v/s Canon XLH1 - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems
GY-HD 100 & 200 series ProHD HDV camcorders & decks.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 26th, 2006, 12:33 AM   #16
JVC America
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 516
new lenses

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Barwood
Wow, I didn't expect Canon just help out the HD100 just yet, sort of works against their own little cam in a way.

Any way to find out more about these lens options? Just curious on what they are and where the price will land.
Hi Guy,

Here is a run-down of the four new ProHD lenses that are being shown at NAB:

1. Fujinon HTs18X4.2BRM-M48 - Fujinon 18X Wide Angle - Approx. list of $10,800. Estimated delivery of August 2006

2. Th17X5BRM - Fujinon17X - Approx. list of $3,300. Estimated delivery of August 2006

3. Th17X5BRMMD - Fujinon17X with motorized focus/zoom/iris. For pan/tilt remote applications - Approx. list of $4,000. Estimated delivery of August 2006

4. Canon 20X lens - 5.8mm-116mm - Prototype only at this time. No price or item # yet.

These four lenses, plus the two that we already have, will work on any of the GYHD cameras.

Regards, Carl
Carl Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2006, 12:49 AM   #17
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 423
Thanks Carl. I bet the lens of most interest to most will be the Th17X5BRM. $3000 is not so unthinkable a price if there is a definite difference in performance. You might want to look at selling the camera with this as a stock option. No need for the current stock lens if you have this one. August is still some time away though.

It will be interesting to see what an extra $2k on the lens can do for you. Thinking of the usual CA, powered zoom speed. It is lens like this that make the HDxx0 series more attractive than its fixed lens cousins.

I guess there is no chance of adding an auto focus function to a future model camera for use with a lens like the Th17X5BRMMD?

Any thoughts on single focus/iris/zoom controller for tripod use with a lens like the Th17X5BRMMD?

Annoying little blighter arn't I (and not too little either...)
Guy Barwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2006, 06:54 PM   #18
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Hicks
In our booth here at NAB, we have sample HDSDI footage running through this new encoder circuit, and then being decoded back to HDSDI. The original HDSDI and the encoded/decoded HDSDI are then connected to two side-by-side DTV1710CGU HD monitors. And the results are pretty amazing. You can't see the difference between the raw HDSDI and the encoded/decoded signal. Some HDVinfo.net members have seen this demonstration, and I believe can verify this. This new encoder chip will be used in the GY-HD200U and GY-HD250U.
I stood there for a couple of minutes trying to find compression artifacts, macroblocks, etc and I must say it was incredible. I hope my Digital TV provider starts using an encoder like this.

The other reason for the choice of 19.2Mbps is that it is ready for microwave transmission or digital broadcast based on the ATSC industry standard. (Am I right on this Carl?)
There were two microwave transmitters connected to HD100s at the booth.
I believe ABC, FOX, ESPN, etc are already delivering 720P60 in the same bandwidth - or less.

Ken Freed explained to me how higher bandwidths wouldn't necessarily mean a better end result because it is the quality and efficiency of the encoder that counts, and sticking with a broadcast standard allows for live, low latency microwave transmission. This was two days ago and I wasn't taking notes so I don't want to put words in his mouth. Maybe he'll come on and explain it to us after NAB?
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2006, 06:59 PM   #19
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen L. Noe
You'll be interested to find out that I've been dumping 60p sequences to the HD-100 for some time. It dumps down at 59.94 and captures right back at 59.94 although I have not seen the HDV60p on my screen as Tim Dashwood did. Nevertheless it has been working. This makes me think the existing deck would work.
That's the other thing. The HD100 is a 720P60 recorder, it just doesn't encode 60P. However, I have also sent a 60P m2t out via DVHSCap back to the camera. This is why standards are so important for futureproofing.
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:07 AM   #20
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ram Ganesh
Now that it does HD-SDI... what is the difference between HD200/250 and XL-H1?

720p vs 1080i
both do 24p (24f)
both HDV
both have HD-SDI
both interchangeble lenses
6GOP/12GOP vs 15 GOP
$8K vs $9K

what else is the difference?
To the original question, I have heard that the the 250 will be $8995 for Body Only (lens extra). Is this true?

Thanks
Ken Diewert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:12 AM   #21
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Diewert
To the original question, I have heard that the the 250 will be $8995 for Body Only (lens extra). Is this true?

Thanks
Yes. According to the info given at NAB.
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:15 AM   #22
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 423
"both do 24p (24f)"

Is 24f equivalent to 24p though? I havn't kept up too much on the Canon but the initial rumours were it was like the Sony, and interlaced CCD only.
Guy Barwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:31 AM   #23
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Barwood
"both do 24p (24f)"

If 24f equivalent to 24p though? I havn't kept up too much on the Canon but the initial rumours were it was like the Sony, and interlaced CCD only.
24F is much better than Sony's Cineframe 24. It's all in the eye of the beholder, but most who have analyzed it are fairly impressed with it. Yes, the camera's CCD's are interlace, but whatever Canon did to make a virtual 1080p...well, it just plain works. The look is very similar to F900 Cinealta.

btw, I thoroughly applaud JVC for their improvements to the GY line. Honestly, if I hadn't already bought my camera I would be sorely tempted by the new 60p cameras. That said, I have found that the H1's 1080i converts to 720 60p extremely well too.

They're both great cameras, that's for sure.

I like the true progressive nature of the JVC cameras, but the question for me will be this:

Consumer HD sets are moving towards 1080p. Which camera's footage holds up best on an unforgiving, full raster 1080 TV like the Westinghouse LCD? The jury's out on that one, because I expect the JVC cameras to convert fairly well, but will 720p look a bit softer than full raster 1080i/p of the H1? Who knows? I do know that I am very impressed with the direction of the JVC line and look forward to seeing the 60p footage when the 200's ship.

I'm a fan of the lucid look of 60p.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:38 AM   #24
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 1,200
Guy,

I'm pretty sure that's right, the 24f is interlaced.

I've been weighing between the JVC and H1 for a month and since the announced release of the 250, I was considering waiting but I won't. October is a long way away and there could be delays, and then there could be something else on the horizon. I ordered the H1 today.

Sorry Carl, If I was doing more studio work, I'd probably chose JVC.

I think they're both great cameras. I would prefer the Canon shoot 720p, 24p etc, but for me I like the Canon glass and I've always used Canon products and I don't plan to do much film out.

Unfortunately these forums tend to pit shooters and editors against each other based on brand loyalties. I think it's just cool to celebrate the visual arts medium and most of all, enjoy the process of capturing images and telling stories.
Ken Diewert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:52 AM   #25
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Diewert
I would prefer the Canon shoot 720p, 24p etc,
Why? Canon committed to the 1080i format, but pulled off a pretty convincing 1080p look via the F modes. The recorded frame size via HDV is 1440x1080, and if acquired via SDI is full 1920x1080. I understand the purist argument over "true progressive" but I don't think it's all that simple. Many people aren't aware that good 1080i can be downsampled and interpolated into good 720 60p. I've done this myself through Compressor and the results were fairly shocking. Nowadays you can get a little Teranex converter to do high quality, motion adaptive conversions in real time.

Now I'm not implying that's actually preferable to true progressive, but again, results showed me a lot more than theoretical arguments.


Quote:
Unfortunately these forums tend to pit shooters and editors against each other based on brand loyalties. I think it's just cool to celebrate the visual arts medium and most of all, enjoy the process of capturing images and telling stories.
Well said.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 07:33 AM   #26
JVC America
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood
I stood there for a couple of minutes trying to find compression artifacts, macroblocks, etc and I must say it was incredible. I hope my Digital TV provider starts using an encoder like this.

The other reason for the choice of 19.2Mbps is that it is ready for microwave transmission or digital broadcast based on the ATSC industry standard. (Am I right on this Carl?)

That is correct. The 19.2 Mb/Sec transport stream will fit into an existing digital Standard Def microwave. That's one very important reason that we stayed with the HDV1 19.2 MB/Sec. plan vs 25 MB/Sec. Plus, 19.2 MB/Sec. is more than enough to insure top quality of the 720P/60 signal. The ATSC transmission standard for 720P transmission calls for about 15 MB/Sec., or less, so we're above that.
Carl Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 07:35 AM   #27
JVC America
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Diewert
To the original question, I have heard that the the 250 will be $8995 for Body Only (lens extra). Is this true?

Thanks
Ken, the tentative list price for the GY-HD250U is $8995 US for the camera head only.
Carl Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 09:30 AM   #28
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barlow Elton
Why? Canon committed to the 1080i format, but pulled off a pretty convincing 1080p look via the F modes. The recorded frame size via HDV is 1440x1080, and if acquired via SDI is full 1920x1080. I understand the purist argument over "true progressive" but I don't think it's all that simple. Many people aren't aware that good 1080i can be downsampled and interpolated into good 720 60p. I've done this myself through Compressor and the results were fairly shocking. Nowadays you can get a little Teranex converter to do high quality, motion adaptive conversions in real time.

Now I'm not implying that's actually preferable to true progressive, but again, results showed me a lot more than theoretical arguments.
Thanks Barlow,

As I mentioned on the H1 site, I appreciate the extra work you and others do on all these forums and the info you provide to educate us less technically proficient users and newer users. That's stuff you can't find in manuals or mags. That's why I've been camped out on the site for the the last 6 weeks.

Ken

Ken
Ken Diewert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 08:01 PM   #29
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Thanks Ken.

Not trying to talk you out of the JVC at all. It's a phenomenal camera, period. And now an even better camera line. It's just when people go into the "true progressive" argument I have to chime in and give my relatively "real world" impressions. 1080i has a lot going for it too.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:56 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network