HD 100 users and potential buyers please check this link out.

I wouldn't give that post a lot of credibility. There's a post that was made shortly after that one that says that JVC has already solved the SSE problem with users commenting on how newer units have no SSE.

I guess we're going to have to wait and see how it all works out.
 
Once again, the split screen CCD block will not be replaced by a single block.
The split screen 'effect' in the image is what is of concern and the reports coming in now are that it is minimalized. Time will tell if the 'effect' can be completely eliminated.
 
The effect can surely be eliminated with a sufficent CCD hardware upgrade. And it will surely happen, but who knows when? JVC says their working on it, but that won't remedy the current units in circulation. I'm very concerned regarding JVC's apathetic, take it or leave it attitude. If there is any truth to thw news at all, which I believe there is-judging from their official speak no evil, admit no evil policy, and non-official, off the record statements of how this is a limitation and not a defect, this is not how the situation should be handled. The brochure advertises the camera for ENG and videography applications with the Full Auto feature for on the fly work. You simply cannot tip toe around the split screen issue, or fix it in post. The camera had even been advertised as a news gathering camera as well as for film-makers and event videography applications . What self respecting broadcaster (or hobby enthusiast) would purchase a camera where a defect would cause your turnaround time in editing to be increased. No one is asking for the CCD block to be replaced by a single block. Technology is no longer the issue. The camera is not a predictable or funtional unit with the SS problem. And even if ou have controlled parameters, I still find the split screen to be unpredicatable. You can see the right hand CCD fighting to compensate the picture literally. I am a professional shooter, and even the best of us will need to use presets from time to time. This is a consumer issue, and JVC would be wise to include this information regarding the SS as part of their information packaging. I feel for the dealers that will be distributing refunds for this camera to educational institutions and broadcasters like ABC, and film companies like MGM who have made bulk purchases of the unit. JVC, why couldn't you have just been up front in the first place? You officially have a black eye. The swelling will diminish as the split screen issue fades.
 
Well, I was told by JVC that any units exhibiting SSE would be replaced and that they were aware of the problem. They were sure that the problem had been fixed. I borrowed a demo unit from a dealer, which had SSE at all gain levels and severe CA on the lens. I have since bought a camera, trusting in the fixes and I am pleased to tell you that I have no SSE and minimal CA. I've yet to do a resolution test. So far, so good.
 
The SSE can be eliminated or minimized with firmware updates, but CA are a lens issue. Are they also improving the lens quality?
 
Some CA on the edges but it still resolves 800 lines. CA is not nearly as bad as what's been shown initially. Make no mistake though CA is there if you look hard enough.
 
U guess when it comes to the split screen issue special note should taken that this does not apply to hd100' s in the UK.
 
Well, it certainly does apply to earlier units in the UK. But there is no SSE on my camera. CA is definitely there on my lens but not to the extent that I saw on the demo unit I used for a couple of days, which was delivered a few weeks earlier than mine. The CA is disappointing but I've seen pretty bad CA on professional and broadcast zoom lenses. All I can say is that there's nothing on my lens that does not relflect its cost. The only serious complaint I have at the moment is that the battery life/charging time is completely ridiculous. If you need to run the camera on batteries then you should add the cost of a battery/charger upgrade to the purchase price of the HD100.

This is not an apology for JVC, just a statement of fact: the camera isn't perfect but the example I have is perfectly adequate for our needs (low budget broadcast).
 
Huiy Tang said:
U guess when it comes to the split screen issue special note should taken that this does not apply to hd100' s in the UK.
Click to expand...
Huiy, Tim Dashwood posted some very interesting findings over on dvinfo.net that may be of interest to you. He states that if you put your menu item "master black" to -3, the split screen is eliminated without much undesireable effect on the rest of the image. Can you please try that and attempt to get the split screen effect? It'd be nice to isolate the problem amongst all users of the original camera runs.

thanks..
 
stephenlnoe said:
Huiy, Tim Dashwood posted some very interesting findings over on dvinfo.net that may be of interest to you. He states that if you put your menu item "master black" to -3, the split screen is eliminated without much undesireable effect on the rest of the image. Can you please try that and attempt to get the split screen effect? It'd be nice to isolate the problem amongst all users of the original camera runs.

thanks..
Click to expand...

I have to stress that this test was performed on firmware 1.14. Others may have different results.
 
I'm leaving in a hour to go pick mine up. I hope the split screen deal is not too bad. I also hope for no dead pixels. By the way, I read the manual I downloaded online and didn't see anything about a firmware or dead pixel masking menu. How do I go about that? I would like to find out the firmware version when I get mine.
 
Did the master black -3 test. The split is still there and I'm on firmware version 1.17. It's more subtle but it is still evident. When I took the camera into a low light situation the color temp looked less desirable because the black level as reduced. I'm just going to wait for the next HD100 line where the issue will be eradicated. During your testing please ensure that you hook the camera up to a monitor, the defect is much more obvious. And it burns you when you don't or can't see it through the viewfinder or the LCD screen, but ends up on your computer.
 
JVC UK are saying that the SSE is now fixed on all units being delivered in the UK. I'm not sure about that but I can tell you that it's not present on my camera. I have version 1.17 firmware. I believe others on this forum have seen SSE in cameras on this firmware version, however, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was just luck of the draw. I can also tell you that my camera had been opened and re-sealed by JVC UK so - if there really is a difference in units supplied here - maybe it's because they are being checked more thoroughly.
 
I ended up not buying the camera yesterday. The dealer only had one left and I ask to open it and test before buying. It had 3 dead pixels, which were visible even without closing the iris. The split was so severe, it could be seen at 0db under the normal store illumination, which wasn't dim at all. It was right there on your face. You couldn’t have missed it. We didn’t even have the camera on a monitor. It could be seen in the camera LCD. He said he didn't know how to look the firmware number up. So I have no idea how recent the camera was. But I didn't buy it. I decided I will wait till something official is announced about the problems.
 
There is no way you can see a dead pixel on the LCD.... It must be a dead pixel in the LCD (which is no big deal at all (as a 'regular dead pixel - that can be fixed...)
 
Well, it was so big that I could see it. We both could. Not only in the LCD, but also in the EVF and in the same spots. So I don't think it was in the LCD.
Besides the split was the worse of all, since I heard you can fix dead pixels yourself in this camera.
 
Indeed, but there is something strange. Dead pixels can't be visible due to the low resolution of the LCD and VF, it must have been something else then. If you could see it in both, it seems so error in the processing AFTER the CCD...
 
I'm pretty sure it was dead pixels. Even the dealer agreed. If you moved around, panning and tilting, it would stay still in the same spot in the screen. Besides, I know what a dead pixel looks like :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top