JVC700 vs Panny 300

From the specs I'll think this is a no brainer, full hd chips and the avc codec vs. pixel shifted mpeg2. Not to say that the JVC is bad, but i think the HPX will have the edge, especially for keying, grading and other work where as much color information is what you want.
 
I'm actually trying to decide between the JVC700 and the HPX170. Both come to about the same price if I added a 64GB p2 card to my HPX170 order.
 
Carlos Corral said:
I'm actually trying to decide between the JVC700 and the HPX170. Both come to about the same price if I added a 64GB p2 card to my HPX170 order.
Click to expand...

I'd definitely wait until someone tests the JVC camera. The JVC may have an edge in resolution, but may have the dreaded "split screen" problem, earlier JVC HD cams had, because they are using 2 chips, side by side.
 
Kenn Christenson said:
I'd definitely wait until someone tests the JVC camera. The JVC may have an edge in resolution, but may have the dreaded "split screen" problem, earlier JVC HD cams had, because they are using 2 chips, side by side.
Click to expand...

they pretty much solved that by the time the 200 series came out.
The HM700 plus the upcoming Nano Flash (plus CF cards..) will probably be more expensive than the hpx300 with 2 16gig P2 cards and you get 10bit 4:2:2 AVC Intra with the 300 vs 8bit 4:2:2 long GOP. And less hassle.
 
The JVC's onboard recording is 8-bit 4:2:0. I think zeke's point was that he was comparing the HPX300 against the Nano Flash, which should be able to record 8-bit 4:2:2 at 100mbps long-GOP.
 
New patented 3-CCD optical system
Diagonal Spatial Offset with Adaptive Pixel Correlation Technique
More than 900 lines resolution
1920x1080p 4:2:2 processing (DSP)
Switchable 1080i or 1080p / 720p scanning
 
MrBill said:
New patented 3-CCD optical system
Diagonal Spatial Offset with Adaptive Pixel Correlation Technique
More than 900 lines resolution
1920x1080p 4:2:2 processing (DSP)
Switchable 1080i or 1080p / 720p scanning
Click to expand...

These are very, very good specs.

I think you all are dismissing this camera too early. First, its CCD, so no rolling shutter issues, also, it has interchangeable lens, and is 1400 USD cheaper than the HPX300.

I remember a comparison test between the JVC HD100, HVX200 and Sony Z1 done by the "24" Cinematographer - For him, it was a no brainer, the JVC was the best of the bunch for his show. I'm an HVX owner and user, and love my camera, but I certainly will take this camera into consideration for my next purchase. 900 lines of reloslution, CCD technology, interchangeable lenses (this plus letus relay should look fantastic) makes this a very fierce contender. AVC INTRA is obviously great, but we are still to see a heavy motion HPX300 video. This will be the deciding factor, at least for me.
 
If the specs are correct, Sérgio comments are very reasonable.
Its been ages since I used any JVC gear and I'd never owned one before.
What makes me wonder it's the "Diagonal Spatial Offset with Adaptive Pixel Correlation Technique" part.
 
MrBill said:
New patented 3-CCD optical system
Diagonal Spatial Offset with Adaptive Pixel Correlation Technique
More than 900 lines resolution
1920x1080p 4:2:2 processing (DSP)
Switchable 1080i or 1080p / 720p scanning
Click to expand...

I was under the impression is shoots 4:2:0 and that 4:2:2 was only available through the HD-SDI out.
 
Can someone explain to me how two imagers side by side can create a final image? Does each handle half the horizontal resolution?
 
Carlos Corral said:
I was under the impression is shoots 4:2:0 and that 4:2:2 was only available through the HD-SDI out.
Click to expand...
That's correct. The internal processing is 4:2:2, but the recording mechanisms available to it are 4:2:0. If you want 4:2:2 from that unit you'd have to get it from the HD-SDI.
 
Barry_Green said:
The JVC's onboard recording is 8-bit 4:2:0. I think zeke's point was that he was comparing the HPX300 against the Nano Flash, which should be able to record 8-bit 4:2:2 at 100mbps long-GOP.
Click to expand...

Yes.
I heard that the new JVC outputs 10bit 4:2:2 out the HDSDI, but the NanoFlash records at 8bit, but very good 8bit at that. For broadcast work, more than good enough. On the other hand, for purely broadcast work, AVC I 50 is 8bit 4:2:2 also and should meet broadcast specs.

The hassle... is having an external device tethered to the camera in the first place, plus extra batteries and sundries to keep track of.

I'm not knocking the Nano, just trying to put things in perspective.

If lowlight is good I would say the HM700 is a viable alternative to the EX1 since for similar money you get removable lens and image flip to work with adaptors. And SDHC cards are way cheaper than SXS or even getting the 'alternative' stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top