Why Not To Buy This Camera at DVinfo.net

Christopher Toderman · October 26th, 2003, 06:09 PM

We are so close to CES and NAB, and there's been all this development in HDV standardization, with blu-ray DVD (HD), I am sure that new, better products are coming, without all these headaches, problems, and insufficiencies. So if one wants to use low-cost HD to make a good quality picture, or an HD presentation, why not rent Varicam, or CineAlta, since it is a lot more comon, and therefore similar rates as Varivcam can be obtained. You'll then get real HD. Or rent the new $25K #900 Panasonic, which will give you 24p and better picture on conversion to HD than this JVC's HD. JVC themselves make HD convertor, used by a number station to convert their 50 Mbps SD to HD. We all know that Canon will come out next year with a new HDV system with interchangable lenses. There will be more systems, that will be released in a more mature state, that will allow easy production and editing. So if you need to buy a camcorder now in this price range, buy the DVX and upconvert it to HD, if you ever need to make HD presentation. Remember also that JVC does not seem to have released low light spec in the US, but in Japan it is 35 lux. That may be one of the reasons for chroma noise at low light levels.

Darren Kelly · October 26th, 2003, 06:23 PM

CHristopher,

Do you own your own computer, or are use using someone else's, cause I can't believe you'd buy a computer when a faster, better, cheaper one will be coming out soon. Either at Comdex or CES or ????

Do you own a digital Camera, cause there is abetter one just around the corner that has more pixels, uses batteries better is cheaper and actually takes the picture for you...

Are you getting the point?

NAB is 5 months and 22 days away - in other words, we're at the 6 month point. I've learned that NAB is always just a few more months away - and the products that get released are about 18 months after that!.

As to CES, yes it is about 3 months away.

If you're goial is getting the best for the least, you will wait until you die.

As to renting a Cinealta - $1500 per day for the camera, forget the rest of the goodies needed (Like knowledge on how to work one). Deck is an additional $1000 per day, Edit suite is a minimum of $20K to build - minus the HD monitor, which can set you back more than the edit suite if you desire.

The JVC Cameras offer amazing value, outstanding picture quality and they cost less than $3K - or if you like 2 days rental of the Cinealta camera.

You can edit on a PC laptop or a Mac for about the same price as the camera.

So, my way, you spend a maximum of $6K and can make a pretty decent video.

Your way the sky is the limit - minimum spending is 1 day of rental of the camera and deck - $2.5K and then either $20K for the edit suite or rental at $500 per hour - say minimum of 1 day: $4K
Your total is now $6K

And you better get it all done in the 2 days or you're screwed.

That's why waiting doesn't get you anything.

Buy and Enjoy...

Alex Raskin · October 26th, 2003, 06:33 PM

I'm with Darren on everything he said.

Also, upconverting quality SD to HD in post as Christopher proposed, still will not give you the HD resolution.

Paul Mogg · October 26th, 2003, 07:08 PM

...and the SDX900 is a Standard definition camera, with NO firewire output. How are you going to get your footage into your editing system? You have to buy an uncompressed capture card and RAID arrays to go with it, oh and don't forget the lens, at least $5000 just for that, and it's not even HD! I agree with Darren and Alex, you can always wait around for the next best thing, but if you want to get on with doing HD today at a budget that's affordable to the average person, this quirky little camera gives you an option, and you won't have to sell your house to do it!

Christopher Toderman · October 26th, 2003, 08:13 PM

Hey guys, you own this camera, enjoy it. But there are plenty of potential buyers and they should know other opinions. There are specials on CineAlta in major US market that lets you rent it for a small fraction of what you're claiming. What was the last time you rented one? Or are you just reading a rental house brochure? Independents don't always pay the same rate as studios. They look for specials. You don't need a deck. You can edit offline. There are post houses that will help with a decent project. What is the last time you put together a low cost indie production? This camera's been out for a few months? Has anyone shot a film with it already, or are all of you guys still on a learning curve? At the end of the curve, there will be new systems, that you may be able to use out of the box. Panasonic #900 when upconverted has a better image than the JVC, even Steve Mullen stated it. JVC has even cheaper models than Panasonic #900 that can be upconverted to HD with the same results. All these positive HD10 comments have one result. Your friendly manufacturer, JVC, will get you what you are satisfied with; what you bich about, they'll fix on the next model. So the next HD10 could be either in a different color box, or with a better color system. Your choice.

Ken Hodson · October 26th, 2003, 09:22 PM

That is not a comparison in options. Do you want to own a camera or not?
Sure it may be equivant in cost between the two, to produce 1 feature. But in your case you don't own the camera at the end or befor. So, no hundreds of hours of learning your craft, no spontanious shoots, no goofing around and discovering something new. You assume everyone is a pro with a screenplay in the bag, and beyond making time consuming mistakes.
Lets compare apples to apples. The only comparison would be the DVX-100. Similar price. Similar size, similar editing procedure.
Ken

Yang Wen · October 26th, 2003, 10:07 PM

similar editing procedure? I'd like to hear how you explain that one.

Ken Hodson · October 26th, 2003, 10:49 PM

I was referring to firewire transfer. But I may have spoke to soon as I am uncertain if that is an option.
Does it tranfer through firewire?

Yang Wen · October 26th, 2003, 10:51 PM

The JVC cam has firewire transfer. However, the footage transffered over is difficult to work with, unless you take the time to re-render them into a usable format. I believe Aspect HD relives you from doing that?

Ken Hodson · October 26th, 2003, 11:13 PM

Yes Yang, thanks for enlightening me!?

I was refering to the Panasonic SDX900, as it may or may not have firewire and I was insinuating it didn't.

Christopher Toderman · October 27th, 2003, 12:44 AM

I don't own the camera and I don't want to own the camera. Still it's interesting how much attention it is getting. Resolution is not everything. DVX in it's progressive mode, converted to 1080i does not look overall worse than HD10 converted to 1080i. I've seen that. Since most HD distribution and transmission is 1080i, and since the average person who is buying the HD10 also produces SD, I don't see any logic for most of the purchases. If one needs to learn basic camera skills to produce a movie, he is at a level, where the DVX will serve him a lot better. Plus he'll be able to learn things that will be usable for work with another camera, e.g. new HDV Canon, or Sony, when they come out.

Use of ND filters to control exposure? Excuse me, but why would anyone consider this camera, especially since unless we are in a studio-type environment, this is impossible. Again, if you're learning, the DVX is the way to go at the moment. And you can shoot 24p. If you want wide-screen, use an anamorphic adaptor. In that case you get full 480p. Since the JVC does not cover the full 720p vertically or horizontally (see previous Steve Millen's reports), you're getting resolution that lies about in the middle between 480p and 720p.

This is a camera that may have started the low cost HD, but again, I don't see what it is good for. I may be blind, but until now no one enlightened me to believe otherwise.

Sony developed the 8 mm format, and licenced it to everyone. The cameras produced were of poor quality. Eventually Sony started making the cameras themselves. These were the first quality 8 mm cameras. Unfortunately JVC is not Sony and it is not Canon, both of which brands are highly respected in the broadcast community, and have to live up to its reputation; one is respected for its cameras, the other for its lenses. It will take one of these two to come out with a quality HDV camera. The JVC is a toy. It is not a tool, especially not a professional one. No one in the broadcast indudtry, or any indie filmmaker that I know would ever use this thing for anything. And the average joe next door, with an HDTV set? He would be the last one I would recommend this camera to also.

Got to go to do more important things. Hope that the ones that bought this camera will find some way to use it effectively. There is a guy in the PDX10 forum who is trying to take the signal from the CCD circutry into a special HD card. He may be better off using the HD10. He would bypass the low quality MPEG2 encoder. Maybe you guys should talk to him. He may be onto something that we all could benefit from.

Ken Hodson · October 27th, 2003, 01:21 AM

"The JVC is a toy." "... any indie filmmaker that I know would ever use this thing for anything."

Hmm. Most of ous indie film maker types here are very excited about doing as much as we can with this camera. DV level resolution is just not where we want to be at. It sucks truthfully. And we know given a little skill what amazing footage this camera can take. But your right, people who don't want to make films or have lower levels of skill would be better served by a SD camera.
Ken

Jeff Donald · October 27th, 2003, 05:10 AM

I don't see anything new being added to this discussion. It's time to move on. It also appears that some individuals may need to read the DV Info FAQ and memorize the part about appropriate content for posts and respect for others. This includes their equipment.

Chris Hurd · October 27th, 2003, 10:21 AM

Howdy from Texas,

I would also like to remind certain members that if a particular piece of gear is not to your liking, such as this camcorder, you are not welcome to come into that forum and trash it. The forum is for those who own the camcorder or are thinking about getting one. If you've decided this isn't the right camcorder for you, then you really have no business in here.

"But there are plenty of potential buyers and they should know other opinions" -- sorry, but they already do and the burden of research and decision-making falls upon their own shoulders and no one else's. I've noticed that occasionaly somebody gets the notion that somehow this equipment is being "foisted" upon the buying public. However that clearly is NOT the case and nobody is in need of being rescued from the big, bad manufacturer. Gear like this is produced because there's a market for it, a demand. May not be for everybody; it isn't intended to be. Those who are about to drop the money on a camcorder such as this one are already well aware of the availability of other models in the marketplace and none of them need to be "exposed" to other options, as if there's some shroud of mystery and deception. There isn't any. Instead there are folks making purchasing decisions who may not be in line with someone else's opinion or point-of-view. That's about it. This is a free marketplace.

I fully agree that "now is always the right time to buy." If you wait, you're not producing. It's a simple as that. Something new comes along in a few months, sell your current gear and move up. It's that simple.

Finally, calling a $3000 camera a toy... the Fisher-Price PixelVision is a toy, and highly sought after by video artists for the creative potential it offers. What matters is, what do you do with the gear. A toy is something you play with, it could be anything no matter the price or its intended purpose. An expensive, high-end SDX900 might be a "toy" in one person's hands. A Fisher-Price PixelVision could be a serious creative tool in another person's hands.

As Jeff said above, please keep our FAQ in mind when you post. This isn't your average message board; please keep the passion in check. There are plenty of other online outlets for emoting. Thanks,

October 26th, 2003, 06:09 PM	#1
Christopher Toderman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: New York Posts: 60	Why Not To Buy This Camera We are so close to CES and NAB, and there's been all this development in HDV standardization, with blu-ray DVD (HD), I am sure that new, better products are coming, without all these headaches, problems, and insufficiencies. So if one wants to use low-cost HD to make a good quality picture, or an HD presentation, why not rent Varicam, or CineAlta, since it is a lot more comon, and therefore similar rates as Varivcam can be obtained. You'll then get real HD. Or rent the new $25K #900 Panasonic, which will give you 24p and better picture on conversion to HD than this JVC's HD. JVC themselves make HD convertor, used by a number station to convert their 50 Mbps SD to HD. We all know that Canon will come out next year with a new HDV system with interchangable lenses. There will be more systems, that will be released in a more mature state, that will allow easy production and editing. So if you need to buy a camcorder now in this price range, buy the DVX and upconvert it to HD, if you ever need to make HD presentation. Remember also that JVC does not seem to have released low light spec in the US, but in Japan it is 35 lux. That may be one of the reasons for chroma noise at low light levels.

October 26th, 2003, 06:23 PM	#2
Darren Kelly Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 351	CHristopher, Do you own your own computer, or are use using someone else's, cause I can't believe you'd buy a computer when a faster, better, cheaper one will be coming out soon. Either at Comdex or CES or ???? Do you own a digital Camera, cause there is abetter one just around the corner that has more pixels, uses batteries better is cheaper and actually takes the picture for you... Are you getting the point? NAB is 5 months and 22 days away - in other words, we're at the 6 month point. I've learned that NAB is always just a few more months away - and the products that get released are about 18 months after that!. As to CES, yes it is about 3 months away. If you're goial is getting the best for the least, you will wait until you die. As to renting a Cinealta - $1500 per day for the camera, forget the rest of the goodies needed (Like knowledge on how to work one). Deck is an additional $1000 per day, Edit suite is a minimum of $20K to build - minus the HD monitor, which can set you back more than the edit suite if you desire. The JVC Cameras offer amazing value, outstanding picture quality and they cost less than $3K - or if you like 2 days rental of the Cinealta camera. You can edit on a PC laptop or a Mac for about the same price as the camera. So, my way, you spend a maximum of $6K and can make a pretty decent video. Your way the sky is the limit - minimum spending is 1 day of rental of the camera and deck - $2.5K and then either $20K for the edit suite or rental at $500 per hour - say minimum of 1 day: $4K Your total is now $6K And you better get it all done in the 2 days or you're screwed. That's why waiting doesn't get you anything. Buy and Enjoy... __________________ Darren Kelly

October 26th, 2003, 07:08 PM	#4
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	...and the SDX900 is a Standard definition camera, with NO firewire output. How are you going to get your footage into your editing system? You have to buy an uncompressed capture card and RAID arrays to go with it, oh and don't forget the lens, at least $5000 just for that, and it's not even HD! I agree with Darren and Alex, you can always wait around for the next best thing, but if you want to get on with doing HD today at a budget that's affordable to the average person, this quirky little camera gives you an option, and you won't have to sell your house to do it! __________________ Paul

October 26th, 2003, 09:22 PM	#6
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	That is not a comparison in options. Do you want to own a camera or not? Sure it may be equivant in cost between the two, to produce 1 feature. But in your case you don't own the camera at the end or befor. So, no hundreds of hours of learning your craft, no spontanious shoots, no goofing around and discovering something new. You assume everyone is a pro with a screenplay in the bag, and beyond making time consuming mistakes. Lets compare apples to apples. The only comparison would be the DVX-100. Similar price. Similar size, similar editing procedure. Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 26th, 2003, 10:49 PM	#8
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	I was referring to firewire transfer. But I may have spoke to soon as I am uncertain if that is an option. Does it tranfer through firewire? __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 26th, 2003, 06:33 PM	#3
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	I'm with Darren on everything he said. Also, upconverting quality SD to HD in post as Christopher proposed, still will not give you the HD resolution.

October 26th, 2003, 08:13 PM	#5
Christopher Toderman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: New York Posts: 60	Hey guys, you own this camera, enjoy it. But there are plenty of potential buyers and they should know other opinions. There are specials on CineAlta in major US market that lets you rent it for a small fraction of what you're claiming. What was the last time you rented one? Or are you just reading a rental house brochure? Independents don't always pay the same rate as studios. They look for specials. You don't need a deck. You can edit offline. There are post houses that will help with a decent project. What is the last time you put together a low cost indie production? This camera's been out for a few months? Has anyone shot a film with it already, or are all of you guys still on a learning curve? At the end of the curve, there will be new systems, that you may be able to use out of the box. Panasonic #900 when upconverted has a better image than the JVC, even Steve Mullen stated it. JVC has even cheaper models than Panasonic #900 that can be upconverted to HD with the same results. All these positive HD10 comments have one result. Your friendly manufacturer, JVC, will get you what you are satisfied with; what you bich about, they'll fix on the next model. So the next HD10 could be either in a different color box, or with a better color system. Your choice.

October 26th, 2003, 10:07 PM	#7
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	similar editing procedure? I'd like to hear how you explain that one.

October 26th, 2003, 10:51 PM	#9
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	The JVC cam has firewire transfer. However, the footage transffered over is difficult to work with, unless you take the time to re-render them into a usable format. I believe Aspect HD relives you from doing that?

October 26th, 2003, 11:13 PM	#10
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Yes Yang, thanks for enlightening me!? I was refering to the Panasonic SDX900, as it may or may not have firewire and I was insinuating it didn't. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 27th, 2003, 12:44 AM	#11
Christopher Toderman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: New York Posts: 60	I don't own the camera and I don't want to own the camera. Still it's interesting how much attention it is getting. Resolution is not everything. DVX in it's progressive mode, converted to 1080i does not look overall worse than HD10 converted to 1080i. I've seen that. Since most HD distribution and transmission is 1080i, and since the average person who is buying the HD10 also produces SD, I don't see any logic for most of the purchases. If one needs to learn basic camera skills to produce a movie, he is at a level, where the DVX will serve him a lot better. Plus he'll be able to learn things that will be usable for work with another camera, e.g. new HDV Canon, or Sony, when they come out. Use of ND filters to control exposure? Excuse me, but why would anyone consider this camera, especially since unless we are in a studio-type environment, this is impossible. Again, if you're learning, the DVX is the way to go at the moment. And you can shoot 24p. If you want wide-screen, use an anamorphic adaptor. In that case you get full 480p. Since the JVC does not cover the full 720p vertically or horizontally (see previous Steve Millen's reports), you're getting resolution that lies about in the middle between 480p and 720p. This is a camera that may have started the low cost HD, but again, I don't see what it is good for. I may be blind, but until now no one enlightened me to believe otherwise. Sony developed the 8 mm format, and licenced it to everyone. The cameras produced were of poor quality. Eventually Sony started making the cameras themselves. These were the first quality 8 mm cameras. Unfortunately JVC is not Sony and it is not Canon, both of which brands are highly respected in the broadcast community, and have to live up to its reputation; one is respected for its cameras, the other for its lenses. It will take one of these two to come out with a quality HDV camera. The JVC is a toy. It is not a tool, especially not a professional one. No one in the broadcast indudtry, or any indie filmmaker that I know would ever use this thing for anything. And the average joe next door, with an HDTV set? He would be the last one I would recommend this camera to also. Got to go to do more important things. Hope that the ones that bought this camera will find some way to use it effectively. There is a guy in the PDX10 forum who is trying to take the signal from the CCD circutry into a special HD card. He may be better off using the HD10. He would bypass the low quality MPEG2 encoder. Maybe you guys should talk to him. He may be onto something that we all could benefit from.

October 27th, 2003, 01:21 AM	#12
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	"The JVC is a toy." "... any indie filmmaker that I know would ever use this thing for anything." Hmm. Most of ous indie film maker types here are very excited about doing as much as we can with this camera. DV level resolution is just not where we want to be at. It sucks truthfully. And we know given a little skill what amazing footage this camera can take. But your right, people who don't want to make films or have lower levels of skill would be better served by a SD camera. Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 27th, 2003, 05:10 AM	#13
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	I don't see anything new being added to this discussion. It's time to move on. It also appears that some individuals may need to read the DV Info FAQ and memorize the part about appropriate content for posts and respect for others. This includes their equipment. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

October 27th, 2003, 10:21 AM	#14
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Howdy from Texas, I would also like to remind certain members that if a particular piece of gear is not to your liking, such as this camcorder, you are not welcome to come into that forum and trash it. The forum is for those who own the camcorder or are thinking about getting one. If you've decided this isn't the right camcorder for you, then you really have no business in here. "But there are plenty of potential buyers and they should know other opinions" -- sorry, but they already do and the burden of research and decision-making falls upon their own shoulders and no one else's. I've noticed that occasionaly somebody gets the notion that somehow this equipment is being "foisted" upon the buying public. However that clearly is NOT the case and nobody is in need of being rescued from the big, bad manufacturer. Gear like this is produced because there's a market for it, a demand. May not be for everybody; it isn't intended to be. Those who are about to drop the money on a camcorder such as this one are already well aware of the availability of other models in the marketplace and none of them need to be "exposed" to other options, as if there's some shroud of mystery and deception. There isn't any. Instead there are folks making purchasing decisions who may not be in line with someone else's opinion or point-of-view. That's about it. This is a free marketplace. I fully agree that "now is always the right time to buy." If you wait, you're not producing. It's a simple as that. Something new comes along in a few months, sell your current gear and move up. It's that simple. Finally, calling a $3000 camera a toy... the Fisher-Price PixelVision is a toy, and highly sought after by video artists for the creative potential it offers. What matters is, what do you do with the gear. A toy is something you play with, it could be anything no matter the price or its intended purpose. An expensive, high-end SDX900 might be a "toy" in one person's hands. A Fisher-Price PixelVision could be a serious creative tool in another person's hands. As Jeff said above, please keep our FAQ in mind when you post. This isn't your average message board; please keep the passion in check. There are plenty of other online outlets for emoting. Thanks, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!