Is $20,000 affordable?
 

According to the latest issue of "TV Technology," "JVC will show a prototype of a new full-size HDV camcorder that's expected to be priced in the $20,000 range, said JVC spokesman Dave Walton. 'Our message is that affordable HDV is here,' he said."

So maybe Sony will be our savior after all with their DSR 0000. The first camera out of the block with the manual controls we're asking for and that's under $5000 is going to get the lion's share of the pie. That's my guess.

$20k for a camera that I've heard will be amazing is probably cheap.

But for us low budget dudes and dudettes, yeah, the Sony HDV 3 chip with manual controls will be ace! (I'll be hanging onto my HD10 for a while longer, doing some more shoots and stuff, because I can't afford another camera!)

heath

Something tells me JVC is about to do what one former forum moderator did--jack up the price on an item that once was cheaper. Maybe someone put the pressure on JVC to get with the program...I'm guessing they're taking their old $5000 DV500 camcorder, replacing its electronics with that of the old $3000 H10 and making a really big profit. Wanna bet?

It's almost irrelevant how they do it. If they deliver a high-definition camera with full manual controls, professional lenses, etc., then they're entitled to price it competitively against the competition. Considering that $15,000 will get you a standard-def DSR570, and $25,000 will get you a standard-def SDX900, $20,000 seems like an eminently reasonable price point for a high-def HDV5000U (or whatever they call it).

If the camera is as good as a DSR570 or SDX900, but includes high-def chips, they'll sell every one they can make. Maybe not to me and you, but to the customers who are already buying $15,000 DSR570's.

What I'm puzzling over is the huge jump in pricing between successive HDV models. It makes one wonder if the H10 was an anomaly that they'd never wished had happened. It also suggests that they'll never try to fix much or any of what was wrong with it. This may be the last time you'll see an HD camcorder this cheap.

Well, you could say the same thing about standard DV cameras. There are $250 DV cameras, and there are $15,000 DV cameras.

Feature-wise, capability-wise, the JVC HD1 is about on par with the $500 handycam camcorders, other than having an HD chip in it. It should be as inexpensive as it is. But if they develop a camera that's on par with a $15,000 camcorder, but have HD chips in it, it would be worth $20,000 (providing the picture actually delivers on the promise).

The rental price for a 20k camera wouldn't be that bad either.

NAB...7 days and counting
 

(Really all we're doing is biting our nails and anxiously awaiting NAB as we engage in idle chatter....)
It comes back to the old question of relativity--is the image of a camera that costs 7X more than the H10 really SEVEN TIMES better? If Sony addresses those concerns with its souped up DSR0000, JVC could once again be found to have made a disasterous move. I'm only speculating here (idle chatter) but I think at the least it portends a relegation of the HD10 to the proverbial back burner so that it won't compete with the expensive new camera.

I hate to say it, but it's not just image quality. Keep in mind, though, the HD10 is a one chip camera and the Sony is 3. We haven't even gotten a confirmation on how much the Sony will cost, and I'll believe the prices on the JVC ENG-style camera when we hear it.

Three years ago, there was a JVC mini-DV camera that cost, with lens, $15,000. Part of the Cinema line, but NOT 24P...

heath

Back to the original question, is 20k affordable?

Even if the new JVC full-size runs that high, it would be worth it to me for the lens options alone. The HD10 is inexpensive - a cam that does 720p that costs less than my car, something I never expected this soon. Take into account the time and trouble to buy/build a mini35 unit for it to use better lenses, have some depth of field without having to fake it all in After Effects, etc., and to me the new full-size camera suddenly doesn't look quite as expensive. People who don't need the features of a full-size camera, no problem. They can use with the HD10 or the Sony coming out soon (granted, I'm using soon a s a relative term here). If you need the features a full-size camera offers, 20K is just fine. Especially with my budget constraints.

A full-size camera that should do 720p that costs less than my house? Beats $60K or $100K.

Just my opinion.

Good analysis, Jeremiah!

heath

The argument of whether it's picture is 7x better is intriguing, but ultimately not accurate.

I find the JVC HD1/HD10 camera completely unusable in a professional production environment. So for me, it doesn't matter if it cost $2500 or $250. If you can't use it, you can't use it.

Now, let's compare the proposed HDV5000U (and of course that's my own made-up name, not any legit name) against, oh, say, a digital betacam camera like the DVW790. It goes for $45,000. Would it be safe to say that this standard-def camera would deliver a picture over twice as good as the new high-def HDV5000U? Sure shouldn't... yet Sony's sold quite a bit of digital betacam gear.

If the HDV5000U is priced at $20,000 I think it'll be quite overpriced, and they'll still sell every one they can make. Adding HDV chips to a $5000 camera shouldn't quadruple the price, should it? It would likely represent an obvious case of gouging, but still... a professional high-definition camera at less than half the cost of standard-def digital betacam? Less than a standard-def SDX900? A third of the cost of the next-lowest-priced professional HD camera? It would sell. I personally would expect to see the price at $10,000, and if the picture performs like it should, it's a no-brainer. The question you have to start asking at that point is, is the Varicam picture worth three to six times more than the HDV5000U...

Like the man said, when it comes to quality you always have to pay ten times more for that last five percent.

Right on, Betsy :)

I can see clearly now.....and I appreciate the flow of discussion. HD gear in general has been way overpriced. However, they were able to "get away with it" because it was the only game in town, R & D costs, low sales volume, yada...Meanwhile, the HD10 for all its shortcomings was probably priced right where such cameras should be priced. I mean, they sure weren't losing money on the product. So now that we've seen just how nice a picture a mere $3000 can buy, for JVC to suddenly produce as their successive entrant a $20K camera seems to be the result of a smoke-filled backroom threat from the others (not to be overly dramatic or to insinuate anything). You know what I mean? It just doesn't make sense from a relative point of view.
Keep in mind this is mini-DV mechanicals inside that JVC perfected with their SD DV500 camcorder priced at a mere $5000. (I'm assuming that's what this new camcorder will look like.)
I think lots of folks expected a $10K camera as the logical successor....