XL2 versus HD101 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 25th, 2006, 04:53 PM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 30
XL2 versus HD101

XL2 versus HD101
Time to ditch my trusty xl1s after 3 odd years of good service. Unfortunately the poor thing took a dive and although the lens/body is fine (deep relief) the viewfinder and ma200 took loads of punishment...

Now I've been hunting around for replacement parts, but the cost is building up enough that I may as well sell what I have that still is in one piece and upgrade. Now the obvoius choice is an XL2 body only kit as I have the 16x manual lens, a matt box, canon batteries, etc. However as I was browsing around I came across the JVC HD101. Now it's more expensive, but the option of HiDef isn't bad.

Now first things first. I'm UK based so hidef is of limited value at the moment. What I need (rather than would like) is a camera capable of native 16:9 SD.

Question 1 - How does 16:9 SD compare between the two? I film a mixture of extreme sports and short films.
Question 2 - Any major advantages between the glass? Ie the manual lens on the HD101 and the Canon 16x manual
Question 3 - Comfort. The xl1 is notoriously front heavy, has this been fixed any in the XL2 and how does the HD101 compare?
Question 4 - Is 720p really that much better than 576p?

Now I've noticed lots of talk about the HD200/250, so I'm going to wait for info on those before making any decisions, but your input would be appreciated.

Regards

Matt
Matt Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2006, 06:54 PM   #2
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NE of London, England
Posts: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Harvey
Question 1 - How does 16:9 SD compare between the two? I film a mixture of extreme sports and short films.
Question 2 - Any major advantages between the glass? Ie the manual lens on the HD101 and the Canon 16x manual
Question 3 - Comfort. The xl1 is notoriously front heavy, has this been fixed any in the XL2 and how does the HD101 compare?
Question 4 - Is 720p really that much better than 576p?
Hi Matt,

1) Well this is quite subjective. Personally I prefer the HD101 (I bought one) but I haven't done a head-to-head. The JVC has an "organic" look to my eye.

2) The JVC's lens isn't great but handles very nicely. IMHO it is the worst part of the camera... but it can be replaced. I'm not sure on the other lens. I used a Fujinon manual on an XL1 once and it was manual iris only, which can be annoying.

3) For me the HD101 has FAR better ergonomics than the front heavy XL2. Get the IDX (or PRO X) battery kit though!!

4) On paper, 720p has over twice the recorded detail of 576p. That is also about what it looks like to me. It is about twice as sharp. The stock lens does hold the HD101 back though and is pretty blurry in the last 10% of its zoom range.

Overall I'd go for the HD101 anyday. Go to a dealer where you can do a side-by-side and test for yourself though. I recommend Proactive. They aren't too far from you down the M11 and round the M25 a few Junctions - www.proav.co.uk
Mike Marriage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2006, 08:14 PM   #3
New Boot
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16
I've owned both, well the ntsc models, and hands down the superior camera in my opinion is the HD100(101 in your case). They are similar in the way that they don't come out of the box ready to shoot. Both their images look a little flat, but the HD100 far excedes the capabilities in image control as opposed to the XL2 which remains pretty flat. And plus the HD100 shoots HDV and DV. Pretty transitional piece of equipment if you ask me.
Matthew McKane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2006, 08:16 PM   #4
New Boot
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16
First time posting on this forum, BTW.
Matthew McKane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2006, 06:03 PM   #5
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Matt,

I owned both until about a month ago when I sold my Xl2. I loved the images I was able to get out of the XL2 with the 14x or 16x manual lenses (Canon makes good glass) but the HD100 offered WAY BETTER balance and ergonomics, a much easier to understand audio routing system, with the added bonus of high definition. Keep in mind that the HD100 can literally do everything the XL2 can when in DV mode. I can't think of one feature the XL2 has that the HD100 doesn't.

You should post this same question in the XL2 forum and see what kind of responses you get.
Chris also runs the very informative XL2 Watchdog that you should check out. The information provided on that site was the main influence on my decision to buy the XL2 (of course that was way before the HD100 was announced.)
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2006, 07:14 PM   #6
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 73
what about shooting on HVD with the HD100 but downcoverting to put on a DVD, will the image be better than of the XL2?
Simon Antoniou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 12:27 PM   #7
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 30
Thanks for your replies everyone. I'm currently reading up like mad on both cams at the moment. I think I will try arrange to play with an XL2 and once the HD200 is out try that one as well (gives me a chance to save up a bit more cash for all those extras).

Regards

Matt
Matt Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 01:04 PM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bethel, VT
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood
Matt,
but the HD100 offered WAY BETTER balance and ergonomics, a much easier to understand audio routing system,

It's funny Tim, I've been a music/audio producer as long as I've been in film/video. I've built a few high end recording studios as we've grown and I was still confused with the XL2 audio even after having Xls and Xl1s.
It was like someone designed the audio interface when they were drunk.
Jim Giberti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 05:54 PM   #9
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Harvey
XL2 versus HD101
Question 1 - How does 16:9 SD compare between the two? I film a mixture of extreme sports and short films.
Question 2 - Any major advantages between the glass? Ie the manual lens on the HD101 and the Canon 16x manual
Question 3 - Comfort. The xl1 is notoriously front heavy, has this been fixed any in the XL2 and how does the HD101 compare?
Question 4 - Is 720p really that much better than 576p?
Matt

Matt - I was I long time XL1 user, having come to it from a film background. Basically, I think the lens is actually pretty good - extremely good considering the overall price of the camera. People have complained about cromatic aberations and breathing, but in my experience with the JVC, these problems were minimal to non-existent. The lens has been overly trashed IMHO.

I always hated the XL lens (even while learning to deal with it). The ergonomics of the JVC is very similar to the XL series, although with a battery pack on the back of the camera (an absolute need), the camera is heavier than the XL. But, the battery nicely balances out the camera (I have the EVS battery - which has worked nicely so far).

The lens is quite long and I would think it would be fantasic for sports, with both manual and mechcanic controls possible.

I would think that you'd still want to shoot in HD, and then downrez if needed - 'cause believe me, HD will be everywhere in 5 years. But, it is neat that the JVC can switch between SD and HD if you really want to.

Having used both, I would think that once you've used the JVC, you would not want to go back to the XL series. Sorry about your camera, but perhaps this is a sign, huh?

Good luck,

John

evilgeniusentertainment.com
John Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 08:09 PM   #10
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
If you're only considering XL2 vs HD101, well hands down it's better to have the HD101. You can acquire in HD (and should nowadays) and be ready "for the future" so to speak, and have great SD at the same time.

At relatively close prices, why even consider an SD 1/3" camera?
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2006, 08:59 PM   #11
2nd Unit TV
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 509
As I've posted before, I had to replace our XL-series of cameras when we moved to HD and tested the big 4 sub-$10k cameras side by side; JVC, Panasonic, Sony and Canon. A long-time XL fan, I wanted so much for the Canon to come out on top but alas, the JVC won out and we equipped the company with 5 JVC 100HDs, 6 if you count the newest one I purchased just for me. We'll be buying 6 more when I can figure out what's real and what's vapor with the 250s since they're not out yet and anything can happen between now and October but the bottom line is you simply have to move on. Life's like that. I loved the XLs but I owe a debt to my company and the JVC won out. Needless to say, EVS was very happy with the large purchase that came their way as was JVC, especially considering we selected the cameras without any pressure from any of the manufacturers. Today, we're shooting 4 network shows with them and the results are great.
Jonathan Ames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2006, 05:09 AM   #12
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barlow Elton
If you're only considering XL2 vs HD101, well hands down it's better to have the HD101. You can acquire in HD (and should nowadays) and be ready "for the future" so to speak, and have great SD at the same time.

At relatively close prices, why even consider an SD 1/3" camera?
Mainly becuase I already have the 'infrastructure' for the xl series, ie batteries, matt box, etc. I would onlt need to buy the XL2 body to be back in action. With the HD101/200 I would have to buy all that stuff again. It's a case of balancing the features with the overall cost.

Cheers

Matt
Matt Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2006, 10:28 AM   #13
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Understandable. SD will be around for quite some time. My only caveat is that I think HD DVD/Blu Ray is going to change the environment fairly quickly.

I go into the massive Costco consumer warehouse stores and when you look for a TV...just about all they sell are HD sets. Big or small. That's a harbinger to take note of.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2006, 10:31 AM   #14
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Jonathan,

What aspects of the JVC were most critical for your company? Progressive, manual lens, etc?
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2006, 11:50 AM   #15
2nd Unit TV
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 509
Actually all of those thingswhihch is why, before we settled on the JVC, we did the side-by-side testing of all the cameras. All of them relative to picture quality was good but we had a few prime considerations fuelled by the demands of the shows we produce and the networks that air them.

First was the dfact that we need 720p when it comes to hi-def. The only exception to the rule is Discovery HD which has 3 pages of technical requirements and specify 1080i. Our current 4 shows are all 720p and after the fact that the picture is superior to i, the network marketing groups can pull virtually any frame out of progressive sequences for stills or group of frames for trailer work whereas with i, it's much more difficult. We shoot at 60 fps because of the slow motion we need to do during the shows which is one of the reasons JVC is providing 60p capabilities to their next gen cameras. They really listen to their customers and it wasn't just because "we" wanted it; we're only responsible for 12 of the 12,000 units they sold over the last 10 months except for the ones that people were kind enough to write to us and say that our recommendation and reasoning led them to purchase the JVC instead of one of the others which really hits home. That's why we spend so much time on this board trying to help people who have perhaps not as much experience as we do. JVC simply realized the importance of 60 to the doc and sports shooters all over the world and responded to it.

Next came lens consideration. We have situations where we need long shots and wide ones as well as everything inbetween. We have four to six cameras on the arena floor and four in the color booth. While each situation may not call for a physically different lens because of the wide range of focal lengths in each, it's possible to need a different lens so we carry them. Most production companies that are actually shooting network will tell you the same thing so lens interchangability was another consideration.

Workflow is yet another. The P2 is a great idea but a few minutes on a card just doesn't work for us. We have situations where 20 competitors are going back-to-back with maybe 10 seconds in between each one. At 1.5 minutes for each competitior and 10 seconds in between each one, that's a total of just under 45 minutes. Now there may be a minute or so break in there somewhere but... If there isn't a chance break in the action, we need to plan for the worst case scenario.

One of the prime considerations for us when we needed a new "handheld" solution to the heft of the Sony 950s and turned to Grass Valley's new Infinity was workflow. Their Iomega Rev cards hold 35 G of information which translates to 45 min of HD storage, just 15 min shy of tape. The only downside to the units are their unavailability. They're scheduled for general release in about August but we're hoping to get 4 in June ahead of schedule for for a specific location shoot in Gillette Wyoming June 24th. If you didn't see that camera at NAB, you really missed something. It shoots 1080i and and 720p through 2/3" lens and imager with a whole list of other features that make it the next logical step for the intermediate-professional shooter now shooting in the sub-$10k camera range like the JVC 100-250 people. Before that camera, you needed to jump into the $70-90k range which most can't do. We'll be adding that camera to the 2nd Unit show now that we've decided on it just so people here can get a look at it'as performance. So many people are turned off by the Grass Valley elitist attitude and the fact that they hear Grass Valley and think $100 rarified air cost factor and dismiss it out of hand. But we think you'll be really surprised to see the Infinity which really is in the affordable category even if it is in the high area of affordability. But for people looking to move from the JVC area to the pro ranks, the camera really is worth looking at.

Every camera we tested was different and while they're all amazing, there is a "best" one for everyone dependent on the type of shooting the individual does. For us, we had to look at picture clarity and depth of field first but also workflow and becayuse of lens interchangibility, media workflow and 720p format, the JVC came out ahead.
Jonathan Ames 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 08:11 PM.


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