SD footage from the hd100

It looks good enough, and pretty clean.
I dont see the split screen effect that many saw.
Hey, the dynamic range seems to be pretty good too !
 
I think the split screen was in reference to the LCD and not necessarily the actual footage. You can co the CA in the night street lights (in the distance), but it's not overwhelming (although still an issue).
 
The split-screen is most definitely not just limited to the LCD, it is recorded in the footage. The first I saw of it was from a screen capture someone sent. It is more noticeable under gain though -- it's not easy to see in 0db conditions (which is good!) although it can still be detected in some shots. Charles Papert noticed it in some of the stuff we shot with the mini35.

For chromatic aberration, I put together a page that shows the effect on a number of shots. It should be understood that the CA is much more visible at the edges of the frame, on high-contrast transitions, or under full telephoto. A wide shot isn't likely to show it nearly as much as a full telephoto shot would, and something in the center of the frame is less likely to show it than something on the edge of the frame.

Here's the chromatic aberration page:
http://www.icexpo.com/HD100/index.html
 
Oh #@#@ !!!

Barry,

that's very very scaring for any professional use...
Do you think the chroma aberration is coming from the lense ?
I dont see that much of color aberration in the dvinfo.net footage though.
Is it possible that there is so much variation between two cameras ?

I looked more carefully at the dvinfo.net footage, and i saw that the color gradation is not that good. Look carefully at the driver's face in the shadow...a wide area with orange coloration.
...might be the .mov compression ...maybe...let's hope it is.
 
Urg. That chromatic aberration looks worse than that on my FX1. Though I must admit - the effect on that wine glass is pretty cool.

-Spiff
 
Hey, looks good to me ... yes there is that minor CA but I don't think enough in this example for the common run of the herd end viewer to find objectionable.

Nice SD! And it should be awesome in HDV.

I'm pretty set on getting an HD100 when they're available in here in the States. ... but... the CA is kinda worrisome. I hope someone from JVC addresses it soon.

--Ralph
 
Antoine_Fabi said:
that's very very scaring for any professional use...
Click to expand...
Hence my concern, yes.

Do you think the chroma aberration is coming from the lense ?
Click to expand...
I'm certain of it, yes.

I dont see that much of color aberration in the dvinfo.net footage though.
Is it possible that there is so much variation between two cameras ?
Click to expand...
Are you referring to the SD footage from DVInfo (about the construction work) or the mini35 footage on DVInfo? You shouldn't see any at all on the mini35 stuff, as we used top-notch Cooke S4 prime lenses. Regarding the construction footage -- that was shot in DV. I would expect that the much lower resolution (about 1/3 as high) would mask most of the aberration, as the overall format can't resolve the full detail.
 
Spiff_2 said:
Urg. That chromatic aberration looks worse than that on my FX1. Though I must admit - the effect on that wine glass is pretty cool.

-Spiff
Click to expand...
The examples of CA that I've seen on the FX1 do indeed appear to be milder. I think the HD100 exaggerates it because of the focal length of the lens -- CA is more pronounced at the telephoto end, and on the HD100 that means 88mm, vs. 54mm on the FX1. So it's possible that the lenses may be in the same class at equivalent focal lengths, but that the longer telephoto of the HD100 exaggerates the aberration. I don't know, just guessing.
 
Antoine_Fabi said:
Is it possible that there is so much variation between two cameras ?
Click to expand...
I certainly hope so. Like I explained before, I don't think that's what's happened here -- I think the very process of shooting in SD may mask the aberrations to a good degree.

But I hope there's the possibility for substantial improvement between cameras, as that would imply that the problem is fixable. The wildlife shots were taken with one camera, and they requested a replacement lens because of the issues they were seeing. The replacement lens behaved similarly.

I believe that JVC is holding up the US release until they get a better handle on quality control. I wouldn't be surprised if JVC USA is now hand-checking every camera that JVC Japan ships them. And I think that's a good thing. I look forward to reporting on what the US-spec camera delivers (although that wine-glass footage was shot on a US camera that was identified to me as a "production model").
 
I can't imagine how the camera will survive if these issues aren't resolved. Buying the 13K lens probably isn't an option for most of us.
 
Frankly I don't think you can expect more out of an $800 lens. Do you? I wish it was equivalent to a much higher lens but hey, it is what it is. The HD100 can survive it's stock lens, don't you think? Now if the HVX200 comes out with a 'marginal' lens then it will kill that camera. That's part of the draw to the HD100 is that it has the ability to morph just by replacing the lens. The HVX200 has the ability to morph by it's vairable frame rate.

The point being that the HD100 definately has it's place that the HVX200 can not fill and vice versa.

PS I'd be really shocked if Leica put out a bad lens.
 
Stephen does have a point.

a "freebee" lens - as it were - can't be expected of too much, especially in HD. HD lenses are costly. Seen the price it might be as good as the FX1's (but with a better mechanical feel, of course)....

In the end you can always see it as a very good cheap professional lens you can shoot SD with. And then it's still a real professional SD camcorder with native 16/9 chips for under €7500... Not that bad, huh? What is the competition? JVC GY-DV700, awsome camcorder, but *al least* twice the price....
 
Barry_Green said:
I believe that JVC is holding up the US release until they get a better handle on quality control. I wouldn't be surprised if JVC USA is now hand-checking every camera that JVC Japan ships them. And I think that's a good thing. I look forward to reporting on what the US-spec camera delivers (although that wine-glass footage was shot on a US camera that was identified to me as a "production model").
Click to expand...

You're probably right... and they should do the same here in Europe. I've decided to wait for the second shipment hopping that most issues will be fixed. However, if CA is a lens issue I believe there's not much to do, unless somehow the camera could mask it...
 
Just like with an XL2, avoid the last 10 % of zooming, perhaps? In the XL2, light goes down a serieus few stops...
 
====================
"Are you referring to the SD footage from DVInfo (about the construction work) or the mini35 footage on DVInfo? You shouldn't see any at all on the mini35 stuff, as we used top-notch Cooke S4 prime lenses. Regarding the construction footage -- that was shot in DV. I would expect that the much lower resolution (about 1/3 as high) would mask most of the aberration, as the overall format can't resolve the full detail." dixit Barry
====================

Yes, i was speaking about the construction footage.

Now, if you're sure that the chroma aberration is entirely caused by the lense, this is a relatively "good" new.

...but, what do you think is the best affordable alternative lense ?
 
I'm thinking the best/affordable alternative lens is going to come from a 16mm movie camera, but until we get the mount made, we won't know for sure.

As of now the only alternative HD lens for the JVC is $12,000.
 
...mmmh, it might be a little prejudiced don't you think? Their ProfessionalDV line was (and is) a true hit...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top