HVX200 vs JVCPROHD

Sometimes I march to a different drummer...

Sometimes I march to a different drummer...

10 years ago, I bought a Supra Twin Turbo when the dealers couldn't give them away. I thought it was the best car in the class.

Currently, I use a JVC DV300, always envying the DVX. Really, really envying the DVX, especially the 100A, which came out the following year.

Now this! First, Pansonic, with the DVX and SDX has a reputation that is beyond reproach. JVC, mired it older cameras, has a reputation desperately in need of repair.

By supporting DVCPro50 and DVCProHD, Panasonic is putting a very high quality image on the recording media. If not a high resolution image.

By using HDV 720p, JVC is providing a full resolution image with an easily managed workflow. And some features that seem very interesting (the earpiece and the attention to focus assist). The 16x lens seems ridculously long (7.3-117 for a 1/3" camera? it sounds like a 2/3" lens!) and maybe too 'pro' a size and a look (you did have a permit and insurance, didn't you).

Someone has said they wanted to see footage. I want to see the footage after it runs through the editor, and on an HD monitor or on film. Who really has the best resolution? Does the HDX200 really provide the color it promises? Does HDV lose too much for moving images? Can we really work in DVCPro50 and DVCProHD with our current equipment?

Damn, don't you hate it when MB and BMW introduce new cars at the same time!
 
If I was Canon and wanted a dog in this fight, I'd think I'd license *both* codecs. How about cam with multi-format P2 plus an HDV tape drive. More likely, they'll be late to the table and come in with a me-too product.

Zig_Zigman said:
Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?
Click to expand...
 
Barry_S said:
If I was Canon and wanted a dog in this fight, I'd think I'd license *both* codecs. How about cam with multi-format P2 plus an HDV tape drive. More likely, they'll be late to the table and come in with a me-too product.
Click to expand...

....As the trend has always been!! :huh:

But don't feel too sorry for ol' Canon....they've still got their awesome DSLR's and Lenses to keep them afloat!! :)

~reservoir~
 
Zig_Zigman said:
Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?
Click to expand...

If canon can take the positives of HVX200 and mix it with positives of HD100 - they will knock both off.

A Canon XL3 with interchangeable lens which does
1080/24p/30p/60i,
720/24/30/60p
in 4:2:2

for $6,999

Basically take HVX200 and put a interchangeable lens mount for $1,000 more.

that wud be the last camera I buy before a full frame 4:4:4 comes out in 2008/9
 
Methinks it leaves the door open for Canon for a 1080 24/p counterstrike. But what codec to use?
Click to expand...

I read somewhere that 50 mbps HDV would give 166mbps ________ (whatever codec it was) a run for its money. It seems to me that with a better compression system, more information could potentially fit into a usable bitrate. And if not limited by such a low bitrate (19 for 720p?) would MPEG really look that bad?

How hard would it be to implement this, with say, hot-swappable hard drives? That would be the last camera I would ever buy, even though I'm broke and don't have anything worth filming.
 
I must remember that what JVC is selling with HD100 is a standard lens (it looks they are speaking about a standard definition), and HD lens they offer is around 6000$ alone...

At least i read this everywhere they post an interview...
 
mr._guiyotinne said:
I must remember that what JVC is selling with HD100 is a standard lens (it looks they are speaking about a standard definition), and HD lens they offer is around 6000$ alone...

At least i read this everywhere they post an interview...
Click to expand...

See...that's the part I DON'T understand. HD is HD, right? But HD with an HD lense is better?

In other words, can my feeble eyes tell a $6,000 dollar difference in the picture? I mean come'on!! I'll save my extra 6k and buy cool accessories for the HVX.

~reservoir~
 
redindian said:
If canon can take the positives of HVX200 and mix it with positives of HD100 - they will knock both off.

A Canon XL3 with interchangeable lens which does
1080/24p/30p/60i,
720/24/30/60p
in 4:2:2

for $6,999

Basically take HVX200 and put a interchangeable lens mount for $1,000 more.

that wud be the last camera I buy before a full frame 4:4:4 comes out in 2008/9
Click to expand...

I don't know where they'd get 4:2:2 from though. They are part of the HDV consortium so I'd thing they'd go with that (4:2:0). If not, do you think Panasonic would license them their DVCPro codecs, only to bring out a better camera?


Aaron
 
Well, i have a question here... a film camera has a better resolution than HD ,or am i mistaken? If photo lenses are as good as get an images to these cameras, what make HD lenses so pricey? I know they aren´t cheap video lenses... Controls, well, HVX looks will have them manual (what we want) and auto too, and will be a truly HD lens, just fixed...

Then why so much buzz around interchageagle HD lenses... I´m with Reservoir, these 6G can make my HVX ready for war... and to record hours and hours on HDDs! Mattebox, Follow focus, whatever you think about... And then they will have to pay for it too.

I see no point on JVC. My pocket is already sold.
 
The extra lens is not needed for HD... Quotes from JVC article.

"Still on the subject of lenses, JVC introduces a new patented feature called HD Focus Assist which not only makes focussing even more precise, it also reduces the time needed to achieve focus. It works by exaggerating in the viewfinder the edge detail of the part of the subject that is in focus".

So..take it or leave it.....Not so with P2 cards..you will need them for HD for HVX. So I would hold on to that extra 6K for about 3 cards.

JVC article cont'd (which may be the ultimate reason I get the JVC)
"One obvious benefit is that recording durations, in both standard and high definition, can be longer than the 60 minutes of the miniDV cassette. The hard disk can be set to record either sequentially or in parallel with the tape cassette. It also allows automatic buffering of seconds or even minutes of video so that the start of the action is always captured. Time-saving is another advantage of the removable disk, which becomes an operational NLE source within seconds of being removed from the camcorder. There is no other system available at any price level in high definition video that offers this rapid editing facility."

"The GY-HD100's HDTV recording format is selected from 720p/25, 720p/24 and 720p/30 and the 625 PAL recording format from 576i/50 and 576p/25 in either 4:3 or 16:9. From the progressive 720p native recording, the on-board converter provides in real time a further array of signal types from which to choose. These signals are not only delivered in realtime but also free from artefacts. In high definition they are 1080i/50, 1080i/60, 720p/60 & 720p/50 and in standard definition 625 PAL they are 576i/50 in either 4:3 or 16:9."


1080i/60 for JVC? Wouldnt that get me the "reality" look as well as the film look with 720p/24???
 
Editor, HVX will be capable of recording directly to normal HDDs, so with 360 Gigs HD you can get three hours of 108024p/60i. I hope it´s conffirmed by now or i will be foot in mouth...
 
Yes, but do you plan to spend a bunch of money on hard drives (which you could probably use in place of p2), a computer, and a HD capture card? You'll need a hell of a lot more room than DVCproHD, that's for sure and it's not a run and gun setup like most "reality" applications are.
 
...kay i have to missing something

...kay i have to missing something

There has to be some advantage of P2 technology that myself, and a lot of posters here, are missing. Completely off the topic of HVx vs. HD100...

why should i drop another few g's for a couple of P2's to only get 16 minutes of footage max (to say i bought two P2's) when im staring at an external 250gb HD (hard-drive not Hi-def, like that would make sense ;) i bought for just over a hundred and fifty bux?!!!! Why would anyone buy a P2 besides the fact that it has a direct slot and is smaller to carry around. Im sure some "Genius" will mass produce an external hard-drive mount to the HVX200 for convenience, but i have to be missing something here...I have to be?

(this is of course direct firewire to and exHD is actually confirmed in the near future)
 
mainly stabiliity. It will not drop frames. HD is a sustained data rate of 100mb/s. If you're recording directly to a hard driive and something goes wonky, you're out. Record to P2, and transfer to a Hard Drive, it could slow down to 2mb/s and go back up to 300 mb/s and your fine. Hopefully a record direct to Hard Drive will be there and will work well. I would like to see that option. For filmmaking I will not cry if it doesn't.

Also, with P2, you can pre-record and loop record.
 
there is just no comparing these two cameras for me. options. options. options.

it's really hard to even compare them in my eyes. the variable frame rate + having a tape transport for me makes it impossible for me to ever consider wanting a different camera.
 
i'm just saying for my work, which isn't really payed work. and doesn't require to shoot for long periods of time.

i just see this HVX and i can't even fathom that all these options are on it. i honestly would have gasped @ saving and spending 6,000 dollars on a camera when i got my DVX. but i would sell my DVX and save money for this thing in a second now. it is just THAT exciting. i still can't believe it will have variable frame rate. that just blows my mind.
 
Editor321 said:
1080i/60 for JVC? Wouldnt that get me the "reality" look as well as the film look with 720p/24???
Click to expand...
No, because it's not shooting 1080i. It's shooting 30p, and then converting that to 60i. So you'll have a 60i-compatible signal that looks like 720/30p footage.

I've gone over this with JVC. I talked with them at their booth. There is no "reality look" on tape, in high-def.
 
TiVo said:
I thought the JVC couls shoot 720 60p
Click to expand...
It cannot record 60p. It can output raw 720/60p on the component outputs, but you can't record it. So unless you're in a studio doing live switching/broadcast, it does you basically no good.
 
princigalli said:
Also, the JVC with its hige lens is as big as a studio camera.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's *tiny*. With its "huge" lens, it's still smaller than an HVX. Overall it may be an inch longer, but it's just a tiny, tiny camera. The main body of the camera's about as big as a man's hand (well, a reasonbly large man's hand, that is). It's really, really small.

If people were expecting a Betacam-looking shoulder-mount camera, they're in for a huge surprise (well, make that a "tiny" surprise).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top