HD100/200 user satisfaction

[Joel Chappell]

Good day to everyone. I am about to upgrade to a new camera system and the HD110 is at the top of my list. I am a methodical person and relatively thorough with my research.

One of the things I notice is that there are more topics posted in this area than any of the other cameras. It's noteworthy at the least. Does that mean there are more users or these, or more problems with this system?

I am very interested to hear the challenges you have with these cameras. Not generalities that are available throughout this forum (which I have spent many hours reading). Real issues, aggravations that you have encountered in using these cameras.

This is not an attempt to bash the HD100/200 camera system. They are well established as great systems and widely used. But with every camera, no matter which brand, model etc., there are things that become annoyances that you can only discover after you have it in your hands producing content.

Finally, are you going to stick with your HD100/200, or are you considering an upgrade, and if so, what would it be? This may seem insignificant to some, but I think that someone that has been enjoying their HD100/200 for 2 or 3 years, and is going to change to something else may have some interesting insights.

Thanks in advance.

Joel

[Carl Middleton]

Sorry that I don't know much about your question... but hello from another first coaster!

Good to see I'm not the only person in the tri county area who logs on here ;)

Carl

[Ted Ramasola]

Ive been using the hd100 for a while now here in the humid tropics. The system stood well. I use mine extensively for corporate work. TV spots , promotional videos. I use mine with a lens adapter.

Ted

[Joseph A. Benoit]

HI JOEL

I had a XL1S/ SONY FX1
and i now have a 110. Its total PRO
Love this camra. i got the DR_HD100 (no more tapes) or you can use tape with the DR 100 if you choose, also a .NTG-1 mic I have had the Camera for 8 months
and have no issue's with it .Plus the fact you have such a great crew with DVi
they always help when you need it if its possible

Good Luck
Joe

[Jaadgy Akanni]

I've had the HD200U for over a year now, and it's time for me to get serious about my cinema projects. I have a reservation for a RED, which I think is the only logical move for me. I'll be able to shoot 4k, 2k (1080p, 720p, if you wish). And edit natively on FCP 2.

[David Liu]

Hi guys, sorry to deviate abit..

I'm on the same spot with JOEL....

I'm looking for an upgrade.. I have a DVX, XHA1.. and I'm looking to upgrade to either the HVX, or the HD110..

Hows the HD110 compared to HVX, the pros and con...

and if I'm gonna buy my HD110 next week, any top-5 pointers I should know?


Best regards
David
Singapore

[Erwin van Dijck]

I have been using the JVC HD100 for over 2 years now. Within a few weeks time I will shift to another camera system and another brand.

Though the HD100 was a reasonable tool to help me produce a couple of great videos, there are many concerns:
- the standard lens is poor, lots of CA, soft in the corners at full zoom, soft at low aperture
- not enough wide on the standard lens, almost always have the wide angle adapter on it
- at the start my HD100 suffered from the SSE (split screen error). One day it suddenly popped up, ruining a days work and leaving me with a rental HD100 for a few weeks. It was fixed a little when the a-upgrade was performed. Nevertheless at gain levels over +6 dB the split screen is always visible.
- only up to 720p
- low light performance is not good enough for me
- poor lcd screen, both color and readability during daylight/sunlight
- the standard jvc battery was a joke
- housing is very plastic and feels fragile

Some good points were:
- tapeless acquisition with the DR100, works great
- easy to operate, manual focus, knobs and buttons at the right places
- everything you need is there: 3ccd, XLR, 48v phantom, SD, HDV, zebra, skin details, lots of adjustments possible, lens controller possible
- shoulder cam
- possibility to use v-mount or ab-mount batteries

regards,
Erwin
-

[Adam Grunseth]

The style of the camera... I work as a TV camera guy for my day job, so its nice that my HD-110 has controls in the same spot, and a lens that works the same way. The camera feels and behaves like I want it too- not like some little pro-sumer rig.

The camera can produce great pictures if you know what your doing. You can customize the look that the camera will output to your hearts content, and a real manual lense opens the door to all sorts of creative opportunities. If you don't have experience with broadcast cameras though this probably isn't the camera for you. I've known many DVX users who don't care for the HD-110 because they need to use it like they would a broadcast cam and they're not comfortable doing that.

I know there is alot of talk about CA with the lense, but I have only seen it appear verly slightly in extreme circumstances, and usually then by adjusting the zoom or iris ever so slightly it will go away. The thing that really annoys me with the stock lens is the insanely slow zoom speed. I end up turning the servo zoom off most the time and zooming manually.

Because the camera has true HD resolution chips, but are only 1/3 inch, you have some very tiny pixels crammed into a tiny space. One of the results of this is very poor low light performance. This camera sucks light. Even for simple indoor shoots that seem to have plenty of natural light I find myself setting up at least one 500w light with a softbox to help out.

Also, the HD-110 doesn't come in as complete as a package as the hvx does. Your going to need some sort of external battery system... I use IDX. I've also heard quite a bit of discussion with time code issues related in recording to tape, so I have a firestore mounted to the back of my cam. In short the configuration I'm happy with costs quite a bit more than just the camera, and I probably could have got away with the HVX for alot less money.

With that said though I wouldn't trade my HD-110 for anything.... except for a HD-200 or 250. If your used to the DVX and like it- and if your not familiar with broadcast cameras, I would say the HVX is probably your best bet. If your not satisfied with the DVX though and want something with ergonomics closer to what you get in a standard ENG/EFP camera than the HD-110 is the best choice. No camera is clearly better or worse though.... it all comes down to what you feel more comfortable using.

[Justin Ferar]

Along the lines of what Adam said...

I think it all comes down to ergonomics. I grew up on shoulder mounted cameras and simply cannot use the camcorder form factor (HVX and Sony) for my own work.

The 16x lens is sufficient and more importantly to me is a fully manual broadcast lens. I do a lot of run and gun work so I get more shots (and better) from a manual lens.

I suppose if you are used to the camcorder form factor then there will be a learning curve with the JVC's. That said, once you go with manual lenses you will never go back to fixed- ever!

I've had 2 HD200's for a year now running flawlessly every weekend.

Bottom line- they are maintenance free and making money.

[Joseph A. Benoit]

Hi Joel
what make & model camera are you using now?

Joe

[Joel Chappell]

Originally Posted by Joseph A. Benoit

Hi Joel
what make & model camera are you using now?

Joe

I've got a couple of Sony HVR-A1u's, Panasonic DVC20, and a Panasonic AG-455.

Originally Posted by Adam Grunseth

Because the camera has true HD resolution chips, but are only 1/3 inch, you have some very tiny pixels crammed into a tiny space. One of the results of this is very poor low light performance. This camera sucks light. Even for simple indoor shoots that seem to have plenty of natural light I find myself setting up at least one 500w light with a softbox to help out.

I haven't really seen too much out there about low light being a problem with the hd100. Maybe I heven't looked in the right places. Interesting info.

Originally Posted by Erwin van Dijck

- at the start my HD100 suffered from the SSE (split screen error). One day it suddenly popped up, ruining a days work and leaving me with a rental HD100 for a few weeks. It was fixed a little when the a-upgrade was performed. Nevertheless at gain levels over +6 dB the split screen is always visible.

Is the Split Screen issue still a factor with the 110 and new 200?

Originally Posted by Justin Ferar

I suppose if you are used to the camcorder form factor then there will be a learning curve with the JVC's. That said, once you go with manual lenses you will never go back to fixed- ever!

The manual function of the lens is one of the attractions of this cam for me. I don't think I have ever had a camcorder that zoomed, focused or otherwise adjusted that way I wanted it to with the built-in controls.



Great feedback folks. I really appreciate it.

[Brian Luce]

Originally Posted by David Liu

Hi guys, sorry to deviate abit..

I'm on the same spot with JOEL....

I'm looking for an upgrade.. I have a DVX, XHA1.. and I'm looking to upgrade to either the HVX, or the HD110..

Hows the HD110 compared to HVX, the pros and con...

and if I'm gonna buy my HD110 next week, any top-5 pointers I should know?


Best regards
David
Singapore

I don't see the HD110 as a major upgrade over a xha1.

HVX200? The image is softer than the HD110's but it has a better codec.
HVX200 has more features like variable frame rate but has extremely short record times, P2 cards are crazy expensive and viable archival solutions are very expensive (LTO's)

[Paolo Ciccone]

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

HVX200? The image is softer than the HD110's but it has a better codec.

I think that Walter Graff has spent a good amount of time and words in showing how these two cameras come really close to the same result. The HVX200 codec doesn't seem to make much difference and it's "better" only in regard to color encoding, it does chop off quite a bit of resolution, 960 horizontal pixels compared to 1280, and that is much more important to me. As I said many times, just say no to HDV in editing. Acquire the footage from the HD100 or any other HDV-based camera, convert it to Sheer or any other lossless codec and edit from there. Think of HDV as a capture-only format and you will not have any problem. I just shot a series of scenes with the HD100 with Green Screen in a less than optimal situation and it worked just fine. I got a key as clean as I could possibly expect from any HD camera.

[Brian Luce]

Originally Posted by Paolo Ciccone

I think that Walter Graff has spent a good amount of time and words in showing how these two cameras come really close to the same result. The HVX200 codec doesn't seem to make much difference and it's "better" only in regard to color encoding, it does chop off quite a bit of resolution, 960 horizontal pixels compared to 1280, and that is much more important to me. As I said many times, just say no to HDV in editing. Acquire the footage from the HD100 or any other HDV-based camera, convert it to Sheer or any other lossless codec and edit from there. Think of HDV as a capture-only format and you will not have any problem. I just shot a series of scenes with the HD100 with Green Screen in a less than optimal situation and it worked just fine. I got a key as clean as I could possibly expect from any HD camera.

Graff's tests corroborated an earlier shootout regarding the JVC's slightly sharper image.

I can't speak authoritatively on the efficacy of the 960 pixel count, the topic has been hashed over about a zillion times here, however the arguments I read regarding pixel shifting convinced me that there was some mitigation in regards to the HVX's less than HD pixel count.

I do what Paolo does, intermediary codec called Cineform. Best thing since orange juice. HDV has been beat up because of its inadequacy in post, the IC totally solves the issue. You don't need some Octacore Freon cooled nuclear powered computer either, just need a little bit of storage--and that's no problem because they're practically giving away hard drives these days. So HDV gets trashed all the time, but looks like the hottest thing down the pike is the Sony Xdcam EX. And guess what format it shoots in? a juicier version of HDV.

[Shai Camerini]

Originally Posted by Paolo Ciccone

I think that Walter Graff has spent a good amount of time and words in showing how these two cameras come really close to the same result. The HVX200 codec doesn't seem to make much difference and it's "better" only in regard to color encoding, it does chop off quite a bit of resolution, 960 horizontal pixels compared to 1280, and that is much more important to me. As I said many times, just say no to HDV in editing. Acquire the footage from the HD100 or any other HDV-based camera, convert it to Sheer or any other lossless codec and edit from there. Think of HDV as a capture-only format and you will not have any problem. I just shot a series of scenes with the HD100 with Green Screen in a less than optimal situation and it worked just fine. I got a key as clean as I could possibly expect from any HD camera.

Ciao Paolo
I didn't understand how do you capture the material, and how do you use it inside FCP? Can you explain the steps and setups?