New Model GY-HD200UB, NOW REC 1O80I 50i and 60i

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL101623

NEW UPGRADED MODEL

GY-HD200 "B" now includes 1080i recording to optional hard disk via IEEE1394!

* Multiple frame rate recording: 720/24p, 25p, 30p, 50p, and 60p
1080 50i/60i available through IEEE1394 output
* Compact Shoulder Professional form factor
* Wide choice of lenses and accessories
* Optional HZ-CA13U Prime Lens adapter
* Built-in image flip recording when using prime lenses
* Built-in 14.4V type Battery Mount
* Dual-media (tape +HDD)recording with DTE
* Next generation super-efficient MPEG-2 encoding
* Enhanced Cinema Gamma
* Advanced 14-bit A/D converter
o Lower noise in low light
o Better highlight handling
* BNC connectors

I think that it is a new version of firmware, this firmware allows the exit by firewire to a hard disk DR-HD100 1080i, if it is certain to the users of the series hd200 them to be able donwload this firmware new

Ola Javier, thanks for the info.

Actually I don't understand why simply adding 1080i out via IEEE makes this a whole "New Model"??? They must be feeling left out over there at JVC after the "real" new models put out by Sony & Panasonic. Surely this is just a 200U with a minor firmware upgrade, hardly worthy of all the hoopla (unless you're recording to a HD100.) If the 1080i also went to tape it would certainly be more worthy of praise.

Does any one know if the new Sony CF Card recorder that they're selling with the new Z7 & S270 captures the Pro-HD Series frame rates?

JT

If I'm not mistaken, the BNCs are new as well. THAT makes this much more appealing to me. Now I can call this a serious camera for my multi camera live switched rig.

If I'm not mistaken, the BNCs are new as well. THAT makes this much more appealing to me. Now I can call this a serious camera for my multi camera live switched rig.

The 200 has always had BNC component out. For serious live multi-cam switching you really want SDI & TC I/O which is only available on the 250 with a sticker price just shy of $11,000.00

I've gone through the specifications & technical data on the JVC site and based on the info they've provided the only thing different I can find between the old and revised model is the following statement:

" For shooters requiring 1080i, an encoded 25Mbps (HDV2) signal can be output through the IEEE1394 interface for recording to an external device such as the DRHD100GB100. It is not possible to record 1080i to tape. "

See:
http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/tech_desc.jsp?model_id=MDL101623&feature_id=02


JT

I think this is very important upgrade to the camera and definitely worth the new designation. The fact that it records the 1080i signal allows it to mix in with a lot of other productions, regardless of the fact that it's not to tape. The bulk of hd cameras out there are 1080i so this is a big step. I applaud jvc for moving in this direction with their equipment and offering these types of options.

I like that fact that they focus of the use of the hard disk recorder and I think that's a good move.

I hope this helps them to sell some units at NAB over the next couple weeks.

Ben

I have a gy hd 250chu but i have shot very little in hd since i got the cam a year ago. The company I do work for isnt ready for hd yet but they might in the future. They purchased Canon xl-h1s for their shooters. A question, will the hd 250 output to the jvc external hard drive in 1080i also?
Also, how do the jvc gy HD 250 w 17x lens compare to Canon XL-h1 with 20x lens.
Thanks

" For shooters requiring 1080i, an encoded 25Mbps (HDV2) signal can be output through the IEEE1394 interface for recording to an external device such as the DRHD100GB100. It is not possible to record 1080i to tape. "
T

OK -- where does the 1440x1080 signal come from?

The chips are 1280x720 -- and pixel shift is not used.
Is this an up-scale of 720p50 and 720p60? Which would mean the resolution remains the same as 720p50 and 720p60 and only the number of pixels carrying detail changes.

At the same time -- each frame is output at two fields.

Thus, the recorded 25Mbps is 1440x1080 with 50 or 60 fields that have no interlace artifacts. Why would we want this signal?

I'm not sure we would. But, the news organizations have been buying tons of 250's with the Focus recorder. Someone must be very interested in using 1080i in their newsroom. This gives them a way to do this. Now their HD NLE's (Avid?) will have a signal that can be used as is.

How does the Focus recorder deliver HD-SDI?

And, if the DSP can create 1080i -- how much harder would it be to modify the VTR to record both HD1 and HD2. And, then output via HD-SDI. To be announced at NAB for later delivery?

A question, will the hd 250 output to the jvc external hard drive in 1080i also?
Also, how do the jvc gy HD 250 w 17x lens compare to Canon XL-h1 with 20x lens.
Thanks

Mark, looking at the JVC site they only seem to have introduced this feature in the 200U. If they want to be really good sports then they should make this 1080i improvement available to us users as a firmware upgrade (as I understand it both the 200 & 250 are essentially the same camera barring the additional HD-SDI & TC I/O on the 250.)

I don't know how good the 17x lens is but surely it can't be as bad as the stock fuj glass so it should compare very well to the Canon (keep in mind even though the Canon has a 1440x1080 imager.

JT

OK -- where does the 1440x1080 signal come from?

The chips are 1280x720 -- and pixel shift is not used.
Is this an up-scale of 720p50 and 720p60? Which would mean the resolution remains the same as 720p50 and 720p60 and only the number of pixels carrying detail changes.

At the same time -- each frame is output at two fields.



I think that's something that should be asked of the reps at NAB for sure. If I had to guess I'd say they probably do like you said and just cross convert the 720 signal. I don't see any other way. Still, it has to make life a lot easier for people who need to output in 1080i or intermix with 1080i footage because you save the step of converting everything in post.

I think that's something that should be asked of the reps at NAB for sure. If I had to guess I'd say they probably do like you said and just cross convert the 720 signal. I don't see any other way. Still, it has to make life a lot easier for people who need to output in 1080i or intermix with 1080i footage because you save the step of converting everything in post.

So if it's merely upconverting can't that just be done in post?

So far this a big disappointment.

Mark, looking at the JVC site they only seem to have introduced this feature in the 200U.

I missed the "only 200." Which suggests that perhaps this is a preemptive message to the 200 owners that they shouldn't be unhappy if there is a new hi-end JVC announced.

Perhaps there will be a 250B or 270 that will record 1080i. Or, have 1440x1080 chips which could record all 720p formats plus all 1080i formats.

Remember the JVC 7000 that was to do both 720p and 1080i and use CMOS chips? Could JVC be going to buy 1/3-inch EXMOR chips? Perhaps there will be a 500 as well.

Didn't someone post there were no 250s available?

Is the 200 built on the 110 chassis or the 250 chassis?

So if it's merely up-converting can't that just be done in post?

So far this a big disappointment.
The JVC marketing department must have been hounding their developers to come up with something new to compete with the other manufacturers. Which could explain why they are advertising it on their web as "New Model". Unless Steve Mullen or one of the other gurus on this board can come up with why there is any difference to working with the 720P and up-scaling at render, I don't think we should be breaking out the Moet Chandon just yet.

Steve, the 200 uses the same chassis & power arrangement as the 250.

JT

Steve, the 200 uses the same chassis & power arrangement as the 250.

JT

Then why not a 250B? I'll bet the 250B gets a new transport that records 1080i. Plus HD-SDI.

There are practical reasons to record an HD2 to tape -- a cassette that can be read on Sony and Pana VTRs. This is useful for news orgs.

Because the 250 can be used in the studio -- 1080i HD-SDI output is critical.

So the independent get his/her 1080i via FireWire. The 250 buyer gets 1080i tapes and HD-SDI.

I'm hoping for a $3,600 to $4900 held-hand camcorder.

So if it's merely upconverting can't that just be done in post?

So far this a big disappointment.

If it is only uprezzing from 1280x720p to I assume 1440x1080i then it saves a weird but minor step in Avid MC/Xpress. I would more interested if they came out with a solid state recording option. Overall, I agree with Brian, not really a big deal to me.

Cheers.

Can someone from JVC jump in here please and give some clarity?
It would be nice if it is a firmware upgrade for the people who invested in this camera HD2xx series.

I would HOPE that it's a firmware upgrade, instead of a replacement model, but I'm not holding my breath after an introduction like this.
It's not a huge feature, since I believe 720p is better acquisition format, BUT I do work with a variety of producers and some will want 1080i to match other footage or other requirements. Transcoding in post isn't always an option, or in the time/budget space.
Now, if it could put DVCPro-HD on to the firestore, THAT would be handy. I have to transcode that for 2 of my clients frequently.

firmware upgrade now for user series hd200. please JVC i´ll hope it.

"it saves a weird but minor step"

"some (producers) will want 1080i to match other footage or other requirements"

It's about time. It saves time by not making the conversion step, and time is money. If you deal with conversions on even a semi-regular basis, then this should be good news for you.

Also remember, there are people who swear by 720p and can list fifty seven technical reasons why it's the better format. Then there are other people who swear by 1080i, and they can also list fifty seven technical reasons why ITS the better format. It's a moot point. It really boils down to personal preference and content requirements. But in this day and age, it's becoming critical that broadcast grade gear can shoot in either format. This is the first step towards a dual format capture for jvc and that's big news if you like this camera lineup and want it to continue.

If you look at todays workflow, yeah, it may not be much of a big deal. A couple conversions here and there, it's only your time. But if you look ahead two and three years from now you'll find that all pro-grade cameras are going to need this capability in order to support a varied client base. If you don't have a multi-format system, you can still get the work done, but you'll spend a whole lot more time doing it.

I use an HD250 with a Firestore in the Promotions department of a 1080i news station. Having 1080i recording to Firestore will be a big time-saver and a potential increase in visual quality, considering upscaling 720p footage to 1080i inside Final Cut Pro might not be the best way to tackle it.
The News department will REALLY benefit. They have to edit on laptops in the field and are under an enormous time crunch. Eliminating any cross-converting step will be very helpful. And to be honest, most news photographers are new to NLE editing in the first place--the whole 720p to 1080i thing is foreign to photographers who have been shooting SD DVCPro for years. So to them I see 1080i recording to Firestore as very good news!

JVC is giving one of these away to some lucky person at NAB...

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=852714&postcount=50

If in doubt, just ask...
I got a reply within hours using JVC Pro's question form:

"For our end users who purchased either a new GYHD200U or GYHD200CHU non-B model on or after February 1, 2008 and would like to have the 1080 50i/60i IEEE 1394 output capability, JVC will offer a free modification of their camcorder through JVC Professional Service until June 30, 2008. Specific details of this modification will be posted on May 1st, 2008 at the JVC Pro web site. Unfortunately, we cannot upgrade models purchased prior to February 1, 2008.

For more information, please contact your JVC district sales manager."

From this, I presume that their is some hardware change. I suspect that it isn't IMPOSSIBLE to upgrade the older models, but perhaps IMPRACTICAL for costs and time their techs would need. But, we'll know more next month, maybe before if our friendly company reps check in here. It's good for the company, if there will be a few disappointed 200 users. Take solace brethern - who'd a known it was possible anyway?

That package with the 17x, Anton Bauer, plate and the DR-HD100 is a darn good deal!

I was expecting the tape transport to go away and be replaced with a hard drive in the 320G rangein the same space... I can wish - right ! then you could record at higher bit rates like 35mbits which would be a very big deal and worthwhile. seems like it'll be another 6-12 months before a new model comes along thats a major step up. of course NAB could always hold a surprise announcement too, but I guess its wait and see. I'm not complaining too loudly though, because it means my 100 is still quite relevant and current enough.

meanwhile sony is selling EX1's as fast as they can make them. I've tried it. other then the really excellent LCD and MUCH wider lens, its not that big a deal.

I was expecting the tape transport to go away and be replaced with a hard drive in the 320G rangein the same space... I can wish - right ! then you could record at higher bit rates like 35mbits which would be a very big deal and worthwhile.

Clearly JVC can do this as that's how my JVC HD7 works. Up to 30Mbps VBR, no reason it couldn't go to 35Mbps. And, use the codec from the 220/250 to get 60p.

That's enough number crunching for 1080i30.

The next jump is double codec performance to get 1080p60 with a disk bandwidth of 60-70Mbps. 80Mps is only 10MB/s which is not all that fast for a 120GB disk.

Power, heat, and the possible need to use two codec chips are the difficulties.

After speaking with my authorised JVC service rep yesterday, I was told that the upgrade is just a piece of firmware that is downloaded. I'm arranging to have my camera upgraded at a cost to be determined (I have a 4 week old 200U model which is not covered by Australian warranty) so I'll find out more about this upgrade tomorrow, and especially if it is simply a firmware upgrade what prohibits ordinary pro users from doing it themselves.

I'm sure that 200U owners who bought their cameras just before February 2008 would be very greatfull if this were possible.

Has anyone else spoken with their JVC rep or have information that is contrary to this?

JT

Thinking more about getting HD2 out of recorded 720p -- how is it done?

Normally, the 720p bit-stream is pulled from tape and sent out FW.

To get to HD2:

Is 720p decoded to baseband then scaled to 1080i and then encoded to HD2 and then sent out via FW?

This requires two codecs running at once. When JVC went from 30p to 60p they used a "new" codec. Does anyone remember if the new codec was actually a pair of codecs working together for encoding? That would mean EACH codec encodes 1 Megapixels at 30Hz. (The aggregate is 1 Megapixels at 60Hz.)

If this is the case -- then it's possible only ONE codec has been used for decoding and the other one has been idle during playback. And, the new firmware routes the signal though a scaler and into the second codec. This codec is encoding 2 Megapixels at 30Hz. (Which makes me think the 200/250 was designed from day 1 to work at 1080i.)

This leads to 3 conclusions:

1) Each JVC codec can encode at least 1440x1080, and likely 1920x1080, as long as the frame-rate per codec is not greater than 30Hz.

2) If the sensors -- or DSP -- supplies a 1080i signal it can be encoded by a SINGLE codec and recorded.

3) So if the sensors -- or DSP -- could supply a 1080p signal it could be encoded by using both codecs. Essentially, working just like it does now with 720p60, except the resolution is greater.

Which raises the question -- can miniDV tape record 50Mbps? Since DVCPRO 50 does this, there is no reason a tape based camcorder can't move-up to 1080p60. Still working with MPEG-2.

And, since JVC already uses a pair of CCD "chips" to get EACH color, by now it's possible these chips could be expanded from 640x720 to 960x1080. So the 60p output would automatically become 1920x1080. That means only the image processing needs to be able to handle 1920x1080 at 60Hz rather than only 1280x720.

This means a 1080p60 is very possible -- perhaps a "500."

The JVC authorised service centre got back to me today and confirmed that turning a 200 into a 200B is a simple firmware upgrade just like the existing ones they have available on the JVC Pro website, and there are no changes required to the hardware, however, in my case because I have the U model (USA) I cannot get it upgraded in Australia because JVC are not making the US model firmware available to Australian service agents, which for me means sending the camera back to the USA (so much for living in a global village!)

Maybe once the hoopla of all this "new model" hype subsides we might see this upgrade available on JVC's firmware update web page. Fingers crossed!! I'm certainly not happy about having to send my 30 day old camera half-way across the world for something I can do in less than one minute right here.

JT

That is good news, if it would be a firmware upgrade only.
Hopefully also for European models.
Definatly a question for next week at NAB.

JVC can only upgrade HD200s purchased on or after 2/1/08? That makes no sense. What are the differences between a camera bought on January 31 and one on February 1? I bought mine last summer. What could they have possibly changed in that time? It's still an HD200U.

JVC can only upgrade HD200s purchased on or after 2/1/08? That makes no sense. What are the differences between a camera bought on January 31 and one on February 1? I bought mine last summer. What could they have possibly changed in that time? It's still an HD200U.

I would say that there is no difference between the cams however what they mean is that they can only upgrade cams bought after Feb 1 for "free". People that bought their cam before this date will probably have to pay a minimum hourly rate to have this upgrade done.

JT

I would say that there is no difference between the cams however what they mean is that they can only upgrade cams bought after Feb 1 for "free". People that bought their cam before this date will probably have to pay a minimum hourly rate to have this upgrade done.

JT
That begs the question, ¿Will this firmware upgrade have any relevance in relation to Convergent Designs' XDR?

As long as the bit-stream is standard HD2 -- anything that inputs HD2 should work.

One question -- does Device Control work when the camcorder is outputting HD2?

By that I mean both Timecode output and VTR Control.

Has anyone seen 1080i footage created on a 200 series cameras? Is it good quality 1080i or are there serious artifacts?

what is the lux on this camera

Rob.

what is the lux on this camera

Rob.

Rob, it's just a 200 with a firmware upgrade. There is no other difference between the U & UB (or E & EB for Aus.) models; i.e the lux is the same as the existing models - hence why some of us have been a little disappointed at what JVC has decided to call a "NEW MODEL". I'm not a big Sony fan, however the announcement of the PMW-EX3 is worthy to be called a new "NEW MODEL".

Just the thoughts of a dumb consumer...

JT

This is not a firmware upgrade. It is a camera modification, that it why it has to be send to a JVC service center.

This is not a firmware upgrade. It is a camera modification, that it why it has to be send to a JVC service center.

Where did you hear that?

I got my information after speaking with my local JVC service rep.

JT

JVC product manager at NAB

JVC product manager at NAB

Did they tell you what was involved in the upgrade? (I ask you this because I actually asked them to tell me specifically what was involved and they said firmware only.)

Okay, we'll have to reserve further speculation until they make their official announcement, as stated on their website:

" Specific details of this modification will be posted on May 1st, 2008 at the JVC Pro web site. "

Hi James.

From the information I got it is very strait forward...send the camera for a modification....

Lets wait for as you wrote for May 1st.

Thanks.

J.

So what does the 1080i feature in the Video Format do? Is that for shooting live video?

I would say that there is no difference between the cams however what they mean is that they can only upgrade cams bought after Feb 1 for "free". People that bought their cam before this date will probably have to pay a minimum hourly rate to have this upgrade done.

Exactly. For those of us who bought our camera in the last 3 months, this is a courtesy service.

The response I have from JVC (published earlier in this topic) also supports that this is more than firmware. If it were only firmware, there would be no reason to withhold it from all 200 series users.

I suspect there is a relatively minor parts upgrade - maybe a chip exchange or something. They are willing to do this work for the recent purchasers to save dissatisfaction with their purchase, but it would be challenging to deal with all the 200's sold. Probably dealing with this group of previous owners has to be strategized. If it can be done for a reasonably priced, fast turnaround upgrade I'll want it, since I deal with producers needing specific formats frequently. Having the "current" model will be attractive to many of us of course.

Glen - I think it's pretty clearly described. You get 1080i HDV through FW so you can record live to a DR-HD100 (or the new flash beast). Not to tape. This format would be compatible with Sony HDV footage projects, and also native for many HD cable stations.

Well, the website lists the upgrade as a hardware enhancement. So much for a simple download fix.
I called JVC and they couldn't tell me why my HD200 purchased prior to 2/1/08 can't be modified. They only stated that my camera wasn't eligible. Very frustrating. I mean, what's the freakin' difference between a camera ordered on January 31st and one on February 1st???
I have a call in to the area sales rep and my local rep. Maybe they can provide answers.

Patience, Glen. JVC is considering how to best respond to the legacy owners. As I posted before, it's been clear for awhile that there is a modification required. It remains to be seen whether this will be practical for legacy owners, but clearly it's more of an issue for JVC to appease recent purchasers, as is common throughout the tech industries.
I suspect it may become available for a price, which even if high, would settle most of us down into a more practical analysis of how much the feature is worth to us rather than merely wanting the latest and greatest because it's there.

There was a JVC demo here in Jacksonville, FL. I wasn't able to attend, but the salesperson I bought my HD200 from asked the JVC engineers if it was possible to upgrade an earlier 200 to output 1080i to a Firestore. He was told NO, the cameras CANNOT be modified. The engineer was telling him why, but they were interrupted, so he never got a satisfactory explanation.

Well, there you have it.

My GY-HD251 left today for the modification.
Will report my findings when camera is back.

Thanks.

Johnnie

There was a JVC demo here in Jacksonville, FL. I wasn't able to attend, but the salesperson I bought my HD200 from asked the JVC engineers if it was possible to upgrade an earlier 200 to output 1080i to a Firestore. He was told NO, the cameras CANNOT be modified. The engineer was telling him why, but they were interrupted, so he never got a satisfactory explanation.

Well, there you have it.

Cannot because of current company policy, as stated here a month ago. It isn't PHYSICALLY impossible.
Mu suspicion is that the cost would be extremely high, charged at normal service rates. There would be a custom small-order chipset and parts, and hours of work at $150 each. So it could easily be a $2000 or more modification with a lower priority turnaround. (replacing a blown firewire costs $2000). Offering the mod at a high price might get even more complaints. So it's likely simply not financially practical.

I'm interested to hear reports about the 1080i cameras - new or modded, and how this footage matches with Sony 1080i native cams. I suspect that that it looks great in comparison (but I'd still keep a progressive workflow if it's under my wing).

But can it record to tape and hard drive at the same time? Perhaps 720 to each in case there is a failure? And, this would be dreamy, could it perhaps record 1080i to the hard drive while simultaneously recording 720 24p to the tape?

Thank you for your input.

But can it record to tape and hard drive at the same time? Perhaps 720 to each in case there is a failure? And, this would be dreamy, could it perhaps record 1080i to the hard drive while simultaneously recording 720 24p to the tape?


Regular modes can be recorded to both tape and drive at the same time of course - it's a preferred workflow for many of us as the tape is an efficient backup of our raw camera master.
It's an interesting prospect to go 720p to tape and 1080i to drive. This would mean that the 1080i encoding was done simultaneously with a different chipset, and chose in the firewire output menu.

I doubt the direct 1080i output is better quality than transcoding from 720p, but it sure will be a lot faster and less resource intensive!