First picture!!!

Jan_Crittenden said:
xander76 wrote:
The Uncompressed output is uncompressed but what goes to tape is compressed as HDV. This is only a 24P derivation to the HDV spec, but the recording is HDV. The output is in the Analog domain and would require a 3rd party device to bing it into any of the HD production systems today as all of those are in HD-SDI.

Be very careful here as there is no 720P/24 outside of an NLE or outside of a 60P with a 2:3 pulldown. That is there are no devices that record just this, unless it is a computer or some sort of memory.

But they will need a Analog component to HD-SDI conversion device.

Hope that clarifies as that is basically what the FX1 does but it does it in 1080, not 720.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...

Jan, yes, it will be analog, but you can capture it straight to a HDD using Black Magic Designs A/D converter and get a sweeter signal than DVCPRO-HD which is compressed. Heck, my guess is that even if one would just feed it to a high end Beta SP deck, it might still looking better than compressed HD.
Although the Sony does it as well, I think it goes out via composite or maybe S-video. We don't know how JVC will do it. Maybe component. Besides, the sony sees through that el crepo prosumer lens (like the DVX100 and apparently HVX200) which not only is worse glass, but limits your work as a cinematographer. It's also interlaced only. So, there's realy no comparison here. It's like saying : The HVX200 records to solid state media but so does many consumer 1 CCD camcorders, so it's not better. It's a different camera, a different animal.
 
Mediacre said:
I, personally prefer to shoot with pro sized cameras. So this JVC is just right. Light but yet shoulder mount. I never liked the toy sized cameras.
Click to expand...
Have you seen how big the JVC is? I wouldn't call that a "pro sized" camera. It's the same size, maybe a tiny bit bigger, than the DVX, and a little smaller than the XL2.
 
I know it's not pro sized. Note I said, I prefer shooting with pro sized, not that the JVC is pro size. That's why I said light but yet shoulder mount.
 
Mediacre said:
I know it's not pro sized. Note I said, I prefer shooting with pro sized, not that the JVC is pro size. That's why I said light but yet shoulder mount.
Click to expand...

You said that 1) you prefer "pro-size" cameras, 2) that you never liked the "toy size" cameras, and 3) that the JVC is "just right." You got all over Jan about context; that was the context of your statement. The way Barry took your meaning is the same way I did, too, and I'm betting most everyone else also.
 
Ok, what I mean is. I like pro sized cameras and the JVC is more of a pro sized than the HVX200. That the JVC has pro size features, but yet is lighter. Wich would make it just right in size.
Clear now? Let me know if you need I break it down in a easier way.
Cheers.

P.S. About Jan, she quoted me out of context. That's different than you not being able to understand what I meant.
 
Well, that's what Barry was speaking to. (??) Have you seen the comparative photos, based on the size of the XLR inputs (which have to be the same on both cams)? The JVC is only slightly larger than the DVX, and it looks like the HVX is about the same size as the DVX but with a longer lens barrel. You're talking about two cameras which are about the same size.

That was Barry's point.
 
Jubal28 said:
Well, that's what Barry was speaking to. (??) Have you seen the comparative photos, based on the size of the XLR inputs (which have to be the same on both cams)? The JVC is only slightly larger than the DVX, and it looks like the HVX is about the same size as the DVX but with a longer lens barrel. You're talking about two cameras which are about the same size.

That was Barry's point.
Click to expand...

I can imagine the JVC size by the lens. I shoot with pro cameras and lenses. If you look how big that fuji lens is in relation to the body of the camera, you can get a good picture of the full camera's size. I think it will be about the size of the XL1, without the odd V shape, which makes it better for shoulder mount. The HVX seems to be the size of a DVX which is a totally different size and form factor. Form fact is what is in focus here along with the size. The JVC has a more pro form factor to it. The DVX and XL1 are not the same size by the way. And regardless of it being slightly larger as you say, which doesn't look like, but anyways, you can't mount a DVX or HVX on your shoulder can you?
 
All apologies to 10s for hijacking his photo comparison from another thread:

jvcdvx9pw.jpg



We don’t know for sure the size of the JVC’s lens. However, we DO know that the XLR inputs are standard and will be the same size on both cams. Therefore, if they’re equal size in the photos, this should be a pretty accurate size comparison.

Now, don’t get me wrong; I do like the look of the JVC. But this is pretty convincing evidence that if it’s bigger than the HVX, it’s not going to be significantly bigger. (The size of the XL series cams entirely notwithstanding. They’re comfortably larger.)
 
That pic is to in right scale. You can clearly see the XLRs are bigger in the DVX and it shouldn't be if it was in right scale. That pic is off. Look how huge the DVX viewfinder looks close to the HD100. The HD100 has the same viewfinder as the DV5000, so I heard. Not possible the DVX finder being bigger.
I also don't see why Fuji would spend time and mony to make a smaller lens rather than using one of their lenses with an 1/3" mount adapted end. By the zoom grip you can see it's jus a standard fuji lens.
 
That's more like it:

JVC+vs+Panna.jpg


Note how the XLR and the viewfinder seems more in scale with each other.


by the way, how do you post a pic? I tried to click the image button but it posted the link to the pci instead of the pic. Thanks.
 
That page wouldn't come up.

I did a quick test with the photo above. I took the photo into Microsoft Paint and cropped it into a little square with all the sides touching a tangent point on the outer edge of the XLR circle on the JVC. Going to "Image Attributes," the square was 18x18 pixels.

I did the same for the DVX XLRs (don't let the silver throw you), and the square was 20x20.

A little larger, yes. Enough to throw the comparison into serious doubt? No. It's only a single pixel on each side.

The DVX viewfinder is unusually big, don't forget.

Also, look at the handstraps. They're comparable size.

As I said, the JVC may be a little bit bigger. But not like the XL series is bigger.

(You can post a photo by typing "
" -- or use the button above the full reply box which looks like a mountain and sun against a yellow sky.)
 
For some reason, I can't post pics. I did what you said, but only the url of the pciture will show. Weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top