Streamcorder
 

Anyone know of, or has played with the JVC Streamcorder?

Nah, but I can tell you it's not very popular. :D

The reason for that would be becuase:

1. It's only "feature" that JVC ever talks about with it, is the streaming video gimmick stuff...
2. It looks pretty strange.
3. Isn't this the camera with the non-removable lens hood?
4. It's over priced.

I'd rather have a DVX100, VX2000 or a GL2...

The GY-DV300 Streamcoder has one major advantage over all other 3-chip prosumer DV camcorders in its class: a 12-bit digital signal processor. XL1S, PD150 etc. have 8-bit DSP's.

Actually Chris, the Sony PDX-10 has 14-bit DSP. See http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Professiona...pdx10final.pdf

Since the price has dropped quite a bit on the Streamcorder, it's a good buy now.

Wow, I wasn't aware of that 14-bit DSP on the PD-X10. Thanks Boyd,

Hi,

I owned TRV950, sold it off and got myself a Streamcorder, the DV301E, after comparing with a friend's PD-150.

Just shot some Music Videos last Wed running on both PD-150 and DV301E. It was a sunny day at the beach.

After comparing the footages, we find that the Streamcorder produces extremely good images, slightly better than PD-150 in terms of dynamic range.

I did not choose the DVX-100 because it has higher video noise in low light. Streamcorder's low light ability is comparable to PD-150.

I chose Streamcorder not because of its streaming capability, rather the additional professional adjustments and settings like Auto-Knee, Black stretch and compress, Master black etc. Also, it's built-in mic comes handy if you do not need XLR everytime.

Most importantly, its ability to handle vertical smear is great. My previous TRV950 suffers badly in this area, makes shooting in the evening extremely difficult.

Although 950 has 14-bit DXP, but most bright scenes blow out easily. Most color light sources like traffic lights, vehicles brake lights are captured with bright white spots in the centre - they just seems to blow-out easily.

However, I miss Sony's better automatic capability. Focusing and exposure controls are slightly more intelligent and responsive than others. PD-150 is more ruggedly built and looks more professional. Most importantly, it offers great battery performance.

Yik, what are the current prices for the DV301E. I would love to get a PAL one, but they seem pretty expensive compared to the DV300 here in the States.

Chris: A/D is different from DSP
 

A Pro camera like the GY-DV300, the GY-DV5000U and the DSR-390 use 12bit A/D conversion. The DSP uses other architecture and will have significantly more bits.

The GY-DV300 and GY-DV5000 use 12-bit A/D and a 24-bit DSP.

The PDX-10 is 14-bit A/D and 14-bit DSP.

So one must be careful what you are discussing. The Sony consumer cameras like PD150 are 8 bit A/D cameras.

This does limit them to 256 data bits so they must use analog pre-knee circuits to wack off the dynamic range of the CCDs. They must compress to 200% or so and let the rest bloom.

BTW, That is why DV recording can be 8-bit, there is no image above 100-110 to the VTR section, so 256 levels is fine to the human eye for DV tape. But the CCD has a much higher dynamic range.

It is the 12-bit A/D in the GY-DV5000, GY-DV300 and DSR-390 that now allow 4096 data bits to be applied to the 400% or 600% dynamic range of the CCD for great highlight control.

DSP is another matter and a completely different part of the camera. The DSP doesn't "get" the image (that is the CCD and A/D) but the DSP "works" the image for white balance, gain functions, detailing, colorimetry, gamma, and about 8 other items.

These DSP items are the kinds of things adjustable in the menu.

This DSP is 24bit in the GY-DV300 and GY-DV5000. And yes, a camera like the PDX-10 would probably use a 14-bit DSP. It would give plenty of processing for that kind of application.

Ken, thank you for your great explanations.

As for the DSP spec., I did come across some descrepancy. Some brochure mentioned that the DV30x has 12-bit DSP while the rests mentioned that it has a 24-bit version.

I don't think I've seen one DV301 in the street whereas VX2ks and PD150s are everywhere. I think JVC missed the design boat by fitting it with a small 2.5" screen, leaving off the slow shutter speeds, the memory card, the second ND filter and the zoom ring.

There are some nice touches - the on/off toggle switch for instance, but inreality it's not a competitor for the VX2k and was never meant to be. The price was silly to start with but is now in the TRv950 terrority which is much more realistic competition.

tom.

Thanks for the clarifications, Ken! Much appreciated,