obviously. Nobody would archive P2 cards, they would archive the footage on their hard disks onto data tape (or hard disks or blu-ray or whatever).



I know some people have seen that, but I've had two different cameras (one from a dealer and one from JVC) and I have tried my damnest to find that and have failed.
Click to expand...
It takes about three seconds to get it to happen. Turn the camera on and point it at a white wall. Point it at the blue sky. Point it at any swath of solid color; lower light makes it easier to see but it can still happen in broad daylight. Forget all the nonsense about 18 dB of gain and whatever.

Is it possible that it is no longer an issue?
Click to expand...
It's better, I'll say that. But it still happens.

I wouldn't plan on that being true much longer...
Click to expand...
What, FCP support? We'll see. JVC's been promising that it'll show up in "the next maintenance release" for a while. Two maintenance releases have come and gone, and still no support, and none in Avid either. Hopefully they will get their act together, but as of right now it's still true.

I noticed you haven't mentioned the final DVD quality for those that go that route. You may feel differently about native in time.
Click to expand...
When I've cut HDV, I've used the native codec. I just don't care for transcoding; it's the old computer programmer in me. But I haven't done that much HDV post stuff. By "everyone", I mean everyone I've said "native" to: DSE, Adam, David Newman, they all say intermediate is the way to go. Fine for them, but I don't like intermediates, so I always stuck with native.

We're all going to be on LCD's or Plasmas very soon.
Click to expand...
That is without dispute! :)
 
Mitch_Ives said:
Actually, I'm waiting to see the SD 480/60P mode of the JVC do slo-mo. I wouldn't hand it to the HVX just yet...
Click to expand...
Why not? I mean, yes the JVC can do 60p, and it can slow down exactly like the 60P of the HVX, but -- it's still SD. You'd have to digitally stretch it to 3x its size before it could be incorporated in an HD project. And even then, you only have 24 or 60, vs. the nearly dozen frame rates of the HVX, in high-def.

You don't have to hand it to the HVX on this one, 'cause the HVX just snatched it away! :thumbsup:
 
Mitch_Ives said:
Fast dropping prices requires massive consumer level demand and high production yields.
Click to expand...
Which is what the SD cards ensure.

The Panasonic engineers (to their credit) indicated that the fast speed chips they use aren't in any consumer use... not even high end digital cameras.
Click to expand...
At the top-end, that may be true (2GB SD 150x cards) but at the next tier down they are. I'm running a 1GB 133x in my PowerShot, and those are the kind of cards used in the 4GB card.
That may have already changed (I don't know), but without massive consumer use and better yield rates is it reasonable to expect fast drops?
Click to expand...
Which is why the 4GB went from $2500 to $2200 to $1750 to $900 to $650 in the space of about one year. And the 8GB card should do the same by this time next year. It's already happened, and it'll continue to happen.

P2 cards themselves will never be high-quantity items; even if they sold 10,000 cameras a month and everyone bought 10 cards, it still wouldn't qualify as a high-quantity item. But the underlying SD cards that make them do qualify, and we've already seen indications of significant price drops, which is a trend I certainly hope will continue.
 
Mitch_Ives said:
Does anyone know if the two P2 slots on the HVX can be set up to mirror?
Click to expand...
Interesting idea. Haven't heard of anything like that, and haven't experienced that with any existing product, but that doesn't necessarily rule it out either. Sounds like one for the wishlist... if it's possible to implement, maybe they will; if it's not possible to implement in the existing product, maybe they'll keep their eye open towards the next product.
 
toke lahti said:
Archiving to the most expensive storage on the planet? :thumbdown
Click to expand...
There's a lot more expensive storage out there than P2, of course, but to address your point -- no, they're talking about using something like two CinePorters to have real-time duplicates.
 
Barry_Green said:
There's a lot more expensive storage out there than P2...
Click to expand...
Ok, thank, I'll just have ipmatiently wait for dv.com...

Just out of curiosity what's more expensive than p2?
(8GB card id $275/GB)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top