JVC GR-PD1 for the Film Look?

[Glenn Gipson]

Now I know a lot of people don’t like the MPEG2 compression that this camera uses, but I think this camera might be overlooked as a great tool for creating a “film look.” Think about it. Not only does this camera record a TRUE 16:9 image at 720x576, but it also attains this resolution AFTER it down samples the image from 1280x659. Best of all, this camera records at 25 progressive images per second, which is just one UNNOTICABLE frame difference from 24p. The two reviews that I found for this camera all say that the image is excellent (accept for the colors.)

http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/...9118144,00.htm

http://drs.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=GR-...jvc_grpd1.html

Also, MPEG 2 editing software is quickly evolving into more stable editing solutions.

[Zac Stein]

umm the panasonic dvx100e and the new update coming, ALSO records at 25p and has the full rez of 720x576p.

An anamorphic lens is available from 2 manufacturers, i know which one i would prefer for the 3ccd's, far better controls.

And i got to say this, and i don't mean it in a bad way, but everything JVC i have ever owned has seemed like cheap immitative junk. It is also like a knock-off from the better brands, i dunno may be just my experience but everything i have got made by them has been junk.


I don't think anything new has come about with this JVC camera, and anyways i would ALSO rather edit native dv than mpeg-2 even if it is evolving.

Zac

[Yang Wen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Glenn Gipson :
Also, MPEG 2 editing software is quickly evolving into more stable editing solutions. -->>>

Ha, who/what gave you that idea?

<<<-- Originally posted by Glenn Gipson :
The two reviews that I found for this camera all say that the image is excellent (accept for the colors.)
editing solutions. -->>>

So you want to shot only in B&W?

[Heath McKnight]

Is hi-res another word for high definition?

heath

[Anhar Miah]

Hi Heath,

unfortunelately not, the PD1 is as you know the PAL version of the HD1, but fr some reason they took High definiation off this model, *why* i dont know, someting about poor acceptability of HD in the UK, thus they offer a mode called hi-res which is actually :

1,280X659 16:9 -source Camcorder user Dec 2003

so this is really unfair for us UK users, but i did read somewhere that the PAL HD1 may hit the UK at a later date, if any one can confirm this it would be really helpful.

[Heath McKnight]

That sucks.

heath

[Simon Wyndham]

The lack of High Def is probably due to the BBC. When they developed the standard for terrestrial digital broadcasting they completely ignored any possibility of moving up to High Def in the future. There is no provision for it. So any uptake of High Def TV's in the UK will only ever be very, very small.

[Nicholi Brossia]

I've been pretty weary about the high resolution JVC camcorders because its seems to me like they're coming out with too much too early. Generally, in relation to cars, that means that they see a market and slap something together in order to get a jump on sales. The single ccd is a dead give-away as far as I'm concerned.

Simplydv (http://www.simplydv.co.uk/newsitems/jvcprog03.html) wrote:
"Effective pixel usage in movie mode is 840,000 in HI RES mode, 480,000 in PS 50 (4:3) mode, 480,000 pixels in PS50 (16:9) mode amd 480,000 pixels in DV mode. Effective area for still pictures is 1,120,000 pixels in memory mode."

I do find 50p (60p here in the states... if it gets here) very appealing for the occasional need for a crisp still frame. I'm glad someone has come out with that. Unfortunately, please correct me if I'm wrong, it looks like the 50p (480,000 pixels) is substantially lower resolution than the hi-res 25p (840,000 pixels), which would make the still frames unusable with the other hi-res video in my opinion.

Also, does anyone know exactly how the 16:9 works? 16:9 ccd? Anamorphic? Just chopping off the top and bottom like many other widescreen camcorder options? The reports that I've read haven't really explained the 16:9 process, just labeled it "16:9." It almost sounds as if they're using an in-camera anamorphic process, but then also sounds like they're using 16:9 ratio ccd.

[Barry Green]

"Unfortunately, please correct me if I'm wrong, it looks like the 50p (480,000 pixels) is substantially lower resolution than the hi-res 25p (840,000 pixels)"

In the NTSC model that's definitely true. The "SD" mode is 60P at 720 x 480, whereas the high-res mode is of course 30P at 1280 x 720.

"Also, does anyone know exactly how the 16:9 works? 16:9 ccd? Anamorphic?"

You know, the hair-trigger response is to say "16:9 CCD". However, leafing through JVC's spec sheet, I can't find any confirmation of that. Even more curious, the HD still-picture resolution is 1280 x 960 (a 4:3 ratio). A careful reading of JVC's site shows they never say that it's a 16:9 CCD, just that it's a progressive CCD that allows native 16:9 recording in HD format. So perhaps it really is a 4:3 CCD, and the 16:9 is done by sampling a 16:9-shaped patch off of it (like the MX500 & PDX-10)?

[Les Dit]

I have a very strong suspicion that they do an optical adjustment to the lens system when shooting SD vs HD.
Guess why the SD to HD switch is on the lens barrel, and it's not just a little electronic push button :)
You are shifting lens elements with that lever... sneaky JVC.

-Les