JVC finally announces HD Everio!!! - Page 14 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC Everio GZ-HD and GZ-HM Series

JVC Everio GZ-HD and GZ-HM Series
JVC's Everio Series 3CCD High Definition MPEG2 camcorders.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 16th, 2007, 06:48 PM   #196
New Boot
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, USA
Posts: 24
Contrasty clips. Playback of TOD files

Steve, did you have a chance to download the turtle clip or the grasshoppers? That was under direct sunlight and with high contrast.

I just want to make myself clear - I am evaluating the camera for myself, the way I am used to film. My conclusions may not apply to others. Just take them as one opinion amongst many. All I try to do is to figure the limitations of this cam. I already decided I will keep it. So need to know whether I need an external mike to compensate for built-in (I have a Sennheiser shotgun, a Samson wireless and Audio-Technica with big capsule, but all are XLRs and none is stereo). Or any special lighting and support stuff (like a stabilizer to compensate for impotent OIS). I am buying a Cantori HiDV head and will let you know how it works with this cam.

Also someone asked me how to play back the TOD files. I have the Combined Community Codec Pack installed on both of my PCs, I assume it is CCCP that lets play back the TOD files. They play in any player fine, just associate the file extension with the player of your choice (as long as they support DirectShow part of Direct X). VLC and Media Player Classic play back without dropping frames, Windows Media Player and Cyberlink plays the videos jerky, dropping frames. QuickTime says "the file is not a movie file" and refuses to play TOD files.

I your players do not play TOD files try installing CCCP, that might help and definitely does not hurt. The link is http://www.cccp-project.net/.

More clips coming tomorrow.

Last edited by Tibor Duliskovich; April 16th, 2007 at 08:04 PM.
Tibor Duliskovich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2007, 05:53 PM   #197
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nanuet NY
Posts: 74
Tibor, is the main reason for keeping it the true progressive imager detailed in your interesting post on the previous page? You have mentioned several limitations, so I'm wondering what tipped the balance toward keeping it.
Mike Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2007, 06:34 PM   #198
New Boot
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, USA
Posts: 24
Why I decided to keep it

Thanks Mike for your kind words! And you too Harrison Murchison, but that was a bit strong!
As you can tell I am pretty picky about image quality. I have L-lenses for my Canon 5D and they also have limitations.
Anyway, all in all, after I confirmed that the imager is in fact progressive and knowing that sooner or later there will be editing software capable of decoding them properly, I looked at my test videos comparing them to what I can do with my other cams. HD7 is far better than my best SD progressive Canon Optura (yes, yse, Optura), my other three cams don't even come close to 7 year old Optura...
If I would to return the HD7 I would loose about $200 in restocking fees. It produces great footage. I know its limitations and know how to work around them, so why not? I am sure a year down the road there will be a new Sony XDCAM EX with SxS cards, or a new JVC 1080/60p, but until then HD7 will do the trick for me. I actually like it.
Yesterday I was shooting in my son's school and confirmed that with the factory battery it can run 85 minutes on full charge with LCD on all that time. A little short, but not bad after all.
Built in mike picks up too much wind noise on windy days, so I probably end up ordering a stereo mike.
Tibor Duliskovich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2007, 06:39 PM   #199
New Boot
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, USA
Posts: 24
More clips

Lizard, F8, 1/100, manual focus at F1.9 with focus assist, tripod:
http://www.transferbigfiles.com/Down...9-ce2a4aa99486

Owl chick again, a little better angle and light, still shows CA on tree branches, especially in the corner (as expected):
http://www.transferbigfiles.com/Down...3-5506836d3101
Tibor Duliskovich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2007, 06:52 PM   #200
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
Tibor, the lizard clip if shot at F 1.9 shows very shallow depth of field and the corners look blurry and washed out a bit...I'm sure the DOF was because of the F1.9 setting- I wonder how it would have looked at F8? It was sharp in the center but got progressively worse as you moved outwards- just looks a bit weird. I know the lizard was at a corner and that explains the out of focus look of the video- but it looks like it was shot through a teleconverter- a bit starnge looking.

The owl chick showed allot of chromatic abberation which is likely due to both the CCD imager and lens (usually more lens)....just looks a bit poor in quality- as if cheap glass were used.....

....I hope there is a "pro" version of this camera in the works that addresses the issues noticed thusfar.

At $1499 it isn't bad- but I think everyone expected a bit better for the specifications JVC touted.
__________________
Steve Nunez-New York City
www.stevenunez.com
Steve Nunez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2007, 07:04 PM   #201
New Boot
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, USA
Posts: 24
I think I mislead you Steve, sorry. The lizard was captured at F8, it was manually focused at F1.9 with focus assist on (it colors the edges in focus), so I knew what I am focusing at. But for shot I switched aperture to 8.0.

It was pretty close to the lizard, probably 30-35 cm (a little more than a feet), so even at F8 zooming fully in (10x) resulted in very shallow DOF. Hope this explains it.

I agree about CA, it is not good at all, this lens disappointed me, but the end result is still better than my older SD cams, so I am keeping it. But you are right, JVC just set our expectations too high and did not deliver...
Tibor Duliskovich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2007, 09:39 AM   #202
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nanuet NY
Posts: 74
Just to clarify, the ability to capture 720/30p progressive images is quite rare among prosumer cameras, isn't it?

For motion events such as sports or dance, shown through a 60p-capable projector, would it be better to just leave the interlacing, or to convert in editing to a 60p stream, with each 30p frame repeated twice? (I worry the latter approach would create some odd motion artifacts.)
Mike Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2007, 06:40 PM   #203
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
MiniReview

Well I went to B&H and picked one up. The salesman said they're absolutely flying off the shelves and that he personally had sold 4 and the other video salesguys had sold a bunch as well (just today)- this is likely to be a good seller.

Build quality is very good- it has a small compact consumer-upscale feel to it. The black finish is good and similar to the older Everio black models (looks like brushed black aluminum.) The small "matte-box" front shade adds allot to the mini-pro "look." The clever lever that snaps a lens cover (bladed aperture type) open and shut is absolutely fantastic- no need for a snap-on lens cover! Overall the camcorder has a nice feel to it.
Quick negative notices were the rear eye-piece doesn't tilt upwards meaning you'll have to bend with your video stance to keep shots leveled- the eye-piece slips back and forth only! The OIS is really bad and can't handle even minor hand tremble at zoom- something other camcorders do much better. At close range the OIS does help but expect shaky video and plan ahead.
In a nutshell this is an MC500 or 505 Everio but in HD.

Video quality is lesser than any of the current HDV cams (and I've had a bunch) and the produced .TOD files will be a pain for most people to edit with popular NLE packages. It is bundled with a PC software package that handles these files perfectly- but you'll need to change the format to edit with other NLE's. Mac users ONLY get a Quicktime component that allows Quicktime to play the TOD files. If you have QT Pro you can export to any of the codecs QT supports- but the conversions are painfully slow!!!!!

~~ Mac workflow- you'll need two free software programs to really get the most out of the HD7. You'll need both VLC Player and MpegStreamclip, both available online and free! You'll need to drop the TOD files into the VLC Player "playlist" and then go to "File"-"Exporting/Streaming Wizard" then output the files to standard .TS files (transport streams of which these TOD files are but in an unconventional wrapper.) The conversion takes seconds as it's not encoding anything but sorting the files into standard TS (transport stream) files that end in TS. These new TS files can be opened in MpegStreamclip then converted into any of the popular codecs MpegStreamclip outputs to. I tried a few variations on the HDV codec and the resulting video was a perfect match to the raw .TOD file which means minimal image quality degradation and you end up with files iMovie and FCP can edit! I tried the HD7's 1920x1080i "Full Quality" mode and used MpgStreamclip to output 1080i HDV with deinterlaced frames and achieved very smooth video that looked progressive in motion.
For the best quality I suggest recording in 1440 Mode CBR and use the preset for 1080p25 and change the frame rate to 30FPS and you'll end up with progressive HDV video!!!!
Video encoding is somewhat time intensive and wholly dependent on Mac processor speed. My Intel iMac encoded at about 2X slower than realtime- meaning the videos took about double their play speed....so 1 minute clip would take 2 minutes to encode on my machine....faster machines will obviously do this quicker.
This negates allot of the benefit of skipping tape and going straight to hard-drive as the resuting files are NOT ready to use with popular NLE's. Remember it is bundled with a decent PC software package that will do for many people- but the informed DVinfo-net user will likely want better.

If anyone is expecting HDV quality as offered with current cams- you'll likely be disapointed. This camera unfortunately ushers the present consumer to "low quality" High Definition video the way 1/6" CCD miniDV cams brought down the quality of dv footage. If you're looking for stellar footage go check out one of the HDV cams by Canon or Sony.

However, JVC has done it again- they've beaten everyone to a new market of hi-def camcorders that record directly to hard-drive- and juding by the B&H salesguy- the camera will likely be a sales hit!

The camera is definitely capable of producing "good" footage in abundant light and at it's price point is unmatched. I will keep the camera until Canon announces their version of this product.

~~ Side Note- when the video is scaled down it does produce rather nice SD scaled video and can output DV via it's firewire port- something to think about! ~~

I will post outdoor clips soon for you DVinfonetters to scrutinize- I'll do my best to present the camera in it's best light and will avoid highlight clipping and shakes- you guys judge what the camera is capable of and if it suits your needs!

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this popular thread.....cheers.
__________________
Steve Nunez-New York City
www.stevenunez.com
Steve Nunez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2007, 07:28 AM   #204
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MO
Posts: 41
If I remember correctly JVM said that the cam doesn't save progressives image because at that time of design there were no chips available to process such large data. So I don't expect that all the data from the progressive capture are actually recorded then how can you deinterlace and produce a progressive image? You can't....

This can be the first and last cam with such strange recording algorithm. I personally have no hopes that year from now there is going to be a SW solution for this issue. Year from now there are going to be better cams.

May be I am not reading this thread carefully but with all the issues at price tag of $1600 I don't see any reason to own this cam.

Last edited by Peter Frollo; April 19th, 2007 at 05:23 PM.
Peter Frollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2007, 11:42 AM   #205
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MO
Posts: 41
Steve do you still have the cam? I am just curios....
Peter Frollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2007, 01:45 PM   #206
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
I do still have the cam but regret it somewhat- the OIS is just horrible at full zoom- it's basically a tripod use cam!

I'll sell it the second another HD/HiDef cam is announced and it's not a JVC product! I give up on JVC they just can't produce cams with enough exposure latitude to satisfy even "hobbyists" like myself- burnt highlights areas, bad chromatic abberation and very poor OIS.....we can't trust JVC's product descriptions as they've touted this cam as having a "pro" lens design and true 1920X1080 (which the chips aren't)- it's basically interpolated resolution from slightly better than an SD CCD. The ONLY nice thing about the cam is it's direct to hard drive feature which will become commonplace in the next few years (I'm guessing.)

The camera does do a nice job in subdued lighting (not harsh) but aside from that- it's poor. At full HD res it's image is lacking and only looks nice when scaled down a bit.....would probably make a nice SD cam for DVD projects.

My recommendation is to pass on this camera unless you know it's shortcomings and feel the direct to HD feature is what you need/want.

(The little HV10 from Canon is VASTLY superior for those contemplating these two cams!!!)
__________________
Steve Nunez-New York City
www.stevenunez.com
Steve Nunez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2007, 06:49 PM   #207
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MO
Posts: 41
This is sad.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...8918&q=jvc+hd7

"Quality, resolution, true Fujinon lens on it, OIS, 3CCD, and a lot of the features we will be announced closer to the release date, we are going to be the leader in the category!"

That is what resonates in my ears for quite time....good teaser for sure...

This cam will hit $1000 sale price really soon....it already dropped to $1500 at B&H which is surprising since "they're absolutely flying off the shelves".
Peter Frollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2007, 07:10 PM   #208
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
"Quality, resolution, true Fujinon lens on it, OIS, 3CCD, and a lot of the features we will be announced closer to the release date, we are going to be the leader in the category!"

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Yeah right- and the Whopper beat the Big Mac----- yeah right.

They're the leader because no one is in that category as they're the only ones that produce a h/d hi def cam.....I think if Fisher Price or Hasbro made one it'd beat the JVC!

Truth in advertising- better read between the lines with this cam!
__________________
Steve Nunez-New York City
www.stevenunez.com
Steve Nunez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2007, 01:04 PM   #209
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
I don't like the AVCHD format but Sony has just announced a new HDR SR7 that might be a worthwhile consideration....if early reviews are good I'm sure that camcorder will be a worthy (probably better) competitor to the JVC. The main hurdle for the AVCHD cams are producing files that are NLE friendly- beit Mac or PC.

Here's a super short handhelp clip- notice I underexposed -2 to keep the highlights in check- towards the end of the video you'll notice the birds get brighter as I was clicking "+" the exposure which burnt out the highlights......the clip has been downsized quite a bit for smaller filesize and was compressed quite a bit with a Sorenson 3 codec....but it'll show how nice the tonalities can be when exposed down a bit......(audio removed)
http://www.stevenunez.com/hosted/MOV035.mov

~~~ Note: as stated earlier, the JVC does produce nice video at resolutions under full HD and if you expose to keep highlights in check- it's not bad at all. At full 1920 res it simply doesn't hold up well- but looks very good when downscaled a bit. The OIS and CA can't be improved as those are design characteristics that are evident in the finished video.
I think this camera should have been marketed as a 720P camera and would have done better- too bad they didn't design it as a progressive 720P cam!
__________________
Steve Nunez-New York City
www.stevenunez.com
Steve Nunez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2007, 06:47 AM   #210
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
Camcorderinfo just reviewed the cam and it seems they were "pleased" with it.....you can check out their findings on their site.
__________________
Steve Nunez-New York City
www.stevenunez.com
Steve Nunez is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC Everio GZ-HD and GZ-HM Series

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:42 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network