ProHD, how much longer until production models ship?

If they keep pushing the deadline, it simply means they have some sort of technical or manufacturing setback. I'd rather wait for a fully functional model, then get one that is buggy because the manufacturer was presured to ship it out sooner. This is not software, you just can't download a patch on a piece of hardware (firmware aside that is).
 
Flintstone said:
If they keep pushing the deadline, it simply means they have some sort of technical or manufacturing setback. I'd rather wait for a fully functional model, then get one that is buggy because the manufacturer was presured to ship it out sooner. This is not software, you just can't download a patch on a piece of hardware (firmware aside that is).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree. I don't think that JVC deserves any smack for pushing back the date. Launching a new products takes a lot of elements working together smoothly and is not an easy task. They could have problems with their firmware, or getting the optics shiped or just a backlog or raw materials needed, who knows. They are betting alot with this product and I am sure that they are going to do the best they can. I am just a little disappointed, I wanted to check one out for a thing I have coming up. Oh well.
 
When a company decides capital expenditures, they're not necessarily locked into a particular model or mfg. Instead, they sometimes use a given model to establish a baseline estimate for future purchases on comparable technology.

We routinely budget based on tradeshow estimate MSRPs for future quarterly CAPEX. The last company I worked for developed capital expenditure budgets between two and four quarters in advance. Their annual production equipment CAPEX spend fell anywhere between 500k and 2.5 million - it just depended on the fiscal state of the company at the time.

In rental and heavily technology-dependent businesses there are many factors that go into the final purchase decisions. Brand alignment, leveraging manufacturers across multiple product lines for discounts, adhesion to corporate mandates for supported technologies, first-cost, depreciation, estimated usable lifespan and obsolesence are all mitigating details that play into the choices made when it comes time to write the check or sign the business lease.

Rental businesses factor in other considerations as well. It used to be the rule that production equipment paid against depreciable cost after only ten rentals, now that is up to over twenty or twenty-five.

Manufacturers, being consumers of technology themselves, are acutely aware of the guidelines governing CAPEX decisions and race to get their products out there with features and a pricepoint that will capture everyone's attention.

Our community contributes a very small fraction in the bigger scheme of things, so we just have to be patient!

e
 
We should still be seeing footage by now I would think. The closer the release date is to the HVX, the more sales they will lose to it. Especially if the HVX has footage out in September when the jvc gets released.
 
I don't like handycams and unfortunately the only camera with better specifications is the HVX200... another prosumer model.
Click to expand...

How can you say that HVX200 is a prosumer model Athouguia ? DVCPRO-HD is a professional format and this camera on paper beats the HD100 by far. Variable frame rates & 1080/24p alone gives HVX200 the edge no other camera in this price range has. & if you practice you can get some steady footage out of handycams just use a tripod, monopod, shoulder mount or a stabalising system which ever you can afford or can suite the situation. Other than stability of the shoulder mount HVX200 is a professional camera & saying that it is a prosumer model would not do justice to the many professional features on the camera.

Raza
 
The HVX200 is a camera with professional features in a prosumer body that uses an expensive and limited capacity memory card. It could be an excellent camera, far better than the HD100. With a tripod, or course any camera is stable, even with the shoulder mount handycams are not equilibrated, the weight is still on your hand and not on the shoulder and you have to use the LCD display... I have one for my PD170 and I never use it. No practice can give you good steady footage as a shoulder camera, for some reason expensive pro cameras are not handycams. Also, the pro lens are much easy to handle, better focus, iris control and zoom. Try to make a really soft zoom with a DVX100, or a PD170 or even with a Z1... it's not possible, zoom always starts too fast.

If you could put the HVX200 inside HD100's body with an Anton Bauer or IDX power system, you'd have a perfect camera.
 
I really want the HVX200 to be a great success, but in the end my only worry is that (the format is perfect, no gripes there) but the sensor is still goining to be 1/3" (x3) thus the final image will be somewhat similar to Z1/FX1, and JVC HD100 beacuse they are all 1/3".

I know asking for bigger sensors at these price points are nonsense, but I just hope that as higher end gear moves towards full 35mm sensors, surely 2/3" sensors should "trickle" down to the prosumer level?

Anyway dreaming over.
 
JVC announced a 2/3" CMOS camera for 2006, the GY-HD7000... another ProHD with 1920 x 1080 native resolution. I don't know about the price... but will certainly be higher than the HD100!
 
2/3 chips also give you a larger camera. I'd venture that the next major step forward will see a shift into single-imager systems like the D20 and Genesis.

e
 
My JVC vendor told me yesterday that he should be receiving his first shipment of HD100 by the end of July. He seemed quite sure of his claims. We'll see... :happy:
 
Rosestar said:
$27,950 WITHOUT lens. Add another $5k-$10k minimum for glass.
Click to expand...

NEW HD CAMERA RECORDER FROM JVC TO OFFER BROADCASTERS AFFORDABILITY... where is the affordability? It's a HDV, not a DVCPRO-HD or a HDCAM!
 
overlandfilms said:
2/3 chips also give you a larger camera. I'd venture that the next major step forward will see a shift into single-imager systems like the D20 and Genesis.
Click to expand...

I was wondering about this too.

Maybe they could continue to use 3CCDs, but each CCD set to a different sensitivity. 1 for blacks, 1 for mids and 1 for highlights.

That way you could achieve amazing latitude.

Is there a reason why not???

I know the Genesis is rumoured to do something similar on a single chip with alternating sensitivity of the pixel lines. Not sure if that is true though.
 
Rosestar said:
$27,950 WITHOUT lens. Add another $5k-$10k minimum for glass.
Click to expand...
Try a little higher -- 2/3" HD lenses start at $12,000 for the cheapest Canon. Good glass can run $25,000 to $65,000. For just the lens.

So the configured JVC GY7000 package will probably start at around $40,000 and go from there.
 
This has been the supposition on the Genesis, though I've not seen anything to back it up in a whitepaper or specification sheet.

Basically, a high-stop and low-stop interlacing on the same 12.4 megapixel non-Bayer RGB sensor is the idea some have run with. I don't know if this would be achieved through a variable pedestal or within gain?

I can't believe that it is less expensive to produce and integrate multiple imagers instead of a single high-definition CMOS or RGB sensor. Perhaps we'll get there in the next generation Panasonic cameras?

e
 
well any pixel can just register sensitivity, not colour (in itself). Therefore a single chip CCD-system would require more pixels, thus, It would need to be larger (andrequires larger and more expensive lenses) or it would have a lower light sensiticity.
 
Barry_Green said:
Try a little higher -- 2/3" HD lenses start at $12,000 for the cheapest Canon. Good glass can run $25,000 to $65,000. For just the lens.

So the configured JVC GY7000 package will probably start at around $40,000 and go from there.
Click to expand...

Barry, along with other members you have noted this before. Just wanted to point out Dave Walton from JVC explicitly states that the 28k figure is "including the lens". See:

http://www.dvformat.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=31724-1

Okay, who knows what quality the glass is, but it does seem the package will be significantly more affordable than its more esteemed rivals.
 
Okay, continuing on this subject, I just looked at the specs page for the GY-HD7000U and there's some very interesting stuff on there.

First, they say that it will record HDV at 720/50p and 720/60p. That's a first.
But second, they say it will record 1080/50i and 1080/60i, but it sure looks like it's *not* HDV. They specifically list what it will record in HDV, and then they have a second category for "MPEG2". Could it be that JVC is developing their own, non-HDV-compatible 1080i recording format? One that would obviously be incompatible with Sony's HDV? And this new format will be recordable only to hard disk -- it will not record 1080/50i or 1080/60i to tape. That's all quite interesting...

No mention of 24p anywhere except in 720 mode; no mention of DV 24p or 1080/24p at all.

Obviously this is a really, really, really early spec sheet and I expect much of it will change prior to the product actually being produced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top