"Stories abound of HD100s failing for various reasons"

[K. Forman]

For some reason, I think about Ralph Nader and the Chevy Corvair. He wrote an article calling the car "unsafe at any speed", just because a few of the cars had motor mounts break while driving. This would cause the car to flip over, sometimes killing the occupants. I knew a few people that had them, and none of them died. But it was still an issue that had to be considered into the equasion.

Same with the article. No, you won't die because of this camera, but you could end up with really garbled footage and a pissed client who wants their money back. Does it happen to all of them? No. Is it likely to happen if you own this cam? Maybe, nobody has determined why it happens, yet. Is it a design flaw? Apparently not, because the reports and footage coming back from the working cameras is great. Unless JVC made a really bad design, and accidently screwed up many of the ones assembled so that they actually worked right? Leaving just the correctly assembled cams to fail? That would be too unlikely to happen, so we'll agree it is a beautiful camera *when it works*.

If I had paid $600 for it, I still wouldn't expect problems like this.

[Jonathan Nelson]

I think my problem sucks because it NEVER comes up anymore. I have downloaded more footage and most of it looks great! I have to really look for the flaws but every once in a while, I see one. Whether it be a stuck frame or some crazy glitch, the problem is there.

Is this acceptable?

You can say that all tape cameras have these problems but I know for a fact that my 320 dollar canon optura has never seen this problem. At this point in time, If I had to document the second coming of Christ, I would probably use my optura because it's super dependable. The canon could still get a bad tape but it has much better odds of getting the job done.

We don't really know if our problem signifies a poorly designed/assembled camera but it doesn't help to see 6 or more people in this forum who have a similar problem.

[K. Forman]

It really depends on the exact problems you are having. If it is just one or two frames on occasion, you can live with it. Two frames could be cut out and never noticed. When it is a matter of more than that, it gets harder to cover up. Unless it should happen between shots, that would be a stroke of luck! Just cut around it ;)

[Jonathan Nelson]

Originally Posted by Keith Forman

It really depends on the exact problems you are having. If it is just one or two frames on occasion, you can live with it. Two frames could be cut out and never noticed. When it is a matter of more than that, it gets harder to cover up. Unless it should happen between shots, that would be a stroke of luck! Just cut around it ;)

Yeah but I did get one bad tape...

The first tape might have been just a fluke and since then, I have seen these small glitches. Not a big deal as long as they dont consume the whole tape.

That is why I havent called JVC or allowed them the time to help me. Right now, I am just on alert. I still hate those glitches though!

If I get more bad tapes then I will give JVC the chance to fix the problem.

[K. Forman]

You might just need to run a head cleaner through it a few times.

[Jonathan Nelson]

Originally Posted by Keith Forman

You might just need to run a head cleaner through it a few times.

Not a bad idea.

I will have to try that soon. These are brand new cameras but I guess it couldn't hurt.

I will have to research the best cleaning tape for this beast.

If I get this thing working perfectly, I will make sure to let everyone know.

[Joe Carney]

I'm beginning to think I'm the only hd100 user in Northern VA. That can't be true can it? hehehe

[Tim Dashwood]

Originally Posted by Bill Edmunds

Just read this in Filmmakermagazine.com. What gives? Is my brand new HD100 going to crap out? What are these "failures"?

Bill,

I finally read the article you quoted in the thread title and frankly, I think this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. I'm sorry I didn't get to this sooner.

For those who haven't read the article it is actually pretty informative. (I've added the link to the #1 post as well.)
http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/spr...ems/my_hdv.php
The only issues I have with the article is that the author mentioned every other forum except dvinfo.net (even though we are purportedly the #1 destination for HD100 information) and that the information is the sidebar is incredibly out of date.

Was it fair of him to state that "Stories abound of HD100s failing for various reasons?"
Yes....but he should have made it clear that as of the publishing of the article you cannot purchase a HD100 in the U.S. - you can only purchase a HD100A, which solves the typical SSE, mode switching and firewire issues reported earlier on in the life-cycle. He mentioned that the update to the "A" model was being offered free of charge, but I think he should have researched a little deeper and stated that the update fixes most the aformentioned problems.
I think it is fair to say that with the current QC in place most of the HD100A units shipped will be problem free. As with any product built by humans and robots there will be some units that have isolated issues, but not because of design or manufacturing flaws (as suggested by the article.)

I also found his statement of "no image stabilization - a real problem" a little weird since the HD100 won hands-down in the Texas Shootout as the steadiest camera because of its balanced shoulder mount design.
The other weird statement was that the body mass was small - causing it to shake. Doesn't the HD100 have the most body mass of all of the HDV cameras, XLH1 included? Odd.

My other little pet peeve with that sidebar is that the notes were not "comparitive" and seemed negatively unbalanced towards the HD100 (although he seems to favour it in the main area of the article.)

[Jack Walker]

Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood

I also found his statement of "no image stabilization - a real problem" a little weird since the HD100 won hands-down in the Texas Shootout as the steadiest camera because of its balanced shoulder mount design.
The other weird statement was that the body mass was small - causing it to shake. Doesn't the HD100 have the most body mass of all of the HDV cameras, XLH1 included? Odd.

This is easy to figure. Though it was not stated specifically, the steadyshot comment probably compared the HD100 to a Z1U when jogging and holding the camera out in front of you by the top handle.

The balanced comment probably compared the HD100 to a full-size broadast camera when running backward down a D.C. street while trying to get a comment from a belligerent politician.

However, used appropriately, the HD100 is better than both of the others.

The HD100 is not best-of-class of the wrong classes, but it IS best of class of its own class.

[K. Forman]

I agree, when it works, it is fantastic. Even though I'm still getting to know it, I know that we will have a beautiful friendship. As long as it works right. What can I say? I'm a fickle friend.

[Drew Curran]

Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood

Bill,

I also found his statement of "no image stabilization - a real problem" a little weird since the HD100 won hands-down

This is one mans opinion I suppose - If he'd actually spent some real time with the HD100 he would see that OIS is not an issue. The weight of the camera plus IDX battery kit keeps it very stable.

I had worries about this before I got the camera. But since using it in my first 'real' shoot, I find that its not a problem at all.

I've talked to a friend who owns an XL2 and he turns OIS off 90% of the time.



Andrew

[K. Forman]

If you have seen my shoulder shot footage, fully zoomed out, you would understand that there are some things OIS wouldn't help. I don't blame the camera for that at all... I blame too much caffiene.

[Brian Luce]

As a guy whose had a few issues with his HD100 and also had issues with the DV500, I'd still say hopskotching around video forums and then proclaiming that "Problems Abound with the HD100!!" is NOT the way to make assessments about the relative QC and reliability of this camera. It's not scientific, it's gossipy, it's flat out stupid and a true disservice to the people trying to make informed decisions about where and how to spend hard earned money.

[Drew Curran]

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

As a guy whose had a few issues with his HD100 and also had issues with the DV500, I'd still say hopskotching around video forums and then proclaiming that "Problems Abound with the HD100!!" is NOT the way to make assessments about the relative QC and reliability of this camera. It's not scientific, it's gossipy, it's flat out stupid and a true disservice to the people trying to make informed decisions about where and how to spend hard earned money.

well said Brian!

[Bill Edmunds]

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

I'd still say hopskotching around video forums and then proclaiming that "Problems Abound with the HD100!!" is NOT the way to make assessments

I don't think anyone is doing that here. My original post was in reaction to a magazine article. It was the author of the article who said these things.