I made a brief phone call to a Norwegian vendor today saying that the JY-HD10U was due to be release in Pal format in November, he had little information about it yet, I signed up for more info whenever he receives it.

Does anoyne have any info on a PAL version yet?

Is the Mpeg 2 artifacts in the ntsc version worse than anything I see with normal DVD (mpeg2)

I am concidering using a pal version for this camera to shoot a feature film project, my other alternatives would be 16mm, or pro HD.

The JVC is by far the cheapest option, but also the "lightest" in setup etc...

Any info is appreciated, I have seen a few stills from the ntsc version posted in these boards, I would love to see more, any links appreciated.

(I currently use the Panasonic dvx100, and/or arriflex 16bl) aside from whatever I rent when I need it.

The actual pal version is not HD, I suppose you will get the same one.

I think a lot of people (indie film makers) would not bother about the NTSC version if the PAL could shoot 720/25p.

There are many links to pix and video on this site.

As well as many dicussions of pix quality.

Even details on the PAL unit.

Remember, if you are always going to present on HD equipment, you can use the NTSC version.

Seems to me that the PAL version might be better in terms of eliminating the "eye tracking" problem. Since its top quality setting is 625p50, you're only talking a 10% loss of resolution and you're gaining the entire shutter speed spectrum for use. Sounds like a good trade-off to me.

It loses a bit more than just a 10% loss of resolution... The NTSC version is 1280 x 720, for 921,600 pixels. The PAL version will be 720 x 576 (so-called 625 lines) for a total of 414,720. The PAL version will have less than half the resolution of the NTSC version.

To me that makes the PAL version completely obsolete, I would opt for any other camera but this one....
I already have the Panasonic DVX-100, which I am very happy with, I was looking for a cheap option to 16mm...

>>To me that makes the PAL version completely obsolete, I would opt for any other camera but this one....<<

The PAL version will probably have the best 16:9 of any sub $3,000 dollar camera. Think about it, you are getting a TRUE progressive 16:9 image at 25 fps, that's not something that the PAL DVX 100 can even do.

...in mpeg format. I'd take the DVX 100 any day.

I'd have to agree the DVX100 even without native 16:9 is simply a far better camera for either PAL or NTSC work.

<<<--
The PAL version will probably have the best 16:9 of any sub $3,000 dollar camera. Think about it, you are getting a TRUE progressive 16:9 image at 25 fps, that's not something that the PAL DVX 100 can even do. -->>>

Of course it can, if you add the anamorphic adapter...

I would think that the PAL version would be the perfect point and shoot camera. No more tracking problems, no need for ND filters.