JVC launches new ProHD cameras

mikkowilson

mikkowilson

Steadi-Guru
Building on the HD100, JVC is launching the HD200 and the HD251.

They have a similar form factor to the HD100 but offer much more on the inside. Including the all familer pro connectors: SDI, Genlock and Timecode. They also support upgrades to full Studio capabilty.

About the HD250 from JVC.com:
  • 60p capture and recording provide high resolution and smooth motion for news and sports
  • Compact Shoulder Professional form factor
  • Choice of several lenses
  • Built-in 14.4V type Battery Mount
  • External time code sync
  • HD-SDI output w/embedded audio
  • Dual-media (tape +HDD)recording with DTE.
  • Next generation super-efficient MPEG-2 encoding
  • Genlock
  • Studio option with CCU
  • Time code synchronization
  • Enhanced Cinema Gamma
  • Composite video input (for pool feed)
  • BNC connectors
Click to expand...


Details Here: http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL101625


Brief overview from the IBC Daily:
http://www.ibc.org/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews_cms.cgi?db_id=23084&issue=2

- Mikko
 
Mikko can you find out if Apple is there and when will they release an update to be able to use FCP with the camera and the Canon...

Thanks Gary
 
Lots of people will care about it being 720p -- does that make it a joke? Not at all.

The real head-scratcher is a $9,000 HD250 that doesn't even include a lens, vs. a $7,000 Canon XH G1. Both offer 3x1/3" CCDs, both offer uncompressed HD-SDI with embedded audio, but one is $2,000 less and includes a (noninterchangeable) lens, the other has no lens and offers lens choices of a 16x POS or a $11,000 good lens.

Vs. $7,000 for the complete Canon package.

So I do think your "who cares" comment will probably prove correct, but not because it's 720p, rather because it's really high-priced compared to the Canon alternative.
 
Barry_Green said:
The real head-scratcher is a $9,000 HD250 that doesn't even include a lens, vs. a $7,000 Canon XH G1. Both offer 3x1/3" CCDs, both offer uncompressed HD-SDI with embedded audio, but one is $2,000 less and includes a (noninterchangeable) lens, the other has no lens and offers lens choices of a 16x POS or a $11,000 good lens.

Vs. $7,000 for the complete Canon package.

So I do think your "who cares" comment will probably prove correct, but not because it's 720p, rather because it's really high-priced compared to the Canon alternative.
Click to expand...

Barry, I think this is a very unfair comparison. The two cameras are much more different than the few points you make above. The HD250 can capture at 60P, while the G1 does 60i. The HD250 is a shoulder mount, ENG form factor; the G1 is not. The HD250 has a professional 14.4V battery mount that can also power an onboard light and/or wireless mics; the G1 can not. The HD250 can be controlled by a professional CCU, the G1 can not (as far as I know). The HD250 can use optional premium ENG HD lenses with digital servos (from Fujinon) and real studio quality rear lens controls for both zoom and focus. The G1 can not.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Canon cameras, but the HD250 can fill a niche of its own. To discount it based on a few selective points is unfair IMO.
 
Last edited:
Yes, you're right, it does have a few points in its favor. Comparison was unfair I guess. It's just what I thought of as soon as I heard the XHG1 was out: "well, there goes the HD250". But perhaps those differences will give it some room in the market.
 
Though the DVX is a good camera, I think we all have to admit that the GY-HD JVS cams are the sexiest looking.

gyhd250u_side_B.jpg
 
Barry_Green said:
Lots of people will care about it being 720p -- does that make it a joke? Not at all.

The real head-scratcher is a $9,000 HD250 that doesn't even include a lens, vs. a $7,000 Canon XH G1. Both offer 3x1/3" CCDs, both offer uncompressed HD-SDI with embedded audio, but one is $2,000 less and includes a (noninterchangeable) lens, the other has no lens and offers lens choices of a 16x POS or a $11,000 good lens.

Vs. $7,000 for the complete Canon package.

So I do think your "who cares" comment will probably prove correct, but not because it's 720p, rather because it's really high-priced compared to the Canon alternative.
Click to expand...
your finally statement produced and produces my feeling..

those jvc people are crazy..
 
They're not crazy, they've obviously produced a product that resonates with a segment of the market. Heck, I was enamored enough with the concept of the HD100 to go ahead and buy one. I wish things had turned out differently, but they are a very innovative company and had some great ideas.

I just don't understand the HD250. It made a lot of sense before Canon dropped the XH G1 bomb on them. Now it seems a lot more marginalized idea. Still has unique redeeming qualities, as tnle2 points out.
 
Barry_Green said:
It made a lot of sense before Canon dropped the XH G1 bomb on them.
Click to expand...
you see.. it's just a question of good sense.. where's it?

it's like silicon imaging vs. red..

i'm concerned about ari and jason's company/cinema camera department.. how will it go after red's 4k launch?..

and we need them.. they're nice people.. expert too.. this indy industry needs people like those..

for example, i was with them.. i decided to go with their product and now my partners are saying: no way!

you see.. the smarter guy is that one who knows when it's better to go back as soon than late..
 
sure.. their silence intrigues me.. what's happens there.. what's their reply? we know they don't have the marketing strategy of a visionary like jannard.. actually they could learn something with the red experience but not with jvc.. even if because jvc had already their profits with VHS and don't need so desperately for more.. but ari and jason aren't matsushi_ta* people..

* matsushi*ta it seems a different sense.. you see.. sense.. all in life must have sense.. 720p at $10,000 or even more doesn't have..
 
as conclusion, maybe a price policy may be "the" solution not the opposite.. that's my point beyond 720p or 1080p or even 2k in the case of silicon imaging.. 4k in their case is the way.. even if just to the sensor.. i saw superman: it is 4k --> 1080p and the differences are there..
 
filmmaker1977 said:
we know they don't have the marketing strategy of a visionary like jannard..
Click to expand...
But... you're comparing apples with oranges with grapes. Not all these products are aimed at the same market!

That's one of my pet peeves with how people perceive DVXUser membership. People think that the only thing anyone would ever want to do with one of these cameras is "make a movie". There are a lot of things out there that people do with cameras other than make movies! News and sports and reality TV and instructional videos and corporate films and television commercials and weddings and ... well, look, there are a lot of bucks being made in big business that has nothing to do with movies.

So there are tools out there that are better suited to some purposes than others.

Is there room in the marketplace for Arri's D20 or Dalsa's Origin or Thomson's Viper after RED hits the market? Probably. I don't know. But I'd expect that each of them excels at something that the others don't.

RED is not going to put every other camera maker out of business overnight. And they're not trying to! They know who they're aiming at. They call themselves Red Digital Cinema Camera Company. They're aiming specifically at VariCam/CineAlta buyers/renters, and the aforementioned Dalsa/Viper types. I suspect Sony, Panasonic, Canon and JVC will have no problem selling all sorts of cameras and infrastructure to broadcasters, networks, and other non-"digital cinema" users.

720p at $10,000 or even more doesn't have..
Click to expand...
Let's look at JVC's HD250: you say "720p -- who cares?" Well, how about Fox, ABC, and ESPN? These are not small networks, these are two of the four biggest networks in the USA, and the largest dedicated sports network in the USA. And they all, exclusively, broadcast 720p. And only 720p.

So you may not be interested in 720p. And Sony may say that only 1080 is "true HD". But there are billions of dollars being spent making, shooting, and broadcasting 720p content.

So now that you've made me think about it, I shouldn't have said that there's no room for the JVC HD250. It serves a unique purpose for the 720p market; an affordable HD-SDI 720p camera head.

even if because jvc had already their profits with VHS and don't need so desperately for more..
Click to expand...
You'd be wrong on that one. JVC is on the ropes, they're in serious financial trouble.
 
Last edited:
True. I heard the parent copmany was even contemplating dropping the JVC brand altogether. Scary thought.
 
Barry_Green said:
But... you're comparing apples with oranges with grapes. Not all these products are aimed at the same market!

That's one of my pet peeves with how people perceive DVXUser membership. People think that the only thing anyone would ever want to do with one of these cameras is "make a movie". There are a lot of things out there that people do with cameras other than make movies! News and sports and reality TV and instructional videos and corporate films and television commercials and weddings and ... well, look, there are a lot of bucks being made in big business that has nothing to do with movies.

So there are tools out there that are better suited to some purposes than others.
Click to expand...
yeah i know but i love to forget..

Is there room in the marketplace for Arri's D20 or Dalsa's Origin or Thomson's Viper after RED hits the market? Probably. I don't know. But I'd expect that each of them excels at something that the others don't.

RED is not going to put every other camera maker out of business overnight. And they're not trying to! They know who they're aiming at. They call themselves Red Digital Cinema Camera Company. They're aiming specifically at VariCam/CineAlta buyers/renters, and the aforementioned Dalsa/Viper types. I suspect Sony, Panasonic, Canon and JVC will have no problem selling all sorts of cameras and infrastructure to broadcasters, networks, and other non-"digital cinema" users.


Let's look at JVC's HD250: you say "720p -- who cares?" Well, how about Fox, ABC, and ESPN? These are not small networks, these are two of the four biggest networks in the USA, and the largest dedicated sports network in the USA. And they all, exclusively, broadcast 720p. And only 720p.

So you may not be interested in 720p. And Sony may say that only 1080 is "true HD". But there are billions of dollars being spent making, shooting, and broadcasting 720p content.

So now that you've made me think about it, I shouldn't have said that there's no room for the JVC HD250. It serves a unique purpose for the 720p market; an affordable HD-SDI 720p camera head.


You'd be wrong on that one. JVC is on the ropes, they're in serious financial trouble.
Click to expand...
yeah i also know but maybe they want to failure.. there are mysteries that we can't accomplish..

conclusion: my viewpoint is exclusively from the filmmaker's side.. i don't give a damn for the others sides.. sorry, i might know there are different shooters.. but even to them or for you at states (720p and so on.. i'm posting from a 1080i country), progressive (jvc or silicon imaging) it seems to film look purposes.. to those ones that you mentioned, there is 1080i interlaced, correct?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top