Hello Everybody,
I have been posting some questions and looking for help here on the forum deciding which camera to buy.Lot of people told me to wait until the NAB to see what is happening...since not too much is happening right now in the HDV world I am still here without a camera.And I have a big decesion to make and I need some help.JVC HD10U or Panasonic DVX-100 (A) ???? Cannot decide...
I really like the JVC for the extra resolution but this is the only positive things I can come up on the side of the JVC cam....However on the other side is 3chip,plenty manual control,24P....but SD....!
I am a beginner but studying and would like to make travel films and documentaries for now...I like the film look and not much a fun of the video lookwhich DVX would be useful becuse I saw nice film look images..I didnt see too good looking JVC images so far.
Will the DVX be enough in term of resolution for what I am looking for ??? If needed I am ready to buy matte box,filters anythings i can imprrove my images...I am planning to start on the Caribbean this summer for a documentary and than in the Fall in Venice,Italy..
Any help and suggestion is welcome...anything ....I am ready to buy but which one ...I have no idea...!!!
Thanks
Gabor Lacza

This is a common question, here's an answer:

If you can wait, wait. If you need to buy now, buy now. A better camera doesn't always equate a better videographer.

And buy what you can afford.

heath

DVX100: 4:3, or lose resolution even further and impose more restrictions by using an anamorphic adapter to achieve 16:9 image ratio.

HD10: native 16:9 image ratio.

Heath,
thanks for your reply...I can afford any of the 2...but which one ...that i dont know...

Alex,
what do you mean impose more restrictions by using an anamorphic adapter ???
So for only the 16:9 JVC is better you say ???
Gabor

<<<-- Originally posted by Gabor Lacza :
Alex,
what do you mean impose more restrictions by using an anamorphic adapter ??? -->>>

Can't zoom all the way through like with the orginal cam's lens, for one.

I hate to say this, but the DVX100A may help you out more. Editing with HDV is still tricky, at least for Apple users.

But if you want real good quality, try the HD10.

Read this review by pro DP Jon Fordham. (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19828) And this one, too. (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17040) He uses the DVX100A all the time, and shot stuff with the HD10 with me.

heath

Well I will read thorugh this ....I read it once but now I will read it again hopefully it might help me to make a decesion.But if I remember well he wasnt a fan of the JVC..

There are many pros and cons to the HD10, and one of the biggest cons is chroma noise. The biggest pro is the image quality! Don't ever forget that, because image is everything. But so is your skill as a videographer!

heath

Well after reading through all that I am more confused now than I ever was..hahahah....Jon didnt liked the camera that much that is for sure as he stated that for 99.9% of video acqusition he dont recommend the camera.But many other do like it...

Jon and I do admit the quality is nice, but we'd like some things to change on the camera. Think about it like this, consider all thoughts:

HD10: Great image vs. chroma noise (more prevalent in low lights) vs. not-so-manual controls.

DVX100A: Good image and manual controls plus 24P vs. not HD.

That's what I recommend; it is then up to YOU to decide the camera that is right for you. I'd also try and contact a dealer to set up a test.

heath

Here is how to figure out what to get:

Ask yourself: What is going to be viewing mode of your video?
How is it going to be shown?
DVD ? Film ? Home computer playback ? Digital projection ?

Only get the JVC if you are doing digital higher definition playback, or computer playback, or home HDV playback.
If you are making a DVD , you don't need the JVC.
If you are going out to film, it's a toss up. Personally I'd do the JVC for film as I like what it looks like converted to 24, I don't like fuzzy films.

So what is your stuff for? That will help you choose the camera. And remember, it's not the camera. It's the filmmaker.
-Les

Right on, Les, though I'd argue, as would HDV JumpStart Training producer Darren Kelly, that acquisition for a DVD can use the HD10, or any high quality, low cost camera.

heath

Thanks guys really for all the help and suggestions so far...
Les,
I would like it to be shown on different medium.I have HD projection in my house where i can show it in native HD but I would also like to make a DVD out of staff I film so i am sure it will be watched on tv as well.The reason I am falling for the DVX right now is the film look as 24p and the reason I am falling for the JVC is HD...I am planning to shoot travel videos and documentaries .At travel videos the HD would be better but I dont like that sharp video look usual 60i cameras give.I dont know how 30p would be better but I saw 24p DVX looked really filmic...
Also I saw some nice pictures of DVX with some nice short dof where you can play with the focus a bit where at JVC you have no control of it...
Here is where I stand right now....I have around $7k for the "package"...I just need to decide which package..

Can you achieve some good "film look" with the JVC or it will be always that strong HD look ???

With the shutter speed set slow, the 30 fps frames look a lot like film. The hardest thing to get is the short depth of field that film cameras usually exploit. Even adding a lot of ND to the lens does not seem to get much of that, but I don't think that's different than other video cameras.

Did anybody seen this website..it is japanase but look at those pictures.Especially at this one:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20030514/ez10.jpg

No depth of field ????
The website is about the JVC HD cam...!

Granted, on the telephoto end of HD10's lens, you get shallow depth of field.

Try moving to the wider angle and keep DoF shallow...

Also, who knows just how far the background objects were relative to the leaves in your pic. If they indeed were far enough, then naturally they'll be out of focus. Again, try to get shallow DoF on the objects that are relatively close to each other...

That's why you need a mini35 (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22456&perpage=15&pagenumber=3) adapter with any small-chip camera - otherwise the acquired video displays too deep DoF comparing to the movie cams, which gives away the video origin of the material.

Thanks Alex....so this JVC is not different than any other video cam in lack of shallow DOF...but as Heath said the image is great.

Correct. DoF is simply a function of the size of the optical image sensor (referred to as "chip" in my prev. post) the image is being projected onto.

35mm cameras have 24x36mm area onto which the lens projects the image.

If you go DOWN in size of that area, then DoF gets increasingly deeper with the same lens. This is simply the physics of the optical system and cannot be worked around, as I understand.

Bottom line: unless your digital cam has a large sensor comparing to the 24x36mm size (and none except experimental HD cams do), your cam's lens will be unable to produce movie-like shallow DoF. This is because today's affordable digital cams only use smallish optical sensor like 1/3" to maximum 2/3" in size. HD10 uses 1/3", for instance.

So the solution is to have an *additional* optical system that would project the 35mm lens's image onto the "Academy-size" :) 24x36mm screen, producing that sought after shallow DoF, and THEN shoot that screen's image with your digital camera.

See the link to one of such mini35 adapters' discussion in my prev. posts.

Thanks Alex for the explanation....the mini35 is great just a bit expensive at least for me...anyway I think I need to go with the JVC cam since the image is really great relative to dv cams.The DOF is almost the same like any other video camera and the "film look" at 30p is pretty good I heard.But I am still not decided yet..i still read around hopefull somewhere I will see a "sign" to help to decide.
Gabor

So after a few weeks of reading and learning about this camera i am still nowhere.You all say that manual controls not that good,audio is terrible ,chroma noise way too much but it is HD and the image is great so....not easy...
Anyway one more question..is it possible to convert the HDV footage to PAL ???
Gabor

Click on over to this posting about PAL. (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25039) As for everything else, it's still up to you, man. You can minimize chroma noise with more light, I've learned!

heath

Thanks Heath,
is this the only way to move from HD to Pal ?? For $1500??
Gabor

That i'm aware of.

heath

Well after all the readings and learning and hearing about the bad and good side of the JVC I still think that those HD images are wonderful and I think I will go for the JVC...My really big concern is now only how I will go from 30p to 25p PAL DVD...
Gabor

Gabor,
Try just letting the edit software do the conversion. I let Vegas do a 30 to 24 fps conversion, and was surprised that it didn't look too bad at all.
The 'normal' person looking at it would not notice.
The wannabe tech geek can spot the difference, but that's not who will be looking at the film.
-Les ( Laci in Hungarian )

I've set my mind on HD10 as well, though, I've read that JVC might come out with an updated version in the coming months. I cannot remember where I read that from, can anybody dispel or confirm that rumor?

I would say probably not; look for new HDV cameras in another year, though, from JVC and Sony (and Canon and Sharp, likely).

heath

If I were you I would go for DVX100,
but if I can I would wait for a month, until the full specs for GS400 come out.
From what we know, the cam processes 1mega frames, and tho it will not be HDV, it's possible to have some HD720 SD/HD solution if that will workout for you.... (especially in the light of the 3K$ 1080i HD Pana mockup at NAB, and 1GB SD)

it's much cheaper, and will not have the "look" or size of the pros...

here are the partial specs:

PV-GS400/NV-GS400

3CCD x 1,070,000 pixels
CCD size 1/4.7"
4 MEGA still (2304 x 1728)
Lens 58 mm
Leica Dicomar Lens
Crystal Engine
12xOptical Zoom
Telemacro Mode
MEGA O.I.S.

Pro Cinema Mode
High Picture-Quality Wide Mode
Colour Night View
Soft Skin Mode
Motion Video/Still Picture (1 MEGA) Simultaneous Rec
True recording 25 images/sec video MPEG4 (PAL version)

Multi Manual Ring
3.5" LCD Monitor
Air Soft Grip
Built-in Flash

4ECM stereo microphone
Wind noise decrease function

SD/MMC Card Compatible
USB 2 (HS Mode)
Webcam

Quick start
DV/Analogue In- and OUtput
MX500/DV953 replacement

I'd hate to start comparing apples and oranges, but here's what tipped the scale for me in favor of HD10 (in no particular order):
True HDV
High resolution
No jagged edges, no color smearing
True progressive scanning
Granted, some of the DV cameras provide these features and HD10 itself has its own specific problems (chroma noise, not-so-manual controls, etc), but there's no competition when it comes to resolution. My advise for Gabor would be that take a look at some of the HD10 footage posted to this forum, compare them to footage captured by your favorite DV camera and try to be objective :)

Bunch of clips to look at here http://www.dvinfo.net/jvc/media/

I'll be getting the HD10 in May.

Sten, thanx for the link... there are couple of pics that compare DVX100 with HD10, I still like the DX100 better.

and you are right.. no point of comparing 3CCD cams with 1CCD
;-)

Depends on the ccd, now doesn't it?
I have an 8 mega pixel camera that has a better picture than any 3 chip camera. Still camera, yes. Guess what's going to happen to video cams?

actually looks like 4CCD video engines =)
the RGB 3CCD + 1 emerald CCD