Now I've been following this subject closely because I plan to make the jump into the HD Market. With so many offerings its kind of hard to make a choice, but after much research and thinking I think I have a choice on which to go with. Here are my opinions and why I think this model is the best of the bunch.
First off let me eliminate the HVX200. I mean seriously what is Panasonic thinking. This is by no means a competitor here I mean most people who get this types of camera are in the Industrial, Event and Low end professional video market and format wise this is like having a Lamborghini in a Honda body, meaning its balance is a little off making its maximum everyday usablity limited. When I first heard about this camera I way hyped and said this is the best in the bunch even if its a little more expensive and its still kind of a palm camcorder. However I felt this way because I over looked and didn't notice a very important factor which is that this camera does not record HDV (Orginally I tought it did). To me, this is fatal deal breaker. I mean you can only record DVCPRO HD with P2 cards? For most people this is not at all feasible. What is it like 15 minutes for a $1700 8GB card? For most real companies this really isn't worth it. Unless you only do commercial spots and maybe Indie Films, even then, still that's pushing it. And yes no doubt on the quality side its probably the strongest out of the bunch, but the workability of the format is another serious issue, you face challenges with archiving footage (its going to take a lot of hard drive space and DVDs) and not to mention the DATA rate of the footage itself its going to be taxing on a lot of computers to edit. For a busy video company, its almost out of the question, especially at its price point. It might make a great DV camera though, but then again not really worth it.
Now for the Sony FX, well not much to say here, its the older in the bunch so it is lacking in many ways. Still the cheapest so that's a plus, but still its a palm camcorder and with its short comings it might not be the best choice for the long run.
Then we have the XL H1, now this to had me excited. A lot of features and some great options, plus the fact that is uses the canon lenses and the possibility of using my still camera EF Lens. But again a couple of short falls, one no progressive, I mean for the price that this thing is going to cost they couldn't do that? I don't mind if it was 720P but with this you get no P. It does 24 frame interlace, and I really don't know what to think about that too much its kind of good for the look of film motion, but on the other end its still fake and coversion to film wise this could be a problem. I guess this camera is good if you want to stay in the video world, but I like to have the option to go film if I can. Also the canon video lens, never cared to much for the electronic focus on the XL1, but still working wise better then the Sony and Panasonic so not all that bad. Form factor is OK, a lot better then the Sony and Panasonic, but still a half ass sholder mount. And then I really have had bad experiences with Canon's LCD view finders, most times I look at them they suck. I've seen this on all types of thier models from the GL and XL1 to the consumer models. So I don't have to much hope on how this one will hold out. But still all said and done, this camera does look pretty promising it it does sport a lot of great features. It is a hard call for me. But the price is what I am not that hot on.
Finally my choice, the JVC HD100. Now by no means the best camera in every way. It has its fair share of short comings. Like the viewfinder, light sensitivity and a few others. And most of all JVC's quality control, this really scares me to be honest, but I figure if a wait a little bit, then they will better work the issues, plus I had a first run of the JVC DV500 and while I did have their big head clog problem at the time, they did take care of it, the only thing I am worried about is the dead pixel thing, but in fairness I've seen Sony's with them to and as long as it can be masked, then thats not to bad. But is its pluses more then make up for the short comings. Cost is decent, form factor is one of the biggest selling points for me it will sit on my sholder, I am used to pro cameras and in any day of the week a pro camera is better to work with shooting wise then a prosumer style one, fast response and better control. Then is does 720P with after much research over all quality wise (not resolution) I think is better then 1080I just the fact that its a full frame. And HDV, not the best format, but the best HD to work with volume business wise for the most part. So I hope JVC can shape things up because this in my opinion is the best choice business wise and for the money.
Any comments?
First off let me eliminate the HVX200. I mean seriously what is Panasonic thinking. This is by no means a competitor here I mean most people who get this types of camera are in the Industrial, Event and Low end professional video market and format wise this is like having a Lamborghini in a Honda body, meaning its balance is a little off making its maximum everyday usablity limited. When I first heard about this camera I way hyped and said this is the best in the bunch even if its a little more expensive and its still kind of a palm camcorder. However I felt this way because I over looked and didn't notice a very important factor which is that this camera does not record HDV (Orginally I tought it did). To me, this is fatal deal breaker. I mean you can only record DVCPRO HD with P2 cards? For most people this is not at all feasible. What is it like 15 minutes for a $1700 8GB card? For most real companies this really isn't worth it. Unless you only do commercial spots and maybe Indie Films, even then, still that's pushing it. And yes no doubt on the quality side its probably the strongest out of the bunch, but the workability of the format is another serious issue, you face challenges with archiving footage (its going to take a lot of hard drive space and DVDs) and not to mention the DATA rate of the footage itself its going to be taxing on a lot of computers to edit. For a busy video company, its almost out of the question, especially at its price point. It might make a great DV camera though, but then again not really worth it.
Now for the Sony FX, well not much to say here, its the older in the bunch so it is lacking in many ways. Still the cheapest so that's a plus, but still its a palm camcorder and with its short comings it might not be the best choice for the long run.
Then we have the XL H1, now this to had me excited. A lot of features and some great options, plus the fact that is uses the canon lenses and the possibility of using my still camera EF Lens. But again a couple of short falls, one no progressive, I mean for the price that this thing is going to cost they couldn't do that? I don't mind if it was 720P but with this you get no P. It does 24 frame interlace, and I really don't know what to think about that too much its kind of good for the look of film motion, but on the other end its still fake and coversion to film wise this could be a problem. I guess this camera is good if you want to stay in the video world, but I like to have the option to go film if I can. Also the canon video lens, never cared to much for the electronic focus on the XL1, but still working wise better then the Sony and Panasonic so not all that bad. Form factor is OK, a lot better then the Sony and Panasonic, but still a half ass sholder mount. And then I really have had bad experiences with Canon's LCD view finders, most times I look at them they suck. I've seen this on all types of thier models from the GL and XL1 to the consumer models. So I don't have to much hope on how this one will hold out. But still all said and done, this camera does look pretty promising it it does sport a lot of great features. It is a hard call for me. But the price is what I am not that hot on.
Finally my choice, the JVC HD100. Now by no means the best camera in every way. It has its fair share of short comings. Like the viewfinder, light sensitivity and a few others. And most of all JVC's quality control, this really scares me to be honest, but I figure if a wait a little bit, then they will better work the issues, plus I had a first run of the JVC DV500 and while I did have their big head clog problem at the time, they did take care of it, the only thing I am worried about is the dead pixel thing, but in fairness I've seen Sony's with them to and as long as it can be masked, then thats not to bad. But is its pluses more then make up for the short comings. Cost is decent, form factor is one of the biggest selling points for me it will sit on my sholder, I am used to pro cameras and in any day of the week a pro camera is better to work with shooting wise then a prosumer style one, fast response and better control. Then is does 720P with after much research over all quality wise (not resolution) I think is better then 1080I just the fact that its a full frame. And HDV, not the best format, but the best HD to work with volume business wise for the most part. So I hope JVC can shape things up because this in my opinion is the best choice business wise and for the money.
Any comments?
