JVC launches new ProHD cameras

but as wedding camera jvc goes well.. i have a lot of students with it to this purpose to SD DVD out.. but even they want the 1080 because they're dreaming with the film out.. and my bet is 1080 ala canon f mode.. or the silicon imaging product.. or the red one from next april/june..
 
Zig_Zigman said:
JVC's only shot to stick around is to make a 2/3" chip HD cam and put it out there cheap ASAP.
Click to expand...
Well, no, that's not gonna happen. They were planning on doing that, they were going to make the GY-HD7000U, but apparently they decided to cancel that product. Why? I don't know -- not enough resources to go around? In any case, they appear to have put all their eggs in the 720p HDV basket. Time will tell whether it was a good gamble or not.
 
yeah..

«For the first three months of the current business year, JVC reported an operating loss of 1.9 billion yen.»

but..

«JVC, which accounts for 8 percent of Matsushita's group sales, aims for an operating profit of 10 billion yen ($88 million) in the business year to March, in a reversal from a 6.9 billion yen loss a year earlier, when it was hit by slowing demand for its cathode ray tube TVs and audio players.»

i understand.. you know.. panasonic is his fav matsushit brand not jvc..
 
If your talking 24frames then 720/25P is not great, but its not that bad either. If your talking TV then 720/50P is the same as 1080i for most things its actually better. DVCPro HD is 1440 scaled up to 1920 so is HDCAM, 1440 devided by 2 is 720 :p For effects, chroma keying etc. 720 50P is perfect a lot better then 1080i.

Please enlighten us about your filmmakers point of view, you showing your DVX work on 35mill copies? I'm a filmmaker, I think video standarts are important to know and abuse. And 720P has its advantages if your going to use effects.

As for the HD100 and HD250: your better off buying a HVX, not just because you have the choice of resolution and recoding formats. (P2 rules) but your not going to use the lens option. Unless your going to rent a PS+tecnick option, but then your better off with a HVX as well. Putting a 2/3' lens on a 1'3' body just means your brilliant broadcast wideangle turned into a basic long lens.. wel sort off and getting the overpriced 1/3' lens is a bad joke.

Personally I think the whole idea of producing 1/3" HD cameras is ridicoulous, the last thing you want as a filmmaker is a HD camera with more DOF then your grandmother has grey hairs.

"ok so we pull back from the flower and focus on the woman in the corner"
"eeeh like we can't its all in focus.... like we need a bigger set if you want to do focus pulls..."

Oh aand i think the HD100 is a horrible little camera to shoot with, crappy viewfinder, to light for real shoulder work but a great idea. The canon is, like the HVX, just another gloryfied camcorder but then again i'm used to real cameras so perhaps not the best point of view here :p



filmmaker1977 said:
yeah i know but i love to forget..

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?
Click to expand...
 
I'd rather put my money on the new Canon. With the aditional money I would have spent on the JVC I could buy a 35mm adapter with very good collection of lenses and
a kick ass shoulder support. Heck, if you throw in the money you would have to pay for the jvc lens you could even buy a steady cam for the canon.
 
What would be the cheapest HD ENG camera out there?
A XDcamHD or a DVCproHD?
And could you edit the data from the above on a cheap PC/mac via Firewire/USB?
Or would you also need a player/recorder and a SDI card?
I think the JVCs will have have their niche...
 
That is the big problem right now: there is no real good solution out there.

XDCam sounds great but half inch chips kinda mess it up and i'm still not sure you can do a file-based transfer of your video from the discs. DVCPRO HD is tape and very expensive if you want a real shoulder cam. The HVX is the only one out there with P2 cards and affordable but your stuck with the 1/3 chips.

My guess is next year we will see some proper HD cams. But i'm off to the IBC as we speak so who knows?


Spartacus said:
What would be the cheapest HD ENG camera out there?
A XDcamHD or a DVCproHD?
And could you edit the data from the above on a cheap PC/mac via Firewire/USB?
Or would you also need a player/recorder and a SDI card?
I think the JVCs will have have their niche...
Click to expand...
 
tnle2 said:
There is a newer story. In my post above I linked to a Reuters article dated August 7, 2006 that states Matsush*ta has confidence in JVC and expects it to become profitable this coming business year. ... I suggest investigating if this is still true otherwise it can inadvertently create FUD.
Click to expand...

Well, frankly, I didnt know. I was basing the comment on my previous knowledge of what I had read. Thanks for the correction. As far as creating FUD is concerned, I think we are at liberty to make such comments if only so that someone can correct our ignorance about them. Thats what DVXUser is for, isn't it? :)
 
What are the projected ship dates for JVC's new HD110, HD200, and HD250 (at NAB2006, JVC had announced different, staged release dates for each model)? Does anyone know?
 
Last edited:
visualbrother said:
If your talking 24frames then 720/25P is not great, but its not that bad either. If your talking TV then 720/50P is the same as 1080i for most things its actually better. DVCPro HD is 1440 scaled up to 1920 so is HDCAM, 1440 devided by 2 is 720 :p For effects, chroma keying etc. 720 50P is perfect a lot better then 1080i.

Please enlighten us about your filmmakers point of view, you showing your DVX work on 35mill copies? I'm a filmmaker, I think video standarts are important to know and abuse. And 720P has its advantages if your going to use effects.

As for the HD100 and HD250: your better off buying a HVX, not just because you have the choice of resolution and recoding formats. (P2 rules) but your not going to use the lens option. Unless your going to rent a PS+tecnick option, but then your better off with a HVX as well. Putting a 2/3' lens on a 1'3' body just means your brilliant broadcast wideangle turned into a basic long lens.. wel sort off and getting the overpriced 1/3' lens is a bad joke.

Personally I think the whole idea of producing 1/3" HD cameras is ridicoulous, the last thing you want as a filmmaker is a HD camera with more DOF then your grandmother has grey hairs.

"ok so we pull back from the flower and focus on the woman in the corner"
"eeeh like we can't its all in focus.... like we need a bigger set if you want to do focus pulls..."

Oh aand i think the HD100 is a horrible little camera to shoot with, crappy viewfinder, to light for real shoulder work but a great idea. The canon is, like the HVX, just another gloryfied camcorder but then again i'm used to real cameras so perhaps not the best point of view here :p
Click to expand...
i can sum the question with only four characters or in this case a number: 1:2.35
 
42

Is that your question in regard to my answer or your answer in regard to my question?

With any luck i'll be shooting a short with a viper or a sony 950 next month, should be fun to take the HVX and HD 100 on set and shoot along side.
 
Why do people whine about 720p being useless when so many of us were all using 480p (or even 480i) so often and so many still are? If audiences can still stomache SD then they can certainly stomache 720p (uprezzed if neccesary). For that matter, I'd much rather have a lower rez progressive signal than a higher rez interlaced one. Interlaced just seems plain stupid.
 
Fugitive said:
Well, frankly, I didnt know. I was basing the comment on my previous knowledge of what I had read. Thanks for the correction. As far as creating FUD is concerned, I think we are at liberty to make such comments if only so that someone can correct our ignorance about them. Thats what DVXUser is for, isn't it? :)
Click to expand...

That's true. I was probably too hard on you guys. Anyhow, no worries :)
 
visualbrother said:
DVCPro HD is 1440 scaled up to 1920 so is HDCAM, 1440 devided by 2 is 720 :p For effects, chroma keying etc. 720 50P is perfect a lot better then 1080i.P
Click to expand...

Respectfully, DVCPRO HD recorded format is actually 1280 scaled during playback to 1920. Because of DVCPRO HD's limited bandwidth (100Mbps vs. HDCam's 140 Mbps) it was not possible to record HDCam's 1440 frame size.

Please don't interpret my comments as coming from a Sony fan. I'm truly not.
 
Why not a Sony fan? They still make some very nice stuff. A Sony DvCam industrial camera has definately my preference over a Panasonic DVX100 of HVX200 when shooting SD :) I think in general Sony's DP150 and 170 are both great at low light conditions as well, Panasonic gives weird cheap stretchy noise.

Anyway, do you mean the HVX200 shoots at 1280? Or the format is itself is 1280?
 
The NTSC HVX200 shoots in 1080 i/p with 1280*1080 with chroma 640*1080

The PAL HVX200 shoots in 1080 i/p with 1440*1080 with chroma 720*1080

HDCAM is 1440*1080 with chroma 480*1080

The reason why DVCPROHD in "PAL" can shoot at higher is because it goes no futher than 25P/50i where HDCAM shoots all the way to 60i/30P

140/30 = 4,666
100/25 = 4
100/30 = 3,333
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top