Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

A direct comparison with the X70 can be done only in 1080 (X70 @28mbps and jvc @50Mbps 422)

I don't even think about going to catalyst also because I firmly believe that there is no 422 50Mbps in the X70- since it looks exactly like the regular avchd @28Mbps). As you all know the XAVC-L of the X70 is the only format that doesn't work (still), while others do. so... there is no XAVCX-L with the X70.

That said the problem with the JVC is the lens. can't be used below 2.8 and over 5.6 . that's how it is. The noise is pleasant, salt&pepper but it will be the only hope in a church. at 1.8 the JVC looks blurred, because of the lens. Unusable.

so in the end the X70 is the better camera in low light because 2.8 on a 1" sensor equals 1.8 on the small sensor of the JVC. But you can't use 1.8 on the JVC while the Zeiss on X70 is first class pretty much at all the apertures.. Why JVC gave such a poor lens to this beautiful camera? I don't know. A better lens would've been a coupe of dollars more in mass production...
that even if the noise is better handled by the JVC.
A great camera destroyed by a poor cheap lens!
will I keep the camera? Yes. 4K is amazing @3.5
but again for a church I'd shoot X70 , absolutely.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Paul 3 stops loss in HD sounds about right. On top of that consider that there will be 2 more stops in 4K.
if the lens was decent @1.2 then maybe, but it's a 2.8 max 1/2.33 sensor camera. the rest is beautiful, ergonomics and everything, but that lens.....

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

ok, the guys @JVC did everything they could processing that little sensor. The software is state of the art. Hands down the best processing Ive seen in years. I can feel the enthusiasm, they gave all the good stuff. Then who decided to save few bucks on the lens?

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Thank you very much for confirming the compatibility of the 4KCAM 150Mbp/s H.264 files with Avid MC 8.3.1. Its always better that the compatibility is verified by our end users.

Comparison to the AX100 is best left to individual users (YMMV), but what can be said is that the image capture and recording capability of the GY-HM170 is equal to that of the GY-HM200 (sans the XLR audio input capability).

Regarding the brand, JVC is now the leading ENG camcorder company in the US based on overall ownership by the top 24 news production groups.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Craig. One of the features I find really unique on the JVC HM150--and I use it all the time--is the tele macro feature. Is this included on the HM200?? Thanks for being so hands-on here on DVINFO.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Regarding macro, you can be inches away from the subject and keep focus on the subject.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Well............seems the real package is the LS300, the HM200 is like a Ford Mustang V6.....similar style, but the engine is a turd. :(

Paul

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Size comparison of the Canon XA20, Sony PXW-X70, JVC GY-HM200, JVC LS300CHU, and just for comparison, the JVC GY-HM600/650

The lens on the LS300 is sketched on (artist rendition) and is probably shorter than what would be typically used. For example, with a Nikon or Canon lens and the Metabones adapter, the overall camera length would be longer than shown.

The concept of a modular cam is something to think about, especially one that can use a variety of lenses. When the lens can easily cost more than the cam itself, and 4K would benefit with good glass, then it seems it would make sense to go the modular cam route. Question: Since I haven’t considered a modular cam before, am I missing anything here?

Also, when one has several lenses and a modular B-roll cam, then lenses could be swapped around, and, a modular B-cam wouldn’t cost as much as a fully equipped cam.

A possible downside seems to be finding and using lenses, or lenses and adapter combinations, that work with a modular cam - things like focus, autofocus, iris, etc. Haven’t come across anything about how Image Stabilization works with adaptive lenses. Sony, Panasonic, and Canon have some good IS systems in their camcorders, some models better than others. This is another area for discussion.

The HM200 is looking like a good cam and it’s one that will work fine with FCPX. For a bit more, the LS300 looks interesting, especially with the Rokinon lens (promotion) added in at no cost.

Edit: The Canon is facing the opposite way because if it was flipped the wording would be backwards. Also, tried to line up the back of the camera bodies, not the EVF, with each model.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

not really. Something happened.... the HM200 has been saved by the 4K surprise of the lens performance: pretty good wide open (and 1.2). Only in 4K. (the lens is not good enough below f/2 in HD). That changes everything for what now I consider a 4K only camera. Just ordered 2 128GB card (U3). yes... in 4K is that good to deserve the cards. My opinion of the HM200 changed dramatically after I saw the lens @1.2 in 4K. WOW

about the LS300 I don't really see the point , if you think GH4. Yes better ergonomics but it's not like the LS300 is a shoulder camera or anything: needs to be held in mid air too so..... what's the point? The GH4 gives remote (lanc-ish) too for the servo zooms. what else? the sensor? I say HM200 for a camera ready now that does everything in 4K or the GH4 for the creative videographers (with or without a crew or movie sets : with crew: commercial and movies , without a crew: amateurs obsessed with the bokeh for the 2 minute boring youtube video with cheesy music)

and that's the marketing targets for those cameras in a simple sentence.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

I am confused.......the lens is not sharp enough for HD, but looks amazing in 4K? :-\

Paul

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Yes I am confused too!

Anthony, any chance of posting some quick test shots so we can see what you are talking about???

The way your recent post reads this does not make sense (to me anyway) but we really appreciate you sharing your experiences on here with this cam.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

LOL yes, that was a surprise, something that I would never guess and in fact I didn't even try 1.2 in 4K. It was a test that I did leaving the lens wide open by mistake. then I did it again, and again: in 4K 1.2 keeps a decent sharpness and contrast, very useable. hard to believe but that's how it is.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

it was hard to believe but then again lots of things happen in 4K, for example it gets darker (6DB difference from HD) , so why ? it's the same lens, no?

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Why is anybody proposing this - silly thread. A1/2.3 " sensor versus a 1" sensor - completely different cameras designed for different purposes. Different depth of field for a start..

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

These two camcorders are poised to attract the same potential buyer. There are many, including myself, who would be in a position to choose between the two, and a thread like this can sort out some of the good and bad points of each. I consider it valuable.
These cameras are both considered prosumer, they are about the same size and form factor, the same price range, similar picture quality, on and on. For these reasons I consider this thread appropriate and anything but silly.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Didn't mean to offend, you're right the specs are very similar. What I should have said IMO these cameras differ at the most fundamental basics - sensor size.
That will affect noise floor on the image, depth of field, dynamic range etc..
So the 1" sensor will be easier to throw the background out, but harder to focus. Better in low light and better dynamic range and probably less aggressive in camera noise reduction. 14million effective bigger pixels versus 9million so clear image zoom is going to be less artificial on the Sony as it doesn't involve pixel shifting etc..

So if you do a lot of shooting where you want everything in focus then choose the JVC - for a studio based situation the JVC may be a good choice, for live streaming it may be better than the Sony.
Me - I'd pick the Sony for most types of work. X-AVC 10bit 4:2:2 internal HD for green screen work is also a big plus IMO. Yes the colours are screwed out of the box but that can be overcome.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

A decent review of the JVC GY HM200. The video concentrates on the 1080P mode and some low light footage with gain examples.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

yes it's a bit dark in low light but in 1080 I can go up to 15DB with no bad noise. in 4K I am limited by the 30p but I can use f/1.2 , 1.4 , 1.6 (only in 4K) while in 1080 I can't go below 1.8. Notice the "cold" WB by default (it's like a JVC signature of the colors)

impressive little machine, after I couple of weeks I kinda understand why the guy wanted to publish a new video about it.

One more thing: the sensor read-out in 1080 is fast and gives smooth pans! Finally. not just less rolling shutter (that I did notice immediately) but also the typical blur that starts the moment you pan or tilt. The HM200 is hands down the best camera that I had in years regarding panning. outperforms even the EX1r for a fast pan. In 4K is a little more visible , but still better than other cameras in 1080!

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Kevin - That was some fine Internet sleuthing to come up with that link by Rick Young that you have in post #57. This gives us another good look at what this cam can do and the low-light portion with the different settings was very helpful.

There are still some areas of interest, like how well the 1/16 ND filter will work in sunlight on the water. The shot on the sailboat with the chrome winch was helpful.

Something on the optical stabilization would be of interest. Weight-wise, at 3.4 lbs with battery but without mic, this will fit nicely on my Glidecam 2000 because it is rated for up to 6 lbs, but the Glidecam takes time to set up and it isn’t always available.

I looked at some of Rick Young’s other videos and the Dedolight one at one of the shows was a good watch. Haven’t seen much on the Dedolight in the US and I really like my Ledzilla (with Sony battery). After watching the video, though, I’m ready to add a larger Dedolight or two to my kit.

Rick did some previous reviews with some pretty good cams but he seemed pretty impressed with the HM200.

“The devil is in the details” and we’re all looking for those details.

Edit: And speaking of details, Anthony, thanks for the info about Jello and panning. That's good to know and the jello thing is one thing I was concerned about since this isn't a 3CCD cam.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

blur panning (and tilting, but mostly panning) has been a problem since forever. Rolling shutter as well. Now I believe that it has very little to do with the cmos sensors or the (global) shutter. But with the speed of the read-out. basically the chips in charge of processing the sensor. In fact one of the major thing with the C100II is just that: they double the speed just for the blur panning. And regarding the RS why the alexa doesn't show it? why the F55 doesn't show it? one is global and the other is not.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Yes John, I have been lurking on the internet to find footage and anything of substance about the HM200. I am ready to retire my JVC GY HM150 and the Sony X70 and the HM200 both look interesting. There is not much out there on the HM200.
I would have liked for the review to be more comprehensive about some of the details, but it did offer a good glimpse into what the camera images look like. I am glad that this review was shot in 1080p because right now, that is what I am shooting. I thought that the images looked good. Comparable to the Sony X70 for sure and in 4K, comparable to JVC's much publicized LS300, which from what I have seen, has come up very short.
As HM150 user, the 200 looks very similar. Size, layout, etc. The reviewer said in both reviews, that the camera feels good in the hands and this is just how I feel about the HM150. Very well made and ergonomically right on. I can say for sure that the 150 and the 200 files (.MOV) are a real delight to work with. This is very important to me. Shoot, put the card in the computer and watch. Easy import into any edit program. I don't want to wrangle with files as the Sony X70 users seem to be doing.
I would like to know if both the LCD and viewfinder can be used simultaneously. They can on the HM150 (I really love this feature), but not on the Sony X70. Also, how is the LCD and viewfinder? The viewfinder on the HM150 is not very good. I notice that the 200 has not improved on the size of it and I am hoping that the quality of it is better. The LCD has been made larger from the 150. From 2.7 to 3.5, which is the same size as the Sony X70 if I am not mistaken. Lastly, for now, I am very disappointed to see that the built in lens cap of the HM150 is not on the 200. Why, why?? Get ready to lose some lens caps.
Anyway, if anyone out there has any additional insight and can answer some of my questions I would love to know. There is not one user review on B&H about this camera and it has been on sale for at least a couple of months. This is very intriguing to me and an indication that the Sony X70 is really outselling the HM200.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

My concern at the moment is about the "Re: X70 issue - recording froze up"

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

yes LCD panel and VF can be on at the same time. They are both "OK" but not spectacular, BUT they give a pretty close representation of what you'll get in the files. Sony makes the LCD panel look good but then the colors in the timeline are different, so thanks but no thanks. On JVC you can really calibrate colors, WB and blacks looking at the LCD knowing that's exactly what you'll get. The VF is small and lesser quality compared to theX70, but then again I can see everything corner to corner on the JVC , while on X70 the rubber gets in the way on the sides and you have to adjust the position of your eye. On JVC the diopter lever is cheap and needs to be calibrated all the time because loses the position. I had to put a gaffer's tape on it to keep it from sliding. The small oval eye cushion fit perfectly and makes things a little better.
about the pictures here's what I think: the X70 is a 28Mbps 1080 avchd camera (I don't buy that xavc-l excuse for a codec that simply doesn't work). the JVC is a 150Mbps 4K mov or avchd camera. big difference , in the pictures not on paper.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

I find it odd that JVC hasn't put up any footage. Its good to see this footage and to hear what Anthony has to say but it would be good to both see more footage and to see a more comprehensive review. One thing I'm curious about is how the dynamic zoom looks. Having that reach is important for some of what I do.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Anthony, stupid question here, but can you test the f1.2 blur in 720p? I am just curious if the camera would be as sharp as the X70 in 720p, since that is what I shoot to air at.

I am reconsidering the HM200. I bought an X180, but it has some very annoying features, such as weighing almost 10lbs fully outfitted with shotgun, large battery, and LED, and going into some sort of "macro" function when the hard stop focus hits infinity!

I miss shooting on the X70, so light and easy to wield, but I need those damn manual dials and switches! I would be ever so happy to see a wide angle and telephoto (optical and digital zoom) low light comparison at each cameras maximum gain setting. My X70 leaves me wanting at 60p even at 33db many times. My X180 is even worse, damn thing putters out at only 18db!

Paul

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Paul 1.2 @720 is like the 1.2 @1080: soft. The blur panning you mean? is fine, but it will be soft. Is it useable? no, not the current standards of the most advanced processing today (the cellphones).

You are re-considering the HM200 while I am re-considering the HM70 with a beachtek LOL for opposite reasons (I want to go back to a shoulder camera, a real one, not a rigged one)

in case anyone will be interested I am running lots of tests with the HM70 for the audio part (which is the big problem with that camera). So far I'm having the best results with a beachtek with phantom and a splitter (hosa) that gives two mono and cuts most of the floor noise (I didn't know that and I wasn't expecting that outcome but the effect is exactly that: put the camera mic level @ -2 and pump the beachtek. So far I'm already competing against the native XLR of both the HM200 and EX1r in terms of presence from the same microphone (shure SM58) and shotgun sony 1-542-296.

The trick was made possible but the (surprise) of the hosa splitter (YMM261). I am using a beachtek with the battery.. a pain I know but it's necessary for both the phantom and the increased overall volume achievable compared to a passive one. The beachtek stays on the right side, vertical, with velcro. not a problem with the HM70. there is room LOL

The idea of the splitter came out originally because I wanted a backup track on my shotgun for interviews with an handheld (be it the G3 or corded). But now I have 1 channel for anything (also with plug-on power) and 2 more XLR plus a 3.5mm AUX on the other channel. Basically I can handle 4 mics at a pretty high quality on HM70.

Once I fix that audio thing then I will be ready to put the HM70 on my shoulder and shoot stable stuff (for a change). And I can assure you that I am not the only one with the "back-to-shoulder" sentiment.

JVC GY-HM200 - Firmware 2.0
 

Hello there,

did the firmware update to V2.0.
Worked perfectly.

What is new:
- histogram
- 4K mode with 70mBit (So that can be written on cheap SDXC U1)
- In streaming was added functions ? (I do not use anyway)

more I have not discovered yet, maybe I'll find some ....


Andreas

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

I have arranged an HM200 demo from JVC for the week of December 21st. I ended up retiring my Sony PXW-X180 when my station issued me an HM890 with live streaming built in. My PXW-X70 is still my primary camera, but it has limited usefulness for live streaming because my station is going Zixi, and the XAVC codec takes FOREVER to ingest/transcode into FCPX. The ability to Zixi stream from a 35Mbps plug in Verizon modem, and to be able to export as soon as I ingest, instead of waiting for X70 XAVC transcoding, could make me a convert. If it is incapable of producing a picture in the lighting that the other cameras can, that could be a deal breaker........live streaming and quick exporting black snow is not beneficial.

I will give it a good night ENG workout. I have not only the X70 to direct compare, but an HM890 and HM650 as well as a Sony A7sII. Plan to side by side these cameras in ENG night mode, iris's always wide open, and at 0db, max db, and middle db gain settings. ENG cameras are used wide open at night, and you get three quick toggle selections, so that is how they will be tested, no artificial f4.0 12db only shoots! :)

The 600/650 are known enough to be a good control, as you can find plenty of 600/650 footage on YouTube. My 890 has a f1.4 constant aperture lens, that should be fun. We all know what an X70 does.

Paul

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Anthony - that is what a global "shutter" is. They are referring to reading out every pixel on the entire sensor at the same time. So yes jello or rolling shutter has everything to do with the speed of the readout on the sensors.

Its a characteristic of CMOS sensors. CCD sensors are by design global shutter cameras. So you have to design a much more complicated and expensive CMOS sensor to make it instant readout. Yes processing is important but the sensor has to be designed to feed that information at the same time to the processing chips. Non global CMOS chips simply can't do that they read out row by row, from top to bottom. Wouldn't matter how fast your processors are it's the speed of readout that matters - some non-global CMOS chips are better controlled - ie they have faster readouts from the actual sensor or less pixels to read, so they exhibit less rolling shutter. Global shutter CMOS cameras have an individual pre-amp and feed for every single pixel on the sensor. That's how they achieve simultaneous readout of every single pixel.

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

In a decade, rolling shutter will be as obsolete as vertical smear on CCD's.............sorry, vertical smear on everything except current JVC ProHD cameras. :-P

Paul

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Hope you're right Paul - I just point out that the tech and manufacturing cost is a lot higher fro global shutter CMOS sensors. Vertical smear should only be an issue on CCD cameras? I'm surprised you're seeing it on CMOS sensor cameras. If a client complains just call it the Star Trek look at 90deg :)

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

Vertical smear was first observed in IT (interline transfer) CCD cameras back in the early 90's. The "fix" was FIT (frame interline transfer) CCD's, which cost an additional $10,000 per camera/camcorder across the board for Sony models!

By 1996, 2/3" "pro" 3 CCD cameras such as the DXC-D30 and KY-D29, were able to eliminate vertical smear with IT chips. Unfortunately, the current crop of JVC ProHD and Panasonic HPX 1/3" CMOS cameras still have a bit of vertical smear.

If processing speed the reason we live with reasonably priced CMOS jello video, then in a decade, with advances in cheap fast processing, those days should be gone.

Paul

Re: JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70
 

As I pointed out it isn't processing speed, but the fundamental design of the chips is different. Thus it will only get cheaper if they start to incorporate it in lower end cameras allowing for economies of scale. Manufacturers like BMD are trying to do this so I think you're right - its only a matter of time.