JVC HD-200 Pros/Cons?

[Mark Dalzell]

Hello,

I am seriously considering the JVC HD-200. With the recent price drop $5,499.00 at B&H it is very appealing.
I also like the fact it has the ability for interchangeable lenses. I have also seen some footage of the HD-110 and it was very impressive.

My question is to those of you who have this camera, what pros/cons are there for this camera? Any know issues/problems?
How durable is it? Do you recommend buying the extended warrany? Overall satisfaction with the cameras HD quality.

Anything else you would like to add.

Thanks in advance to all who post.

Regards.

Mark Dalzell / Sin City Productions
Las Vegas, Nv

[Eric Gulbransen]

Buy the camera. CALL down the road a ways from you - Scott Cantrell at TapeworksTexas 866-827-3489. Great camera, great service, great deal, great friend, now. Get the mac warranty to kick in after the two year JVC warranty, just because you can, and because you just, never, know. Lots of images on this forum, from pros. But some of these pros can produce a great image from a hole in a cereal box. You really want to judge? Check out the frame grab, shot by nobody. Not even half of a clue as to what in the hell I was doing at the time. No post work. Straight out of the cam then compressed for the web.

By the way your new home, this forum, is FULL of great and helpful people. You will never leave.

Call Scott, tell him GoGo sent you. I promise you'll be happy you did.

Good luck brother

[Brian Luce]

Originally Posted by Mark Dalzell

Hello,

I am seriously considering the JVC HD-200. With the recent price drop $5,499.00 at B&H it is very appealing.
I also like the fact it has the ability for interchangeable lenses. I have also seen some footage of the HD-110 and it was very impressive.

My question is to those of you who have this camera, what pros/cons are there for this camera? Any know issues/problems?

It's tough to beat at that price point. Although the canons arguably provide a bit more bang for the buck.

Pros: image quality, form factor, ready made archival solution (the achilles heel of all the flash based cameras), long record times (the other achilles heel of flash cams), lens flexibility (beware though, lenses aren't cheap)

Cons: stock lens not so hot (breathing, chromatic aberration, won't go wide),

Red Herrings: HDV format (dismissed initially as junk, it seems like it's come into its own) , split screen (a problem with eariler models only.

I'll second the Texas Tapeworks endorsement. I got my cam there and theyre a forum sponsor.

[Mark Dalzell]

Brian and Eric,

You guys rock! Thanks very much for taking time to reply along with the information.

I'll check out your buddy Scott and tell him you both spoke very highly of him.

By the way Brian, "how much more bang for the buck" from the Canon? I used the XL H1 last year in a film class.
Nice camera, very good images but I was a bit bummed that it only had the 2.4 viewpiece and not an LCD on it which is pretty useful for gorrilla shooting.

Regards.

Mark

[Ted Ramasola]

Mark,

A tip from halfway around the world.

Its a good choice. I'm an hd100 user. never regretted it and would probably still get the hd200 as another cam.

We have Dvx100s and sonys for our SD work before. This jvc cam is a pro-performer.

Ted

[Diogo Athouguia]

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

split screen (a problem with eariler models only.

There is no SSE on 200 models.

[Mark Dalzell]

Ted,

Good to hear you're happy with your HD-100. I too have a Panasonic DVX-100A. It's in mint condition and has served me well but I need to move up to HD.

Ted, Do you use it hand held a lot and if so do you find it cumbersome as some have said or not? I guess some type of stabalizer would be the move if you were going to depend on a lot of hand held shots though.

Diogo, please excuse my ignorance but can you elaborate a bit more on the SSE? I assume your referring to the "split screen" feature. Has this been eliminated in the HD-200 or fixed or ? Good/Bad.

Thanks to you both for posting.

Mark

[Sean Adair]

I find the JVC's form factor much BETTER for hand-held shooting than these bulky camcorder designs. Bracing on the shoulder, and having controls right where they belong is key for the most importnat type of handheld work IMHO.
Of course if you are trying to do more wild, over the head, swinging around MTV stuff, a smaller camera is easier.

[Mark Dalzell]

Hi Sean,

Well, I don't really plan on any "acrobatic" filming at the moment. LOL.
In addition to the shoulder mount shooting, how is it for basic "cradleing"
the camera?

Mark

[Eric Gulbransen]

You see what I mean Mark? This camera comes with a small army..

[Mark Dalzell]

Eric,

Most definetly. I've been a member of the DVXuser forum for a few years and I must tip my hat to DVi. Very infomative. I really appreciate all the help and
the welcome as well.

I'll definetely be hangin' out here.

Mark

[Ted Ramasola]

Mark,

Without any lens adapters up front to make the rig bulky, the camera as is, is easy for cradling shots. very stable on the shoulder.

Though i must add that with a 3rd party brick its more balanced than with the small jvc battery.

Tripod though is essential for polished look.

If you intend to do hand helds its ok, on the wide end of your lens. I do this often for tight situations and dutch angles.

I have taken this cam on whitewater rafting shoots, up tropical misty mountains, inside humid caves where we have to crawl through the entrance, illuminating the inside with just 5 pcs of 12v battery powered 50 watt halogens.

That gives you an idea of its robustness and sensitivity.

Ted

[Mark Dalzell]

Ted,

How is the Th16x Fujinon lense that comes with the camera? What do you recommend if I were to look into a wide angle or tele? I know I'll need the HZ-CA13U PL mount film lens adapter for other lenses right?

I was also going to invest in an Anton Bauer battery setup. Pricey but well worth the investment I've heard.

I'm comfortable using my sticks to get the most professional look but I'm definetly a novice at best using the hand held shots. Practice makes perfect but then again there's always a stabalizer when the budget permits.

You don't happen to have any footage available you shot with this camera from the caves, mountains rafting etc. do you?

Mark

[Justin Ferar]

All this praise for for the HD-200 is well and justified. Except no one has brought up the 3000lb gorilla in the room- which is lousy 720p60 HDV compression. Specifically macro blocking. It's bad.

Although I don't have much experience shooting 720p24 I sure will get some this year. Shooting 702p24/25/30 avoids the longer GOP the HD-200/250 uses for 720p50/60. So after shooting a full year (30 projects) at 720p60 we will be switching to 720p24 for 2008 and change the way we shoot- less pans and tilts.

I regret not buying the 250 because of the SDI out. At the time we had to buy 2 cameras and the cost was too great, so I compromised and got 2 HD-200's. The Convergent Design flash recorder (in development) will give the HD-250 protection from obsolescence for years.

Doh!

[Mark Dalzell]

Justin,

Are you speaking about the current camera or an older model? The only reason I ask is I found this on the JVC site (which could be biased on their part also).

Newly-developed pixel converter
To enable 720p/60 recording, a new super encoder and a new pixel converter were developed, incorporating an adaptive filter which optimizes the scalar performance of cross-converted signals, including 1080i. The resultant effects are increased resolution and reduced aliasing. Objects thus have much more natural looking edges and images are therefore extremely lifelike in appearance.

If I'm correct, I plan on shooting 720/24p to get as close to a film look as possible. At this point and for me needs, the HD-200 is more appealing price wise than the 10K for the HD-250.

Mark