Who designed and tested HM100?

[Tim Dashwood]

Originally Posted by Dan Thomson

I see that Robert Rogoz has had a forum thread pulled. He made a direct request to JVC for information on firmware upgrades. This is too bad, because I firmly believe JVC should respond to this issue, one way or another. Roberts request for information was valid and of high concern to readers of this board. Pulling the thread simply allows JVC to keep their collective heads buried in the sand.

That wasn't Robert's thread it was Andy's. I promoted it to sticky because yes JVC does review this board and yes they do find our wishlists helpful. Almost 100% of the items on the now infamous HD100 Upgrade Wishlist made their way into the HD200 and HM700 series cameras. Wishlists are useful and we should start a separate one for the HM700.

What isn't worth posting is a direct challenge to a representative of a manufacturer like JVC and expect him to address or acknowledge anyone's specific pet peeves in an open forum. It's not going to happen. We have worked hard to provide a unique environment where representatives from various manufacturers contribute valuable information as often as they can, sometimes even when it is outside of their purview. We don't want to upset that balance, especially when we have regular JVC contributors from the U.S.A. HQ like Dave Walton & Craig Yanagi. It's fine to express your disappointment in features of a product and suggest remedies but lets keep it professional.

BTW, we have never pulled a thread or post just because it was a negative review a product, even if that company buys banner space at DVi. If there is merit in any comment it stays. If it is presented in an unprofessional way it may be edited (which is why I pulled Mr. Walton's name from Andy's thread.) Everything else is subject to DVi policy.

[Chris Hurd]

As Tim points out, we did *not* pull that thread -- instead, we promoted it as a top sticky:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-gy-hm...-wishlist.html

This thread is Robert's thread. Obviously it hasn't gone anywhere either.

[Robert Rogoz]

I think issues raised with HM100 are more then just "pet peeves". I think they are very major technical issues. Unfortunately some of them can't be resolved without changes on camera body (like filter thread, exposure dial and so). However there are other major technical issues that can be fixed with firmware:

safe area for 16x9 and 4x3 shooting

1/120 shutter speed for 720/60p shooting

These 2 things are a major oversight on the part of manufacturing and testing. JVC never advertised interval shooting or histogram on HM100, so in my opinion it would be unreasonable to expect this. However the 2 issues mentioned above go way beyond this. They are the norm and standard on majority of higher end consumer cameras in the past couple of years, and I think it makes this camera somewhat unusable in a professional environment.
I don't expect JVC to answer directly to complaints, however a good PR goes a long way. I would urge JVC to acknowledge some of the issues and assure the customers that the steps will be taken to improve the product.

[Tom Hardwick]

We're maybe being a bit harsh on this camera because of it's price point, and because Canon and Sony have got us used to bigger than 1"/3 CMOS chips. If taken at face value the HM100 does what the designers set out to do, they've made a camera that can go unhindered where something like a Z1 would be turned away.

I still don't get Robert's .'safe area for 16x9 and 4x3 shooting'. The camera is 16:9 and presumably the v/finders show what's safe. Are you saying that when switched to 4:3 the v'finders are not pillarboxed? So when did any of you out there switch your HDV or HD cams to 4:3? If you switch the HM100 to 4:3 you can kiss any wide-angle coverage goodbye.

I'm thinking it's probably an ok camera, it's just been given the wrong street price for the spec. Just when cameras were moving towards three (much needed) switchable NDs, this camera reverts to the TRV900's one.

tom.

[Dan Thomson]

Originally Posted by Dan Thomson

I see that Robert Rogoz has had a forum thread pulled. He made a direct request to JVC for information on firmware upgrades. This is too bad, because I firmly believe JVC should respond to this issue, one way or another. Roberts request for information was valid and of high concern to readers of this board. Pulling the thread simply allows JVC to keep their collective heads buried in the sand.

My apologies for this reply. I see Tim has posted a sticky regarding this topic. Way to go Tim.

I don't want anyone to think I am beating up on them or being hypercritical. When I realized the sticky had been created, I corrected the post (see above). My confusion arises because Tim renamed the sticky and I did not realize it was the aforementioned thread.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

I'm thinking it's probably an ok camera, it's just been given the wrong street price for the spec. Just when cameras were moving towards three (much needed) switchable NDs, this camera reverts to the TRV900's one. tom.

If -- and I'm not saying some of the points raised aren't valid -- these issues are serious enough to prevent serious shooting, how would they become less problematic if the price were a $1000 less?

The camera control system is essentially that of the consumer HD7. I used that camera for several years and the fact it cost about $1000 didn't make me any happier with the ackward exposure control system.

Perhaps "price" is an issue for some because IT rather than hands-on-before-buying testing was used to set buyers' "expectations" about what the camera SHOULD be.

Given the yen/$ ratio and the difficulty Japanese companies are having making a profit -- price is much more an indication of the total revenue NEEDED to meet company goals in relation to the number that can be expected to be sold. Which itself is typically a function of what the competition offers -- not some absolute indication of feature set.

So the question is "what are the alternatives?"

I know of only one and with it you are getting AVCHD. If that is acceptable to you -- then that MIGHT make better sense -- given it is only $2000.

I think the primary goal of the HM100 --was to get a SMALL XDCAM EX SDHC camcorder on the market as fast as possible. And, generate as much revenue as possible given demand. To do this, the HD7 was used as a base. Many of the things we want were I'm sure on JVC's wish list too. But, time and money have no doubt delayed these wishes until a design started with a clean sheet of paper can be brought to market.

When demand lowers and IF the tiny Pana cuts into sales -- I would expect the price to drop. I'd love to see a $2000 version with a standard handle. (The Pana ships without the mic-handle at $2000.)

[William Hohauser]

$1500 HD three chip CCD camera? Are there any out there? The only $1500 HD cameras I know of are single chip CMOS.

The HM100 deal breaker for me are the lens controls. There's no way I will struggle with a single ring for focus and zoom. The placement of the menu buttons, and what not, are a pain but once I'm shooting I need manual control over the focus and zoom at the same time. The complaints in this thread are legitimate but where did the idea come from that a pro camera has limited lens control?

The interesting and sad thing is, JVC has never really made a decent small camcorder. Their DV models were always poorly designed in some way. Yet their full sized pro cameras have been well thought out and decently made for their price range as with the HM700. The HM100 seems to continue the JVC trend of poor small camcorders. If they come out with a HM200 with improved lens control, I'll be interested.

[Robert Rogoz]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

If -- and I'm not saying some of the points raised aren't valid -- these issues are serious enough to prevent serious shooting, how would they become less problematic if the price were a $1000 less?

I think for a lot of people it would be much easier to write it off as bad purchase and simply ditch the camera. Yen vs USD aside, usually a complete silence is not the best PR policy in most cases.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Robert Rogoz

I think for a lot of people it would be much easier to write it off as bad purchase and simply ditch the camera. Yen vs USD aside, usually a complete silence is not the best PR policy in most cases.

I can't believe folks would buy a camera without testing it -- or trying one at a show. The HM100 was at CES and NAB, and dozens of smaller shows.

Who in their right mind believes anything said at a show by anyone. No one at a show knows anything about what will ship except those in Japan. These are common sense ways of doing business -- like not buying from certain dealers.

And, if you failed to "check and test" before purchase -- why buy from a dealer that doesn't allow at least 7-days for a return. Years ago I tried a JVC HD10 from B&H and returned it without any hassle. In only a few days I knew it wasn't "enough better" than an HD1. All these HM100 issues could have been found in a day of shooting.

If you thought an HM100 was a tiny, cheap 700 -- you had to be deluding yourself. In the day of multiple internet reviews, how could anyone say they didn't know how the HM100 worked.

PS: If you thought an HM100 was a XHA1 -- because "someone" told you it was, that's a really sad reflection on your ability to comprehend the world.

[Chris Hurd]

Easy does it folks. Let's please not make this personal. Thanks in advance,

[Robert Rogoz]

I second that. Since there is a "HM100 wish list" maybe you can just close this one, as it looks like some folks have too much steam under the hood.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Robert Rogoz

Since there is a "HM100 wish list" maybe you can just close this one, as it looks like some folks have too much steam under the hood.

I agree. Done. Thanks all,