This is a request JVC to implement enhancements to the GY-HM100.

If you have been reading this forum, you know most of us like the idea of the HM100, but we are frustrated with some of what we feel are serious short comings that should be able to be fixed by a firmware update.

Refined zoom, somehow this should be able to be improved in firmware, perhaps as others have suggest 'zoom speed settings'. But also reducing the lag in the manual zoom wheel, it's pretty much impossible to do anything with any fineness with that thing.
1/120 shutter speed for 60fps
LCD 'flip' mode for use with 35mm adapters.
Histogram
Intervalometer
SD gridlines in LCD and viewfinder
Safe area gridlines in LCD and viewfinder
Interval Shooting
Focus and Zoom display parameters


This is by no means a complete list but just a few that I have found on the forum.
I am sure others will add to the list.


Implementing these enhancements would not only improve the camera, but improve JVC's relationship with its customers.

If JVC has no intention of providing firmware updates, we would at least like the courtesy of being notified that no further firmware updates are planned or forthcoming.

Thank you.

If JVC has no intention of providing firmware updates, we would at least like the courtesy of being notified that no further firmware updates are planned or forthcoming.

Thank you.

This would be much appreciated by me as well.

5. Intervalometer
8. Interval Shooting


This would be something HM700 owners, such as myself, would like as well.

Have Fun,
Jim.

I have revised the title of this thread and made it sticky.

I would also like to add a feature request I've heard mentioned often.


Hard wired remote port (LANC or otherwise)

One important thing for the HM700 will be
Time-Lapse-Recording, the other histogram.

-HDV-out via Firewire, not only SD.
-ProRes422-Recording

But also nice will be a CA-Correction
with the next firmwareupdate.

Let us wait for the next JVC invention
with the next firmwareupgrade.

-HDV-out via Firewire, not only SD.
It already does that... but you need to record in the SP bitrates (19 or 25mbps) for HDV compatibility.
-ProRes422-Recording
The ProRes bitrate is too high for practical acquisition of documentary, event, or news. I would instead wish for XDCAM EX in a 4:2:2 variant (XDCAM HD 422)... but that's really a request for Sony.

I made some tests, the output over the firewire is only DV,
not HDV, downscaling works only with 19 and 25 Mbs.
The manual says the same!
I can work as HDV direct in a FCP-sequence
when I use the files direct from SDHC-card.

Many people think, the next upgrade includes
MP4 like HM100, but an XDCAM-codec like xdcam hd422
will be the best solution on work with 10x SDHC-cards.

The HM700 doesn't have to downscale to DV via firewire in 19mbps and 25mbps modes. It can also output HDV at 1280x720 or 1440x1080. It cannot do this in 35mbps modes because that bitrate is outside of the HDV spec. You make the choice of either HDV stream or DV downconvert to NTSC/PAL by flipping the DV/HD switch.

I don't quite understand what your saying with your second statement? The HM700 can also record XDCAM EX in the MP4 wrapper if the SxS adapter is attached. The HM100 wraps XDCAM EX in either MOV or MP4.
With Class 10 media XDCAM HD422 is the logical next step. The question is whether Sony will ever license it for SDHC or allow it onto the SxS media? Maybe there will be a XDCAM EX 422 in the future?

Pixel masking in the HM100 also would be very very very appreciated..

fixing hot pixels by pixel masking methods or any other way using the menus (as in HD100) ourselves without having to send out the camera to the dealer everytime.

I would also like to see the issue of the lens fixed. It could be solved by designing a wide angle attachment with threads for filters and plastic housing for sun shade.

Please?
My 100 looks way cool with it's supplied plastic shotgun, but I now have to shell out for a Rode or similar to replace the supplied toy microphone.

Charles

Well in fact they should just not include that shotgun, and drop the price. I agree. I'm a sound person by trade, and that mic is insulting. Cheap, it feels like a toy, and is hissy beyond use except for recording the very loudest stuff where the noise floor would be down very very low. But I replaced it right away, and might as well toss the plastic one away.

That was a joke, and ultimately made them look even worse I think. I mean, I couldn't believe how hissy that thing was. If this was again, a consumer camcorder, including a mic like that might be useful, and added to a $600 camera might have even seemed a bonus. But adding that P.O.S. to a $3500 camera as if it's 'Professional' to match the camera, sorry, that was a bad move.

I'm most interested in this thread in finding things that could be improved for those of us that HAVE the camera. I know a remote port, and reworking the threads on the lens, these are important. But won't give us that already shelled out thousands of dollars any satisfaction.

But in that initial list at the top (most of which was borrowed from my post, which I guess I feel is a tad rude, but OK whatever) could be accomplished in firmware. Let's hope that JVC sees that they have a restive group on their hands who really feel a tad ripped off here.

Someone else pointed out, would I really be less unhappy had I paid $2000, and the answer is most certainly. I understand that there are price points and features cost money. But this was NOT a cheap camera. And the fact is, that label 'professional' on the side, just because it's using XDCam compression, isn't enough. As so many are pointing out, a Professional camera intrinsically has certain features built in. Histogram. Gridlines i the viewfinder. Intervalometer. A USABLE ZOOM! :)

At this point I certainly can't recommend this camera to anyone. And until JVC somehow responds a bit to us (if they're really reading these forums) not sure I can recommend JVC at all at the moment. Like others, I simply want to know, does JVC ever plan to address any of these things, or is this camera locked off feature wise. If so, I have to sell it I think, and take a huge loss, which will make me probably wary of JVC forever.

It's all a real shame mostly because this camera really does have some great potential. It's just not there yet. Not for any Professional use.

Tim, unfortunately LANC controller can't be added- however lens issue can be fixed with redesigned lens converter imo. Simply design a wide zoom through converter, with proper filter attachments up front and with sun shade. I would also urge JVC not to charge owners of HM100, but do it as a service (or at labor/parts costs), as this is a bad design issue.

Tim, the original intent of my note was to list things that could be fixed in firmware.

I said in my note the list was from items I found on the board, and yes most were from your thread.

I did not mean to be rude.

(if they're really reading these forums) They really are reading these forums. Trust me.

a Professional camera intrinsically has certain features built in. Histogram. Gridlines i the viewfinder. Intervalometer.

These are all VERY new items for cameras IMHO.

Until the EX1, I'd never used a camera with a Histogram. Gridlines? Well, IMHO there should be action safe and 4:3 safe. Anything else is gravy (and I do like gravy...). Intervalometer? I wouldn't argue if my camera had it but it's pretty much a niche effect and I can understand why a manufacturer would choose to leave that off ESPECIALLY when encoding to a long GOP MPEG stream. A strictly I-frame codec camera recording to solid state media? Yeah, I'd expect it.

Long-GOP MPEG and intervalometers don't mix. That should be obvious.

Since JVC is reading.

Instead of a coming out with an HM 110 with improvements to the HM 100, I would like to suggest an HM 200 (or whatever number you want). The HM 200 should be more like the HMC 150 or XHA1 with a more robust lense with 3 rings, focus, iris, and zoom with 72 mm threads raning from 14x and 28mm wide. 1/3 inch CCD's like the 700. A slightly bigger form factor. Mounting screw holes for accesories. Bigger LCD. Price it around $4,500.00 to start. And if Sony allows, record in mp4 and QT.

Cheers.

David, this sticky was started mostly for people, who already own this camera and are seeing major shortcomings, like lack of 1/120 shutter or lens issue. If I want a larger camera- size of HMC150 with XDCam codec I would have bought EX1. However the point of this camera is the size, but it looks like even the idea was a very good one, the things fell apart during the design phase. Lets focus on a topic at hand not a new design.
BTW Canon fixed a lot of issues with firmware, so did Sony. I think the only right thing to do is to address some of these issues by JVC. But for now I would like for users to stay on the topic instead of drifting into a field of new design and product pricing.

Long-GOP MPEG and intervalometers don't mix. That should be obvious.
The camera already shoots video size stills. It should be possible to program the camera to shoot these stills continuously at a selectable interval... so the result would be the same as using a stills camera (and the HM100 is already sold as a stills shooter, with special mode and everything).

This is a reasonable feature to add, and it won't compete with an other JVC products that I am aware of.

This is a reasonable feature to add, and it won't compete with an other JVC products that I am aware of.

The idea of HM100 competing with other JVC products is simply without merit. HM100 is a 1/4 inch chip size camera with rather limited lens (46mm). So the notion of this camera taking a share of HM700 is simply ridiculous and if it is promoted by JVC is down right self destructive. A 1/4 inch camera will never produce picture of 1/3 inch, as 1/3" will never produce as good of the picture as 1/2"... and so on. It should have exactly the same features, so the pictures could be matched.

David, this sticky was started mostly for people, who already own this camera and are seeing major shortcomings, like lack of 1/120 shutter or lens issue. If I want a larger camera- size of HMC150 with XDCam codec I would have bought EX1. However the point of this camera is the size, but it looks like even the idea was a very good one, the things fell apart during the design phase. Lets focus on a topic at hand not a new design.
BTW Canon fixed a lot of issues with firmware, so did Sony. I think the only right thing to do is to address some of these issues by JVC. But for now I would like for users to stay on the topic instead of drifting into a field of new design and product pricing.

Sorry. This is for JVC not you Robert. If this is offtopic then Chris or Tim can delete it. BTW, I'm about to receive my open box HD 100 from B&H. After I shoot with it on Saturday
then I guess I'm qualified to post my opinion?

David

I did not want to sound rude David, however what I would like to see is to have existing issues and design omissions fixed. I also wanted to point out that camera pretty much described by you already exists: EX1. It is about 1/3 larger and 2 times in weight, however it produces remarkable picture, hence even "stingy" Discovery Channel will allow it as a broadcast quality. I was amazed both by quality of footage and by quality of the unit. The camera used on the shot had almost 500 hours of usage and was never in the shop for a repair! The LCD is truly amazing- sharp. I am sure I will want to own one in the future, particularly with ability to avoid usage of SxS cards. BTW "rolling shutter" issue is overblown out of proportion, unless you shoot something like weddings. However in a light controlled settings I don't think it is an issue at all. So if you are looking for a camera described in your post: XDCAM codec, separate zoom and focus, sharp lcd and so, look no further and just buy EX1.

I am involved with shooting a pilot about Mt Rainier. Our permit allows only 2 people on a shoot at one time. I carried one time HVX200 all the way to the summit, my second and third trip we used HM100 above 10 000 feet. Huffing relatively small HVX200 with some sound gear and a tripod is a back breaking experience (you also have to add all the climbing gear, tent, food and cooking stuff): on my first trip my pack was close to 75lbs. That's the reason I was extremely excited about HM100. Now comes bad: HM100 lack of basic features and lens design. I spent over 30 minutes trying to screw on a polarized filter! Then the ND filter- why only one setting? For majority of folks it will not matter, but if you shoot on snow you need polarized filter, plus ND screw on, but this combo produces vinigating. Lack of safe areas for even 16x9 shooting eliminates my estimate if the edge of the filter will show or not. Then for some fast moving shots I switch to 720/60p only to discover there is no 1/120 shutter. Now these are HUGE design/engineering problems.

Long-GOP MPEG and intervalometers don't mix. That should be obvious.

I'm not quite sure what this means, that you have to have a camcorder with an intra-frame codec to record time lapse? I have an EX1, which is the same inter-frame codec as the HM100 (which I also have) it has a pretty decent 'intervalometer' or time lapse capability.

In addition, many camcorders feature still image capture, and many of those have intervalometers, for example, my Sony HC1 which is a HDV tape camcorder, but also has a an intervalometer for stills captured to it's memory card.

Anyway if 'intervalometer' means the above functions, yes, I'd really like one in my HM100, and I don't think it has it.

While I am just an amateur, I definitely vote for a better working zoom, gridlines, and intervalometer. Although I will probably be using my Nikon D700 for any time-lapse stuff.

The screw-on filter slot is definitely a joke, and the JVC wide angled lens don't have threads, though the lens hood does have 72mm threading.

Today I read the message from JVC, so many people want a better HM700 and JVC hear it and makes a new HM700-version, should be released after the IBC at Amsterdam.

Did a shoot this weekend with my new HM 100 as b-cam and a rented HM 700 as a cam.
First off the quality of both cameras resolution wise are close enough to be used together.
That in itself is pretty amazing.

However, i was surprised that the 700 had noticeably more noise in the blacks. It may have been the way the camera was setup, but at 0 db and 9, there was noise. The 100 looked cleaner in that respect. Maybe that is why the 700 is getting a new noise reduction upgrade. It really surprised me.

The 100 really loves red, I mean saturated red, but once I turned down red in white paint and color gain down, it looked closer to the color of the 700. Not exact but close enough for cc in Avid. But even then reds really popped on the 100. Overall, though it makes a nice picture.

A lot of people have made reference to the zoom control, but I thought it was comparable to the Canon XHA1. I don't zoom except to line up a shot anyway.

However for me, i do wish the focus/zoom ring was a focus/iris ring. The iris button on the back isn't bad, but out of habit I kept grabbing the ring (in auto focus) and of course i would zoom unintentionally. This really does suck. For professionals, an iris ring is much more important than the ability to zoom with the ring.

So, overall it is a great broadcast quality camera that is really small, but for my wish list:

Please change the ring to be a choice between focus, zoom, and iris control.

Thanks, David

Today I read the message from JVC, so many people want a better HM700 and JVC hear it and makes a new HM700-version, should be released after the IBC at Amsterdam.

Can you tell us anything more? Like a whole new camera, or more firmware updates?

JVC in Germany say new model,
but it's a firmware upgrade to version 301
with MP4-recording on the SDHC-cards without
the KA-MR1000 SxS-Adapter, further new DNR
and the wellknown update for 10x SDHC-cards
known from the firmwareupgrade to V201,
end of august '09.

I was wondering if we are going to hear from JVC on issues raised in this topic. HM700 had one important firmware update to unlock recording MP4 to SDHC cards. I was wondering if the company is taking any steps to fix some of the issues with HM100 raised in this topic or if it will just leave us stranded because we didn't spend enough money?

I was wondering if we are going to hear from JVC on issues raised in this topic. HM700 had one important firmware update to unlock recording MP4 to SDHC cards. I was wondering if the company is taking any steps to fix some of the issues with HM100 raised in this topic or if it will just leave us stranded because we didn't spend enough money?
Or, we already _have_ spent enough money, and that's the end of it.

Perhaps the purpose of the HM100 was just to get a quick cash input, and that's that. Not unheard of. Take an existing consumercamera, make some cheap mods, call it a "Pro" camera, borrow a bit of new technology from the flagship HM700 and stick that into the consumer mod camera, toss in a few consumer accessories, push hard with some full page ads for a couple of months, get some friends to post favorable early "reviews, and voila, a nice profit for the quarter and time to move on.

Kind of like a big studio pushing out a very bad "block buster," shutting out any previews for legit reviewers, grabbing the cash the first weekend, and move on.

Well in fact they should just not include that shotgun, and drop the price. I agree. I'm a sound person by trade, and that mic is insulting. Cheap, it feels like a toy, and is hissy beyond use except for recording the very loudest stuff where the noise floor would be down very very low. But I replaced it right away, and might as well toss the plastic one away.

Tim - unfortunately this is the standard even for "pro" cameras. The reason being is no pro ever uses the top mic to record anything other than natsound. If you shoot interviews or sound pieces for a living you'll want your own gear anyway, or you'll use a professional soundie.

I shelled out a few bucks for a Rode NTG1 and I use that as a top mic as I found it absolutely useless as a shotgun. I then went out and bought a Senheisser 416 to use for interviews, plus lapels radios etc. So the point is where would JVC stop? Any decent mic is going to push up the price of the camera considerably. Instead JVC have elected to do what Sony do and include a throwaway as the top mic. It probably adds less than $5 to the price of the camera.

Give it some thought and I'm sure you'll come to the same conclusion. Not really a firmware issue either. Tim D - you might want to split these posts out of this thread to avoid clutter.

Or, we already _have_ spent enough money, and that's the end of it.

Perhaps the purpose of the HM100 was just to get a quick cash input, and that's that. Not unheard of. Take an existing consumercamera, make some cheap mods, call it a "Pro" camera, borrow a bit of new technology from the flagship HM700 and stick that into the consumer mod camera, toss in a few consumer accessories, push hard with some full page ads for a couple of months, get some friends to post favorable early "reviews, and voila, a nice profit for the quarter and time to move on.


I'd have to agree, after all, JVC is charging $500 for an SD card cataloging/storage case. Which is just plastic sleeves, paper, and a cheap case.

JVC | ProHD Media Sleeve (25 Sleeves) | 25PPROHDINV | B&H Photo (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/629618-REG/JVC_25PPROHDINV_ProHD_Media_Sleeve_25.html/mode/edu)

I'd have to agree, after all, JVC is charging $500 for an SD card cataloging/storage case. Which is just plastic sleeves, paper, and a cheap case.

JVC | ProHD Media Sleeve (25 Sleeves) | 25PPROHDINV | B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/629618-REG/JVC_25PPROHDINV_ProHD_Media_Sleeve_25.html/mode/edu)
Actually, it appears not all of those are included for $499.95... since under the photo of the case it says? "Shown with Optional Equipment." Or maybe it's the dividers that are optional equipment, not the any of the things you mentioned.

I would like top stay on the topic, so JVC actually listens. I would like to see at least some issues fixed. However I would like to remind JVC companies live and die every day, and at this day and age no one is too big to fail. If we- the users stop buying your product your shelf life might be quite quick. It has been now quite a few weeks and I hope there is an update to fix some of the issues soon.

What do you guys expect from a 3k camera. The HM100 produces far better images than any tape based camera in the same price bracket, and I have used most, if not, all of them. Sure there are niggles with the cams operation, mainly, to me, the exposure control, but hey, you just adapt to the fact that you adjust exposure from the back of the cam, rather than a lens ring. The work flow and image quality way outweigh, for me anyway, any design faults that this cam has. If we want all the features of a fully pro cam, we have to pay an awful lot more for it. The quality of the mic is mentioned quite regularly, when did any of us not discard the mic supplied with a new camera, for our already owned, Sennheiser, AT, Beyer or Rode mics. At 3k the HM100 does exactly what I want it to. It took a while to get used to it, but once we got aquanted the cam works, for me superbly. Bottom line is, if we want a cam with all the bells and whistles, dig deeper in the wallet

Image quality- my old HD100 produced almost as good of a picture as HM100, for me the main reason is size is portability. Regardless, I think the issues go way beyond "niggles", like inability to put a polarized filter onto the lens- regardless if it is a $200 or $3500 camera. The same with lack of 1/120 shutter speed- one of the reasons I bought it is for 720/60p. So why isn't there 1/120 shutter, only 1/100 and 1/250? It's obvious you are much better camera op, since a lack of safe areas on LCD is non issue for you.

It's obvious you are much better camera op, since a lack of safe areas on LCD is non issue for you.
Probably, (he says, tongue in cheek) But surely Robert, you checked such features as filter fitment, safe area indications, shutter speed options etc before making the purchase. I dont use the LCD for anything other than replaying footage, and even for that its crap. I purchased the cam, and any other cam I have ever owned for picture quality, and I stand by my statement that for the 3k price it takes some beating. I use it regularly alongside an EX1 and for the price paid, I cant fault it. I am not a JVC fanboy, in fact I have used Sony equipment, solely, for the last 23 years. I have no regrets regarding the purchase of my HM100. I went into it, having checked and tested the cam extensively, with my eyes wide open.

Hey, nobody held a gun to our heads and ordered us to go out and buy this camera. Tell me about any cam in this price range that some people wont find something they dont like about. The bottom line is we dont have to buy anything we dont want to. Its no good making a 3k purchase, without having thoroughly tested it, to see if it meets the purpose it is intended for. If it doesnt meet those needs, buy something that does.

I think this thread is not just to voice our dissatisfaction with the HM100, but to also provide JVC with some feedback from professionals about what they'd like to see in a professional camcorder of this form factor. The reason I think that some people who purchased the HM100 are so vocal is that the HM100 was promoted as a "Pro" camcorder, by JVC, a 'breakthrough.'

In many ways it was and is, and is unique it the size, codec, and sensor. There is nothing else like it out there.

I think what we're puzzled about are some of the seemingly boneheaded decisions by JVC on things that could have been fixed in firmware or with small changes in the design. I'm sure there are lot of variables in manufacturing something like this, and as somebody who has some experience in manufacturing and software development myself, I know sometimes you just can't put in all the 'bells and whistles.' You just run out of time and you've promised the public a release date. Also in this economic climate sometimes things just stay on the drawing board because it's just too expensive to make changes when you're trying to cut costs and save money.

So I'd like to keep this thread focused on the issues about the camcorder, how to make this version better with a firmware upgrade, or help JVC make the next version better. I don't regret my purchase decision and use the HM100 all the time, I'd just like some of these issues resolved for the next firmware update or the next HM100. If they came out with another one with the key features, size, codec, CCD, and included all the suggestions here, I'd buy another one.

I think this thread is not just to voice our dissatisfaction with the HM100, but to also provide JVC with some feedback from professionals about what they'd like to see in a professional camcorder of this form factor.

If JVC was going to offer a firmware upgrade, it would have done so. Things like the lace of frame lines is purposeful.

JVC made a miscalculation on the HM700 with the MP4 hobble it put on that camera, and it had to make a change to keep customers (and really annoying early purchasers who got duped into buying the SXS add-on).

The hobbles on the HM100 don't fall into the same class and won't be changed, I predict.

Contrary to other things JVC said, the HM100 was an adaptation of a previous consumer model, and the design flaws were inherited or the adapted body wasn't suitable for more reasonable accommodation.

However, it is also likely the JVC designers working on the HM100 are not top notch, and thus some of the problems.

Also, even though JVC has a history of being "first" in some areas (first HD camcorder), it also has a history of being inferior to offerings from other companies such as Sony and Canon (again, first HD camcorder).

Of course, even the big guys can take shortcuts, such as the sound problem on the PD150. However, in this case, the camera was revolutionary and bullet-proof enough that an aftermarket fix was developed. I doublt anyone will take the time to hack the firmware on the HM100 to fix some of those problems.

Canon has dealt with a problem on the XH-A1 in a straightforward and honest way... the hand strap anchor that breaks free under constant use. Canon put out a notice and is fixing any cameras without any kind of a run-around.

Whether it's the designers level of skill and fore thought, a cost saving problem, or what, JVC seems to built in a few major problems with each model, such as the too easily blown firewire port, impossible to change fuse, and always break viewfinder on the HD series. Not to mention the inferior 16x lens... a lens that is way less good than the built-in lens in competing prosumer camcorders selling for less (Sony cameras, XL-Hx, etc.)

The JVC standard seems to combine an innovative vision with unnecessary design flaws and insulting hobbles.

I am sorry, and I realy dont want to drag this thread away from its original direction. But I feel it is turning into something of a witch hunt. I cant believe that every one here has purchased an HM100 for 3k without satisfying themselves that is would meet their needs, and expectations. As I said before, the camera does fall short in some areas. But I, for one was more than aware or these shortfalls before I purchased. An analogy, I need 4 wheel drive vehicles to work on my shooting ground, I dont go out and buy a sports car, then moan about it not being any good in woodland and rivers. I buy the vehicles, ie, equipment that will do the job for me. I know a camera that ticks all the boxes, (well most of them), its called an EX1, and it costs over twice as much as an HM100. I use them both, together regularly, and am more than happy with the results from both cameras.

Colin, not everyone lives where you can just test the camera. For me it's about 2 hour drive to the nearest dealer. I had a test scheduled for this camera, but JVC was very slow to ship to this part of the US- they were shipped several weeks after B&H already received them. So with a project scheduled I had to buy it from B&H, have it shipped here, set it up and go on a shoot. A lack of 1/120 shutter speed is like buying a 4x4 truck just to find out it doesn't have a transfer case. Also inability to screw filters on and off is like buying a car without wheels- doesn't get you very far. Like I mentioned before- these are issues I would like to see resolved, some of them are just a matter of firmware update. JVC was very vocal prior to the release of HM100, I find it very interesting none of them is addressing these issues at all.

Points taken, Robert. I agree, as I have said in previous posts, that the design and functionality of the camera could be improved on a great deal. But having said that, a lot of people reading this thread are being put off by only the negative points of view of the cam. I to, would welcome any firmware updates to improve on an otherwise superb little camera, that gives amazing picture quality.

I agree with all the drawbacks on this camera, especially the zoom ring and rocker zoom, lanc control and something like making OIS a "User" definably button. I guess I have small fingers, I don't really have trouble putting in a filter and removing it, I just carefully drop the filter in place, and screw it on. We are all left speechless on why the filter thread is recessed, perhaps the 46mm thread is only meant for the wa lens and the lens hood 72mm is meant for filters?

For me, even with these drawbacks, and comparing to the other camcorders in the current market, I would buy this again in a heart beat!

JVC - I'd like one of your consumer based cameras to record in .mov at the same rates/modes as the HM100.

I need 3 cheaper cameras to abuse in difficult conditions and it is very hard to record at 50p with the HM100 as no consumer cameras will do this etc etc etc, I don't want to strap a £2800 camera to the chassis of my vehicle as I drive across sand dunes ;-)

Please make my life easier so you have the large HM700, medium sized HM100 and then a smaller consumer based camera or two all recording in the same formats etc!

This is a request JVC to implement enhancements to the GY-HM100.

....

Thank you.

A good list of requested enhancements.

To add to Andy's list I'd say extra focus aid would be good. The HM100s aid is quite good but sometimes doesn't work for me. I'd like to see focus magnification as in the Sony HD cameras.

With regards the HM100 in general, I don't have the same problems that some others seem to have with this camera. Its got limitations but then so does everything else. It's small, light, it shoots full HD in progressive and it does QT to SDCard – nothing else fits the bill at this time. I'd like to see JVC improve it and continue their commitment to challenge the big three in HD cameras.

This thread has remained unchanged since November 2009. In this thread their are lots of excellent suggestions for JVC to implement in a firmware upgrade, yet, here it is February of 2010 and not one improvement on the original camera.

I am really disappointed with the effort JVC is putting into this product. Compared to Sony or Panasonic, who continually upgrade the EX and HPX lines, the sound of silence from JVC is deafening.

Just my two cents.

Dan, we're always looking into making our products better, but there is a difference between implementing new features and a firmware upgrade.

When products are brought to market, they are built to perform within specifications where all of the components are capable of operating at a optimum functional level.
Firmware upgrades are designed to provide improvements to performance, and we've released a number of since the introduction of our camcorders. I hope you've been able to implement them as most of our users have.

Feature additions and changes are more complex and entails all aspects of the operation as well as the physical capabilities of the product. There are instances where certain features cannot be combined with others. As a reference point, the implementation of the XDCAM EX codec and .mov file wrapping capability is extremely complex.

Yes, this is an over-simplification, but I hope you understand the core of the message.

In my view, contrary to popular beliefs, there is no "conspiracy theory" about manufacturers holding back technology willfully. Having worked for two professional product manufacturers, one of them being Sony and managing the DVCAM line as well as the launch of HDV, I can tell you that the product engineers and designers ALWAYS "give it their all" to bring a model to market to the best of their ability. This is the same understanding and respect I give to all professional product manufacturers.

We really appreciate the constructive input being provided by the participants of DVInfo as it has given us invaluable feedback and insight for our future product design and feature implementation. I believe the progression from the GY-HD100 to the HM Series is a good indication of how far we all have come.

And, yes, we are constantly working to bring a better product to market. Thanks very much for your ongoing interest and support.

Sincerely,
Craig

Thank you Craig for replying with a well thought out explanation. You have reassured me that JVC does indeed listen to it's customers.

The previous 4 pages of this thread indicate many requests and I acknowledge most of them fall outside of the "firmware" upgrade path. They are actual modifications or additions to the original design.

My gripe with JVC has to do with the speed control of the zoom lens. It is virtually impossible to predict the outcome of the zoom speed making it difficult to "pull" the zoom at any speed other than "full out". I need some way to preset the zoom speed. This is a basic function of any prosumer grade camcorder and an absolute necessity for working professionals. Given that the HM100U has three ways to control the zoom (stick, ring, and rocker), it is hard to fathom why the zoom control response curve is so tight.

That's it. The flimsy threads for the filters, no LANC port, low light performance, all of these items I knew about when I bought the camera - and for these items I accept responsibility. But the zoom control issue cannot possibly be "within specs" and it needs to be addressed in a firmware upgrade or as a warranty item.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

Yours truly, Dan Thomson