External recorder for YUV (YPbPr) output camera

L

lovecameras

Carbonite Member
I would certainly like to try and keep my JVC HD200UB camera going as it can output 422 uncompressed and has a fine Canon HD lens, but finding it hard to know which external HDD/flash recorder or something could work as the camera lacks a HDMI.

Any suggestions that will work please? Some say a Ninja can work but then I'd need a component to HDMI converter which dont seem to be portable (mains power only?)

Thanks
 
Greg_E said:
Why not the Firestore device that was made to work with this camera? There are a few of the Firestore DR-HD100 listed on ebay that claim to work.
Click to expand...
They'll work, but they only record at the 25mbps HDV spec, so it wouldn't be on par with a modern HD recorder. You'd get 1440 x 1080 interlaced HDV at 4:2:0 and 25 mbps, or 1280 x 720 HDV at 4:2:0 and 19 mbps (IIRC). No different from the tape that's in the camera.

Even if you got the JVC SxS recorder it wouldn't help; it records 35mbps XDCAM-EX, which is a darn sight better than HDV, but still 4:2:0 long-GoP MPEG-2, and even then, only from the JVC GYHM700U. From the HD200UB, it only does HDV data rates, so... at that point, might as well get the cheap firestore.

An external recorder like a ProRes recorder could result in a notable jump in image quality over HDV, but as said in the original post, it'd have to somehow convert from analog component to HDMI or HD-SDI. BlackMagic makes a $200 mini-converter for component to SDI, but then you'd have to find a way to mount it and power it.

Seriously, for the cost-to-value in buying any of the above solutions, I would suggest it was time to just buy a new camera.
Click to expand...
Totally agree.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Seriously, for the cost-to-value in buying any of the above solutions, I would suggest it was time to just buy a new camera.
Click to expand...



Not all of us are a materially affluent as you are Mitch so please have some consideration and perhaps learn not to troll/pointless comment in future elsewhere. Some of us have to be frugal....Thanks

Now I await a warning from admin as I have stood up to a 'site sponsor'...
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
They'll work, but they only record at the 25mbps HDV spec, so it wouldn't be on par with a modern HD recorder. You'd get 1440 x 1080 interlaced HDV at 4:2:0 and 25 mbps, or 1280 x 720 HDV at 4:2:0 and 19 mbps (IIRC). No different from the tape that's in the camera.

Even if you got the JVC SxS recorder it wouldn't help; it records 35mbps XDCAM-EX, which is a darn sight better than HDV, but still 4:2:0 long-GoP MPEG-2, and even then, only from the JVC GYHM700U. From the HD200UB, it only does HDV data rates, so... at that point, might as well get the cheap firestore.

An external recorder like a ProRes recorder could result in a notable jump in image quality over HDV, but as said in the original post, it'd have to somehow convert from analog component to HDMI or HD-SDI. BlackMagic makes a $200 mini-converter for component to SDI, but then you'd have to find a way to mount it and power it.


Totally agree.
Click to expand...

Thanks Barry for the reasonable and detailed response. I knew I could count on you. :)

Shame on you JVC for NOT putting in a standard HDMI connector!
 
lovecameras said:
Not all of us are a materially affluent as you are Mitch so please have some consideration and perhaps learn not to troll/pointless comment in future elsewhere. Some of us have to be frugal....Thanks

Now I await a warning from admin as I have stood up to a 'site sponsor'...
Click to expand...
I was not trying to troll or make pointless statements. I was attempting to offer a realistic perspective. Any solution you find to get your JVC working the way you wish will easily run $500, more likely closer to $1000. You can buy a lot of modern camera for that. Camera's with greater sensitivity and resolution, lower noise floor, and components that aren't almost a decade old. I was offering a perspective as to where I would think it would be best to spend your funds, and was genuinely trying to be helpful. Sorry if you took it any other way.
 
Mitch Gross said:
I was not trying to troll or make pointless statements. I was attempting to offer a realistic perspective. Any solution you find to get your JVC working the way you wish will easily run $500, more likely closer to $1000. You can buy a lot of modern camera for that. Camera's with greater sensitivity and resolution, lower noise floor, and components that aren't almost a decade old. I was offering a perspective as to where I would think it would be best to spend your funds, and was genuinely trying to be helpful. Sorry if you took it any other way.
Click to expand...

Don't worry Mitch. I read it the same as you wrote it and agree. Some people can be way too harsh. Forest for the trees thing.
 
At $200 an old Firestore would be a reasonable purchase, even though it is still only HDV. Only thing cheaper would be a firewire cable to a computer that you already own. There were a few other firewire based recorders, if you found one of those cheap enough, that might be an option.
 
David W. Jones said:
HDMI connectors were not a standard on video cameras back in 2007 when mini-DV tape and FireWire was the big low cost thing.
Click to expand...

If I had my druthers, there would be NO HDMI connectors wasting precious real estate on video cameras aimed at the professional market. Well, MAYBE IF there are already at least a bare minimum of TWO SDI OUT connections(one clean and one configurable) available. My F55 has HDMI, but I have four SDI outs, so it doesn't bother me.
 
lovecameras said:
Not all of us are a materially affluent as you are Mitch so please have some consideration and perhaps learn not to troll/pointless comment in future elsewhere. Some of us have to be frugal....Thanks

Now I await a warning from admin as I have stood up to a 'site sponsor'...
Click to expand...
Really?.....you should work on your vernacular....
 
lovecameras said:
So, other than Barry's sensible comments, there is no real solutions? Well I am surprised and also surprised the "pros" couldn't help me out except make put down personal character assassinations.

Pointless.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't be surprised, with an attitude like that.
 
Last edited:
lovecameras said:
So, other than Barry's sensible comments, there is no real solutions? Well I am surprised and also surprised the "pros" couldn't help me out except make put down personal character assassinations.

Pointless.
Click to expand...

You have had plenty of other solutions. The reality is you are looking for a niche product of a niche category that frankly may not exist. I don't think it is unrealistic for people to suggest alternative solutions to your situation. Not every solution is going to be a solution you like but that doesn't mean it is a bad solution or one done out of spite.

The reality is you are facing a situation with an older camera that doesn't have an economical port to expand it's life beyond the grave. External recording only gets you so far and is not some form of miracle worker. It will not help with noise or what the camera itself is capable of resolving in terms of detail or dynamic range. The image block in your camera is older and any external recorder is going to take that image and just record it as it sees it. No magic to happen there.

Component is also an inferior connection to HDMI in many ways and can soften the video and add it's own unique level of artifacts. It is extremely far from an optimal way to capture video. Yes it was the best we had back then but that doesn't mean it is going to deliver anywhere near decent results by today's standards.

Look I was once in your position trying to breath some life into a Sony F900 by adding an external recorder but the image block is what was getting old on that camera and in the end it still was nowhere near what a newer generation camera was going to deliver in terms of quality.

Mitch's advice was sound and that you may be able to sell your camera and use that money plus what you would spend on an external recorder that nobody even makes and if they did would cost a fortune and just buy a new camera. You could end up walking away without putting an extra penny into the change.

You may not like his answer but that doesn't mean it was a bad answer.

If you absolutely insist on keeping your existing camera then getting a Component to HDMI adapter may be your best choice and figure out a way to power it. Myself and others would highly suggest however to explore the option of selling your camera and getting something that not only has HDMI for the future but has a vastly superior image block and is more future proof.
 
Ok here is a portable battery powered solution. Get an 11" MacBook AIR and a Blackmagic Design Thunderbolt Intensity capture device. Those are bus powered and have component input. Yeah it is a PITA but you can run the setup power free and it has very good component HD capture. You might be able to get 4 or 5 hours out of the setup before the battery dies on the MBA. Get a laptop stand to mount to your tripod and you are more or less good to go. If you buy the ScopeBox software from Divergent Media for $99.00 you can even use that MBA as an 11" field monitor with full scopes, waveform, peaking and the ability to load LUTs. This is likely going to be the only realistic portable solution.

I still say you should just get different camera. That setup would be around $1,000.00 minus storage. Your camera right now is a 720p HD camera. You can buy a used Panasonic GH3 for $500.00 that records incredible 1080p 60p 50mbps that you can down convert to 720p to deliver the same kind of video you deliver now, 1280x720p 59.94p.

If you shoot 24p the whole component capture has another major issue, pulldown removal, assuming that camera even sends out a proper 720p 24p which it likely will not and it will only output 720p 60p with the 24p packed inside of the stream. Normal pulldown removal hardware devices are used to removing pulldown on interlaced material and may not even work with a 720p source which would make the YUV capture virtually useless for 24p projects. Again if you shoot 24p you really are better off getting a camera that can actually output a true 24p signal via a external connection. Or else you will be messing around with removing duplicate frames in post to convert the 60p capture back into a proper 24p video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top