GY-HM100 v. HV30

Alex Humphrey · November 20th, 2010, 06:17 PM

hmmmm I wouldn't worry too much about pixel shifting... Sony & Panasonic has been pixel shifting for decades and frankly broadscast isn't full resolution either. (1080i on DirecTV and Dish is about 1,000 x 1,000 on many channels for instance) Lots of new field non capture devising coming out. Just read about the Aja Ki Pro Mini that records ProRess 422 for $1,999.... hmmmm

so REGARDLESS, you should make sure any camera you get has outputs that bypass the encoder so you COULD get some sort of nano recorder. hmmmmm... 2K and get CLEAN 720p at all framerates on my old JVC HD110...... hmmmmm...Guess I don't need an HPX 500 for another couple years then.. hmmmm

Dom Stevenson · November 21st, 2010, 04:09 AM

If you're concerned about BBC guidelines, the way to go is the XF Canon range that shoot in 422 50 mbs. Whether the smaller xf100 gets the thumbs up, we'll have to wait and see. However you don't need to tell them the project wasn't shot on the larger camera.
The BBC have been using Z1's and A1's for years on doco's and reality TV stuff.

Concerning the Nanoflash. Why spend 2 grand on a box when camera's are available that shoot in a broadcast friendly format for a similar price?

Not sure how fast you need this camera, but i'd be looking at the arrival of the XF100 in January. In fact, having played with one in London recently, i'm looking to get one myself.

Hugh Raggett · November 23rd, 2010, 10:35 AM

Thanks Dom, very interesting reply. But is 50Mbps broadcast friendly - when the BBC guidelines state a minimum of 100Mbps for HD.... Also along comes The Ninja HDMI device at a much cheaper price than the Nano...Always something new out there!

Martyn Hull · November 23rd, 2010, 11:36 AM

A lot of BBC news and drama pictures look inferior to my HV30/550Ds there is a lot of moaning at present about overall quality.

November 23rd, 2010, 11:36 AM	#19
Martyn Hull Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: England Posts: 444	bbc A lot of BBC news and drama pictures look inferior to my HV30/550Ds there is a lot of moaning at present about overall quality.

November 20th, 2010, 06:17 PM	#16
Alex Humphrey Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: california North and South Posts: 642	hmmmm I wouldn't worry too much about pixel shifting... Sony & Panasonic has been pixel shifting for decades and frankly broadscast isn't full resolution either. (1080i on DirecTV and Dish is about 1,000 x 1,000 on many channels for instance) Lots of new field non capture devising coming out. Just read about the Aja Ki Pro Mini that records ProRess 422 for $1,999.... hmmmm so REGARDLESS, you should make sure any camera you get has outputs that bypass the encoder so you COULD get some sort of nano recorder. hmmmmm... 2K and get CLEAN 720p at all framerates on my old JVC HD110...... hmmmmm...Guess I don't need an HPX 500 for another couple years then.. hmmmm

November 21st, 2010, 04:09 AM	#17
Dom Stevenson Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: London UK Posts: 430	If you're concerned about BBC guidelines, the way to go is the XF Canon range that shoot in 422 50 mbs. Whether the smaller xf100 gets the thumbs up, we'll have to wait and see. However you don't need to tell them the project wasn't shot on the larger camera. The BBC have been using Z1's and A1's for years on doco's and reality TV stuff. Concerning the Nanoflash. Why spend 2 grand on a box when camera's are available that shoot in a broadcast friendly format for a similar price? Not sure how fast you need this camera, but i'd be looking at the arrival of the XF100 in January. In fact, having played with one in London recently, i'm looking to get one myself.

November 23rd, 2010, 10:35 AM	#18
Hugh Raggett New Boot Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Montpellier (France) Posts: 22	Thanks Dom, very interesting reply. But is 50Mbps broadcast friendly - when the BBC guidelines state a minimum of 100Mbps for HD.... Also along comes The Ninja HDMI device at a much cheaper price than the Nano...Always something new out there!