thisiswells
Retired
Okay. Well. Fine. I still don't have to like it! :beer:Barry_Green said:
Why I MIGHT buy an GV Infinity instead of an HVX200
- Thread starter Lucerna
- Start date
Barrys already pointed out the HD100 has one built-in - as do most of the new 2/3" cameras being released. The point is that they are for the "odd angle" shots, replays, etc rather than general handheld actuality filming. Their appearance on pro cameras is not before time.thisiswells said:
You can add all manner of accessory braces to such as a Z1 or HVX with varying degrees of success, but the point is that they are partial "fixes" to a problem that needn't be there in the first place! Why not just style the Z1, HVX to shouldermount like the HD100 in the first place? All three are roughly comparable in terms of size and weight.thisiswells said:
In a confined space the styling of the HD100 puts much of the length of the camera out of the way beside the cameramans head. Adding a brace to the other models leaves you with an even bigger and longer bulk out in front.
Out of curiosity, when you say "I still don't have to like it! " are you referring to form factor issues or the camera in general? I don't feel any of the three is perfect, but on the form factor issue strongly feel that JVC has got it right.
thisiswells
Retired
I heard the battery life is barely 40 minutes in confined spaces. With a $450 IDX battery the camera is supposed to run for several hours, but then it isn't really in the same size/weight class of the compact cameras, then is it?harddrive said:
I agree. It's just that JVC got so many other things wrong on the HD100 that are off-putting, that's all. I like other JVC cameras, for what it's worth.harddrive said:
I recently bought a monopod for handheld situations -- which helps a lot.
Im still waiting for JVC to come out with a real winner.. the 5000 ENG was, and I know they are capable. the HD100 really could of been much more than it is, but i have a feeling they rushed it out to hit the market before the HD Canon and HVX.. many people here have admittedly bought the HD100 for that reason alone; because it was the only thing out there (not counting the sony's of course)
Fair enough, my previous points were solely to do with form factor, and there seems some unanimity that the HD100 wins there, if not on other aspects.thisiswells said:
Regarding the IDX battery issue you may well ask why you should pay extra money to correct what may be perceived as a design failing (as I do with the issue of braces and the Z!, HVX) but in terms of balance/weight it didn't seem too bad when I tried it, and the same goes for the Firestore addon. By itself the camera is still a little front heavy and adding extras at the rear actually seems to IMPROVE the balance. Adding the same to "all up front" cameras like the Z1, HVX just makes a bad balance position worse - and trying to get round the problem with braces and counterweighting makes for a very bulky situation.
thisiswells
Retired
Because with any luck we'd end up with something hideous like the AG-DVC60!harddrive said:
thisiswells
Retired
harddrive said:
This is a circular discussion, but there's no reason to be arrogant and condescending.
To call me "arrogant and condescending" after your flippant and facetious reply to my previous post somewhat leaves me speechless......thisiswells said:
If you really consider styling to be more important to a camera design than good ergonomics, that is, of course, your absolute right.
Likewise, it is my right to disagree.
May I also ask why in your quote you edited my original post, from "Why not just style the Z1, HVX to shouldermount .......", to "Why not just style the HVX to shouldermount ....."?
The Machinist
Respected Member
I'm pretty sure he was making a joke.
Probably cause he was referring specifically to the HVX and past panasonic cameras which weren't aesthetically pleasing.
I don't think hard drive was being condescending. Just stating an opinion.
Let's take her easy fellas.
"We're supposed to be F@#king professionals." ~Res Dogs (don't know if that's an exact quote or not so an advanced sorry to any tarantino fans out there.)
OK - but is it acceptable on a forum such as this to "quote" someone, whilst editing their comments in a way that isn't transparent? I was quite specifically NOT singling the HVX out for criticism - rather a general design, and that sense went missing in the "quote". How, for example, would you feel about:The Machinist said:
The Machinist said:
The Machinist
Respected Member
I can understand if it was a gross reediting that completely changed the meaning of what you were trying to say with some kind of sinister intention.
I don't personally think leaving out ",Z1" really affects the message behind your post.
However for the sake of all parties involved I believe that proper forum posting ettiquette demands an exact quotation I will do my best to follow said ettiquette in future posts.
I don't personally think leaving out ",Z1" really affects the message behind your post.
However for the sake of all parties involved I believe that proper forum posting ettiquette demands an exact quotation I will do my best to follow said ettiquette in future posts.
The Machinist
Respected Member
Amen Rev.
A sure-sign of an anxious group of professionals waiting for the hammer to fall.