Just when I'd made up my mind...

The DVX doesn't really compare to the HD100, for the reasons maltinghead stated. Personally, I would go for the HD100, but you need to bear in mind that it doesn't have OIS or autofocus, and both of these can be lifesavers for event shooting or anywhere you don't have much time for setting up or opportunity to reshoot.

Richard
 
Who needs OIS on a well balanced shoulder camera? A light shoulder cam is much more confortable and stable than any handycam, it's much better for shooting events. About the autofocus, I won't discuss that. Personally I never missed it on any situation... but there are a lot of opinions about this matter.
 
I agree. Pro ENG cameras have never had OIS and they are steadier than any handheld anyone could ever shoot with a little camera like the DVX100 where the weight is all on the forearm, even with OIS. Centre of gravity on the shoulder is the key and the HD100 fits the bill once you add a battery system.

I have an opinion about autofocus: I've never understood why someone would buy a $6000 camera with a manual lens and complain about autofocus? What is so hard about zooming into your subject, finding focus, and zooming out. It is faster than any autofocus system on progressively scanned chips, and its the way its been done since the zoom lens was invented. (granted the technique didn't work on the servo XL1 lens or 3x Canon lens because of backfocus issues.)
Autofocus generally takes its reading from the exact centre of the screen. 90% of the framing of your subject will not be in the centre if the frame is properly composed. ie: RULE OF THIRDS !!!! How is the autofocus AI supposed to know what you want to focus on?

In fact I just received some footage today from a client of a properly composed sit-down interview, shot on a PD150, with the subject out of focus and the wall behind him clearly in focus. I see this sort of thing all the time from non-pro operators who actually trust autofocus! It makes me cringe every time. Especially when the client asks me if there is a way to "sharpen it in post." :)
 
"I've never understood why someone would buy a $6000 camera with a manual lens and complain about autofocus?"
Plus all you JVC users are saying the focus assist works a treat.
 
dashwood said:
I agree. Pro ENG cameras have never had OIS and they are steadier than any handheld anyone could ever shoot with a little camera like the DVX100 where the weight is all on the forearm, even with OIS. Centre of gravity on the shoulder is the key and the HD100 fits the bill once you add a battery system.

I have an opinion about autofocus: I've never understood why someone would buy a $6000 camera with a manual lens and complain about autofocus? What is so hard about zooming into your subject, finding focus, and zooming out. It is faster than any autofocus system on progressively scanned chips, and its the way its been done since the zoom lens was invented. (granted the technique didn't work on the servo XL1 lens or 3x Canon lens because of backfocus issues.)
Autofocus generally takes its reading from the exact centre of the screen. 90% of the framing of your subject will not be in the centre if the frame is properly composed. ie: RULE OF THIRDS !!!! How is the autofocus AI supposed to know what you want to focus on?

In fact I just received some footage today from a client of a properly composed sit-down interview, shot on a PD150, with the subject out of focus and the wall behind him clearly in focus. I see this sort of thing all the time from non-pro operators who actually trust autofocus! It makes me cringe every time. Especially when the client asks me if there is a way to "sharpen it in post." :)
Click to expand...

Hi. For event work autofocus and OIS can be very useful. For example, if the distance to subject is changing, autofocus can let you concentrate on framing rather than focussing. I agree that with sufficient practice you can do it with a manual lens, but most of the time you don't get second chances so autofocus can be valuable and reduces your stress levels. It's best to treat autofocus as a feature that can be switched in and out as required, and if you know when to use it and when not to use it there is nothing to be ashamed of. I noticed that some of the HD100 sample footage posted on this forum shows focus shifting in and out as the subject runs around. For many users, including non-pros, that footage would be unusable. Regarding OIS, I find the OIS on my XL2 to be very useful when I am zoomed in quite far. Given the choice, I would much rather have it than not have it, especially on such a long lens.

Anyway, in my opinion this is a real consideration for some shooters, but if it's not important to you so be it. I fully agree that it would not be a good idea to buy a camera with a manual lens and then complain about the lack of autofocus. My post was only intended to raise awareness that these features are not included, so that anyone considering moving up to an HD100 from a lower end camera does not get an unpleasant shock.

Richard
 
I see your point of view, but the problem with autofocus is that when you turn it off it's still the servo that controls the lens. You move the focus ring and you are not directly moving the glass, which compromises focus feeling.

The OIS is usefull on the XL2 because it is a very unbalanced camera. A OIS on this fujinon lens would make it heavier which would make this camera more front heavy.
 
Well, AF can be handy, but it's not perfect and can't read your mind. :)

I've seen many times the camera is not focused on the
intended subjects.
 
athouguia said:
I see your point of view, but the problem with autofocus is that when you turn it off it's still the servo that controls the lens. You move the focus ring and you are not directly moving the glass, which compromises focus feeling.

The OIS is usefull on the XL2 because it is a very unbalanced camera. A OIS on this fujinon lens would make it heavier which would make this camera more front heavy.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree. I would love to have a camera with lens that you could switch between manual and autofocus, where the manual setting does not involve a servo.

Not sure I understand what you are saying about the OIS though.

Richard
 
Stevet said:
Well, AF can be handy, but it's not perfect and can't read your mind. :)

I've seen many times the camera is not focused on the
intended subjects.
Click to expand...

Autofocus is a useful feature, but it's not always appropriate to use it because, as you suggest, it doesn't know what you really really want to focus on. If you know your camera, you will know when it works and when it is risky to use it. But many times, it works great, and many times, manual focus also produces out of focus shots, especially in situations where no there is no opportunity for rehearsal and no possibility of retakes - sorry I didn't quite get that, could you please score that goal again? :)

Richard
 
jaegersing said:
Not sure I understand what you are saying about the OIS though.

Richard
Click to expand...
I don't know exactly how it works, but the OIS is a magnetic stabilizer mechanism that has parts, you can hear it working on some photo lens. So, if there are more pieces inside the lens it must be heavier than one without those parts. Correct me if I'm wrong... maybe I'm talking nonsense!
 
Oh, OK. Yes you are probably right. The OIS mechanism is inside the lens so it must add some weight to the front of the camera. The OIS can really help on long shots though, but maybe I just need more practice at holding the camera steady? :)

Richard
 
Re: stability, I think the point is the JVC is a much better balanced camera (when it has the battery pack at the shoulder). In the past, people have complained about the Canons being front heavy and not a real shoulder cam... So perhaps tele on the JVC isn't so hard to keep steady?
 
maltinghead said:
Re: stability, I think the point is the JVC is a much better balanced camera (when it has the battery pack at the shoulder). In the past, people have complained about the Canons being front heavy and not a real shoulder cam... So perhaps tele on the JVC isn't so hard to keep steady?
Click to expand...

I would think that is correct, but since there are degrees of steadiness, I still think an OIS is very useful.

I just noticed that Fujinon sell a bolt-on stabiliser for their lenses. If this fits the HD100 then at least the choice is there for those that have the need (and the deep pockets).

Richard
 
A friend of mine was showing off his new HVR-Z1U yesterday and I couldn't help wondering if it might just be what I'm looking for. Are there any particular drawbacks to the Z1U or ways in which it trumps the HD100? Or vice versa?
 
Dammitjanet,

The Sony Z1U is a nice camera and is capable of producing some decent footage.

Here's the reason I (and probably most others) did not consider the Sony:

It does not record progressive images. I want a camera that offers the filmic 24P (progressive) look. The Sony only records interlaced images. This is good for a live video look, but not for a filmic look. The Sony offers their Cineframe option, but I've heard it's not all that good.

Sony had held off from offering a true progressive camcorder in the sub 10K price range. JVC and Panasonic offer true progressive cameras.
 
DammitJanet said:
A friend of mine was showing off his new HVR-Z1U yesterday and I couldn't help wondering if it might just be what I'm looking for. Are there any particular drawbacks to the Z1U or ways in which it trumps the HD100? Or vice versa?
Click to expand...
Well, yes- there are some ways that both cameras trump the other. First, the major caveat of the Z, as Stevet has already pointed out, is that it shoots an interlaced image. The best work-around to this is to shoot in HD PAL at 50i, deinterlace your footage (using a motion-adaptive method, otherwise your vertical res is halved), and conform your framerate to 24. The end result of this process is a very, very fine looking finished product that is every bit as filmic, IMO, as what you get from the other cameras in this price range, assuming it was properly lit and shot. That's the good news.

The bad news is that the process of shooting PAL and converting to 24p is time consuming, and can be a bit of a headache. With the JVC or the HVX, you save yourself all that time and effort.

I've been fortunate enough to get quite a bit of hands-on time with both the Z and the HD100, so I'll give you my assessment of both cams: the Sony is the ultimate run and gun HD camera. You can pick it up, run out the door with it, and practically point and shoot. It's almost impossible to get bad results with the Sony- even a novice videographer can get good results. You can even run everything auto if you want, but be careful on the Auto settings that the camera doesn't jack around with your gain setting- for some reason it likes to gain up rather than change the iris setting if it can get away with it. The Z is awesome in low light, and has a very clean image.

The JVC is capable of giving you prettier pictures than the Sony can- but you'd better be a pretty decent shooter, or you'll never see it. It's a little more geared to professional shooters, and what few automatic settings there are are basically going to be worthless to you. You'd better know proper lighting, white balance, focus pulling, and exposure procedures, or you're going to get yourself into trouble.

These are really the main differences that I can think of. Both cameras are great when playing to their specific strengths- it's just a matter of which of my previous paragraphs best describes you. If you're more of a run-and-gun or geurilla-style shooter, or your subject matter is more reality-based, you might take a close look at the Z. If you're looking to become the next David Lynch, or you're all about the intricacies of lighting and film-style shooting, the JVC might be your cam.
 
The HD100 and the Z1 are nearly polar opposites. Neither of them does what the other does, so choosing between them should be very simple.

Z1: fixed lens, handheld form factor, 1080i recording, autofocus & OIS, no progressive but good "reality" shooting.

HD100: interchangeable lens, shoulder-mount form factor, 720p recording, no autofocus or OIS, progressive 24p and 30p but no "reality" shooting.

If you want a smaller handheld long-battery-life "live" video camera, the Z1 is tailor made for that. If you want a bigger shoulder-mount interchangeable-lens broadcast-style manual operation 24P camera, that's what the HD100 does.

Very different tools aimed at different users.
 
Dash- As usual, nail on the head. We're finishing up a 90-minute show that was supposed to be a one-off deal for cable and now has turned into a 13-week commitment for a modification of the same show BUT they want it in HD. With JVC, no problem,. Complete the original show in 480 SD 60i mode with the JVCs because we had to add more cameras for better angles aiding the lead-in to the episodic and then it's a simple switch on the rear of the JVC to HD and set up in the viewfinder to HDV 30P for shot, archive, edit and delivery. Even if they want a 1080i output, the move to HD episodic is seamless for us hence the recent 5-JVC acquisition from EVS after the network commitment.
 
First off, thanks for all the great replies guys. This is truly the most useful forum I've ever been a part of, and it's thanks to the users.

I have to say though, I'm a little jealous of all the DVX owners who get Barry's book/DVD. Barry, any plans of a book or dvd for HD100U owners?
 
Well, actually, that's the main reason I bought a JVC in the first place. I planned on using it for event coverage and working on a book/DVD for it. Even planned on partnering with one of the HD100 masters to make the DVD. But I was so disappointed with the unit I received, and it took so long for it to arrive that my window of opportunity evaporated, and I ended up sending the HD100 back.

Since then I've had occasion to revisit the HD100, and realized that I really got a lemon. Newer HD100's are definitely better than the thing I had (which was, admittedly, the very first one that my reseller could get his hands on).

So I'm open to revisiting the idea, but since then Steve Mullen has come out with his guide, so I don't know what the market would be for it. And I'd want to research the potential market acceptance -- I originally started researching doing an XL2 one, but the XL2 just didn't sell at all, so there was no benefit in the reward/risk category. The HD100 was similarly dead for a while, but I think sales have really picked up in the last couple of months so it might indeed be a viable candidate.

In the end there's too many potential projects and not enough time to get to them all. Shoulod have a couple of new projects on the market by NAB (HVX Book/DVD being one of them); after NAB I'll prioritize the others... thanks for asking though! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top