Gary Senda
Well-known member
Zooming using prime lenses and VSM, one of the features of the new firmware
Jvc ls300
- Thread starter lovecameras
- Start date
Honestly the best images I have seen so far from this camera. Most likely because it was very overcast. Maybe he waited days for an overcast day to shoot the review since most cameras will look good in overcast conditions. Although the dynamic range is still nothing to be impressed by. Did he use the new log?
But his footage is on pair or even slightly better than what I have seen from the DVX200 so far. Panasonic priced the DVX200 very well. At only 200 bucks above the LS300 it becomes an interesting game. Larger sensor, exchangeable lens, lighter weight but JVC quality vs smaller sensor, fixed lens limited by aperture, but Panasonic's good rep? The low light edge probably goes to the LS300 since you can use fast glass. But having owned a JVC HD100 I'm still afraid of JVC's quality control and overall reputation.
Jim Martin
DVXuser Sponsor
I still like the footage we did....30p with cinema subdued and 24p with cinema standard. We purposely shot difficult situations (back lit at the beach) to see what it could do. We also mixed lenses from a cheap Olympus to the Veydra.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S47dceBcuJI
Be sure to look at it in at least 1080 if not higher...
With these really cool updates coming next month, I think this camera is going to do well.....and again, if you are in LA, we have the FREE Try-to-buy program here so you can really check it out!
Jim Martin
EVSonline.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S47dceBcuJI
Be sure to look at it in at least 1080 if not higher...
With these really cool updates coming next month, I think this camera is going to do well.....and again, if you are in LA, we have the FREE Try-to-buy program here so you can really check it out!
Jim Martin
EVSonline.com
Interesting... At least the zoom/vsm with prime lenses seems to work well.
Gary Senda
Well-known member
With m43 lenses
Now that could be a game changer. Does that mean that if you use a zoom lens you have a whole new array of focal lengths?
Rod
I've been using the LS-300 for several months, and so far no malfunctions or quality control issues. On two occasions I used it as a live-view monitor continuously for over two hours in 80-degree direct sunlight, with no overheating at all. And as far as build quality is concerned, the LS-300 is as sturdy as an AF100 and has no problem supporting long zooms on its lens mount.
I've worked extensively with both the AF100 and the GH2, and the LS-300 has better low-light performance than either of them. Reason being, the usable ISO range of the LS-300 is shifted a full stop up from the Panasonic cameras. The GH2 starts at ISO 160, the AF100 at ISO 200, and are usable up to around ISO 1000-1600. The LS-300 starts at ISO 400 and is good up to ISO 3200. That ISO range-shift makes your lenses effectively one stop brighter on the LS-300, at comparable noise levels. The LS-300's functionality greatly exceeds the AF100's, and with the upcoming firmware update, its histogram and cinema video features will match the GH4.
Neither the LS-300 nor the AF100 have a "native" ISO, they each have a range of ISO gain levels, which are standardized fairly consistently among camera manufacturers. Here's how Imatest defines it:
http://www.imatest.com/docs/sensitivity_ei/
The minimum ISO on a camera sets a limit on how bright a light it can record before overexposure sets in. The AF100 has a minimum of ISO 200 and on the LS-300 it's ISO 400. This means the AF100's sensor can handle twice as bright a light level as the LS-300, though both cameras have ND filters that can scale down any practical light intensity. The maximum usable ISO setting of a camera is in practice limited by noise at high ISO levels. To my eyes, the LS-300 has about the same amount of noise at twice the ISO level as the AF100. This means I can get comparable image quality at ISO 3200 on the LS-300 as I got at ISO 1600 on the AF100, a major benefit when shooting in low-light conditions.
I've posted a variety of sample LS-300 footage in this thread. Here's an example showing its superwhite exposure handling in dim lighting:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?336928-Jvc-ls300&p=1986563126&viewfull=1#post1986563126
Last edited:
Gary Senda
Well-known member
This is a low definition video with the VSM zoom of the new firmware at work, just published on YT
Gary Senda
Well-known member
There's a little zooming in 4k also, it is only 1.3x, but it can be useful in some situations
lovecameras
Carbonite Member
As somebody who has had some time with this camera I can tell you that your have no reason to fear. JVC are playing serious ball in this game.
At the risk of incurring the wrath of the WDR/pixel peeping intelligencia, this camera delivers the best picture out of the box of any camera I've worked with since film... the features like MFT mount w/ S35, VSM and multiple lens options are revolutionairy - and JVC is following up with customer requested firmware upgrades - what a concept.
Sadly the quality control is lacking. I'm currently waiting for my third camera. The first was locked permanently at ISO 6,400, the second had a diopter that was not adjustable... and even though I use an external EVF, there are times I'd like to strip the camera and use it's EVF. Luckily I was able to test the picture extensively before returning it for exchange - with EF, MFT zooms and Leica and Nokton primes - and was blown away by the results.
I wonder at the boardroom meeting where JVC bean-counters decided to build a fantastic image-making core and surround it with a cheap, sub-standard box - I assume to keep the price under 4 grand. For 5 this camera could have taken front place in the hotly contested prosumer wars... When I finally get a good one I won't look back, but come on JVC, this project needs some serious QC follow through.
Bassman2003
Veteran
I sadly have stop considering this camera as descriptions of the EVF as "horrible" are enough for me to never even want to try it out. Yes, I am making an internet call but in 2015 if you don't include great screens for visual feedback you do not have a clue imho. Cheap cell phones have nice screens and they are larger...
I admit, the EVF is bad by today's standards... it's virtually identical to the Canon C100 or XF100, but it is useable... My view is that the EVF doesn't take the pictures, and I'd rather have an affordable camera with a bad EVF and good images that one with a great EVF and so-so images. Besides, as I said, I use an external Z-Finder or Gratical most of the time anyway. And although some have criticized the LCD on the 300, I think it's fine for basic use, especially with the excellent focus enhancement feature (it turns the picture B&W while leaving the color peaking on).
It's a $3,500 camera - the insides, as long as they are reliable (knock on wood), are worth that much to me. It has NDs, a decent audio head and allows the use of almost any lens ever made. My Pocket Cameras were only a thousand, but after adding peripherals like cages, audio pre-amps, a variety of ND filters, Speedbooster, etc they were much more. My C100, with just as bad an EVF, was originally 5+ grand and doesn't record 4.2.2. or 4K.
They say you get what you pay for, but it's also true that sometimes you have to look beyond the name-brand hype and find tools that do the job no matter what the cost - there is literally no other camera that has the features of the LS300. I admit the issues I've had make me nervous, but every new frontier needs an explorer and for for the price of one week in a decent hotel I'm willing to take the chance.
It's a $3,500 camera - the insides, as long as they are reliable (knock on wood), are worth that much to me. It has NDs, a decent audio head and allows the use of almost any lens ever made. My Pocket Cameras were only a thousand, but after adding peripherals like cages, audio pre-amps, a variety of ND filters, Speedbooster, etc they were much more. My C100, with just as bad an EVF, was originally 5+ grand and doesn't record 4.2.2. or 4K.
They say you get what you pay for, but it's also true that sometimes you have to look beyond the name-brand hype and find tools that do the job no matter what the cost - there is literally no other camera that has the features of the LS300. I admit the issues I've had make me nervous, but every new frontier needs an explorer and for for the price of one week in a decent hotel I'm willing to take the chance.
Bassman2003
Veteran
I appreciate your input and can sort of agree, but I can not give it a pass for being a "$3,500 camera". If you are shooting outside, the EVF is your only hope to get proper exposure visually. I like to see the image I am responsible for and skimping on the EVF is like a punch in the gut for professionals imho. How much more would it cost to get a good screen in the EVF? $25, $50, $100? Well the target market would pay it if given the chance. It is consumer thinking in a pro/prosumer product. If it is working for you then great but I do not want to bring along a separate viewfinder just to make up the difference. Might as well have a DSLR at that point.
I totally agree with you in principle - as I said, a corporate bean-counter decision crippled what could have been a stellar offer. But it is what it is, and frankly there isn't another option for those with MFT, EF and S16 lenses - except the Pocket which I have two of - and they don't offer S35 and 4K.
The separate viewfinder isn't a problem for me because I use Zacutos anyway to get it shoulder mounted, but that's just me... And I'm old school so DSLRs just don't cut it for me - the Pocket is bad enough in that regard.
Bottom line, and the reason this thread is in this forum, is I'd hoped to get away from the constipated design of DSLR/BM style cameras with an updated AF100. This 300 is all there is, so I'll give it a try.
And I may regret it - probably will. On dvinfonet a guy is reporting unacceptable macro-blocking. I haven't seen that yet in my experience, but because of bad cameras I haven't been able to test for myself. It could be $3,500 out the window, but sometimes you play the horses for the outsider.
The separate viewfinder isn't a problem for me because I use Zacutos anyway to get it shoulder mounted, but that's just me... And I'm old school so DSLRs just don't cut it for me - the Pocket is bad enough in that regard.
Bottom line, and the reason this thread is in this forum, is I'd hoped to get away from the constipated design of DSLR/BM style cameras with an updated AF100. This 300 is all there is, so I'll give it a try.
And I may regret it - probably will. On dvinfonet a guy is reporting unacceptable macro-blocking. I haven't seen that yet in my experience, but because of bad cameras I haven't been able to test for myself. It could be $3,500 out the window, but sometimes you play the horses for the outsider.
Last edited: