I don't want anyone to write the device off yet based solely on my footage. I shot this just to see for myself how well this "too good to be true" technology actually worked, and decided to share my excitement and the footage on my own accord. Proper tests will need to be conducted with various prime and zoom lenses to make any sort of definitive conclusions.

Until that time, keep in mind that I was using a fairly wide lens - 16mm focal length, with the subjects at close to the MOD. Also, this was an IMPROMPTU TEST conducted 'spur of the moment' on a very busy street, below freezing temperatures, during one of the biggest film festivals in America! All things considered, I think the HZ-CA13U performed exceptionally well, especially since I popped it off the tripod it had been publicly displayed on all weekend, took it outside to shoot, and I didn't even check the back focus.

Personally, as someone who has shot a fair share of 35mm, S-16, 16mm and video, using this device for a few minutes was a revolutionary moment for me. I'll probably never forget it.
Sony gave the world of cinema HD video at 24fps in the late 90's, Panasonic gave us affordable 24P on miniDV in 2002, P+S released the mini35 around the same time (not so affordable,) and now JVC has created a PL mount reimager for 1/3" HDV without a ground glass for under $5000!
I have a couple of major label music videos coming up that I really want to push to use this device on. This will allow me to shift the budget normally allocated for film stock/processing/transfer into other areas.
This is a big deal!

At $4400 list price, rental house rates will probably be around $100/day or less.

I've included some links to a few very short ts files trimmed from the original 720P60 m2t files for those of you who still doubt the sharpness. These will play fine in VLC.
http://www.timdashwood.com/.Public/dog.ts
http://www.timdashwood.com/.Public/craig1.ts
http://www.timdashwood.com/.Public/craig2.ts

Also when you think RED will be just $3,500 more than that and is not just a true 2/3" camera but a full Super35 one, it makes even less sense to dump 14k on a HD200+this 16mm tube.

True, if you are referring to a HD250/HZ-CA13U combo, but the HZ-CA13U will work with any of JVC's ProHD cameras except for the HD100/101.
There is no denying that RED will shake up the 4K and 1080P market when it is finally released (I'm looking forward to it,) but it will still be in a slightly different teir than the market we are talking with the JVC/Canon products. There is already a huge installed base of ProHD users on the planet. I'm sure rental houses stocking the HZ-CA13U will have no problems renting it on a daily basis.
Also, the $17,500 price tag of RED just gets you started (I think the LCD monitor is included) but I'm pretty sure you still need to accessorize with drive or flash, rails, cage, batteries, etc.

Ok, this looks MUCH better and sharper. Thanks for posting.
I'm somewhat convinced about the sharpness. I say somewhat because the footage has an artificial feeling to it, specially over the skin. Did you have skin tone on or something. Sometimes it looks plastic.
But there's still CA and basically the same amount as 35mm GG adapters. Besides that there's the DOF matter which I like to have the flexibility to choose a very shallow DOF at times. I know you used a 16mm lens, but this is not as wide for the 16mm format. That's about a 33mm lens in 35mm actually. Not that wide. But the worst point is the price. At $2,000 that would be interesting. But at almost $4,500 when you add a HD200 you are almost in RED's territory. Yes, I know, it's not out yet. But still.

A RED shooting rig will be more than the basic price of the camera body. However, you do make a valid point with sub $20k HD single sensor cameras now coming into the market. The high end prosumer HD cameras will start to lose the large price advantage they had over the traditional high end 2/3" CCD cameras. The SI-2k and a basic RED rig do start appearing on the horizon when you're looking at this budget range (for $6000 plus extra).

Well, what you get for 14k is basically a camera body (HD200+adapter). You still need lenses, batteries, a shoulder brace etc to make it a "shooting rig" just like with RED.

I was under the impression that the HZ-CA13U COULD be used with the HD100/101 series, albeit with an inverted image. Have the specs changed?

That's what I said... only $6000 difference. I'm not getting comprehensive about either the RED or the SI, just something you can record onto.

This last link is dead Tim. Thnx

It will work on the HD100/101, but it would be very difficult to operate with the inverted image.
The HD110/111 will invert the image while shooting, but not record that way to tape - requiring a flip/flop in post.
The HD200/250 will invert the image while shooting and on the tape.

Thanks for catching that. Fixed.

Most surprising was how much the optical engineers have improved on this unit since I was led into a secret underground bunker somewhere in the Nevada desert (just kidding) and shown the UNIT last November '06. It looked "not good." Looking at what Tim has shot here is 1000 times better then what I saw 3 months ago. Not exaggerating here folks. So despite all the elements that may still need improvements or the flaws people are pointing out, nonethelss, I gotta tip my hat to JVC for taking what I thought would be a PR nightmare and actually turning out a real and viable product.

And Jon Fauer is an unbiased and respected ASC DP who I can only imagine put this device through very rigorous testing. Smart move in giving the unit to Mr Fauer for his analysis which I am sure we will find in his newsletter. And under the circumstances, Tim did a fantastic job of winging it sight unseen. I've been a part of those quick and dirty test shoots and IMOP, the lack of time to prepare sorta indicates that we are looking at all the elements combined in a less then optimum light. Almost better that way, as we can get the "raw and uncensored" version. also the onine compression needs to be factored in as well.

I'm sure the engineers are still refining this unit and listening carefully to the talk on the boards and forums. All great stuff- that is how they deliver the best product possible, so the analysis of Tim and Craig's shoot is win win for all of us.

RE: DOF. Shooting wide open on 16mm lens's will give a fair degree of selective focus options. Hence the Digiprime with a 2/3" CCD which at T1.6 will get you an equivalent T2.8/4 split if you had the exact same 35mm Lens FOV side by side with the Digiprime. The link below from Abel Cine web site has a nice graphic that reveals that the 16mm frame size is slightly larger then the 2/3" CCD imager.

http://www.abelcine.com/articles/ind...d=85&Itemid=34

At the end of the day, I think it a very interesting development and certainly a valid tool that we can rent of buy to add to our arsenal. My theory is that this is just the beginning of this sort of non GG adapter. In two years, other manufacturer's will strike back and before long something really extraordinary will be out at a very reasonable price. The 1/3" CCD HD market is going NOWHERE, so this is going to capture the attention of the best optical engineers on the planet. Shorter, better, cheaper, 16, 35 cine, 35 SLR..... A great advancement here!

All the best, and very cool of Tim and Craig for having the courage to wing it in the cold and amist the crowds, no 1stAC, and just see what happens.

Tim:

How does this setup compare with the Fujinon 13x lens? Thx.

excuse my ignorance but I dont get how the DOF can be any different without GG, surely it is just a lens adaptor to let you use 16mm lenses..

You are using better glass but the imaging sensors capturing the image are still just 1/3rd inch.

If I am wrong please tell me!!

Nope, it isn't just a simple bayonet to PL mount adapter. Simple adapters like you described are available, but this device is very different.
The brilliance of the optical engineering in the device is the fact that they managed to create a re-imager without a ground-glass.
I can't explain the exact science behind how it works because I just don't know, but there are other optical elements inside that reduce the projected image into the 1/3" frame size after it has been resolved at the 52mm focal plane.

The only similar device I can think of is the Angenieux/Zeiss CLA 35HD designed for 2/3" CCD.

Ouch, JVC must have the biggest smile in the world right now.
 

Hi all,

With the new upcoming HZ-CA13U mount soon to be unleashed on the World, you can bet your bottom dollar that as indi film-makers we are about to be given the fresh breath of air needed to go to town with the best technology JVC has to offer. This adapter will do to feature indi films as butter did to bread. The footage you've shot here looks incredible. I know for a fact that my 251 is already starting to get excited about what's ahead for the coming year in production with this new adapter.

In all seriousness, forget REDROCK, forget P&S... this baby will make your best friend marriage material. With the typical brilliance of JVC quality behind it and the superb DOF this piece of hardware can do, i'm converted completely.

All I can say is WOW, WOW, WOW.... JVC you've listened, learnt and weaved your amazing magic on the world of indi film making. I personally thank you and can't wait to shoot my upcoming feature with this puppy.

Long live our friends at JVC. You make every day on set an exceptional day.

ps - to all my friends on this forum, stay tuned for some exceptionally great news from my company The Actors Cafe as we hit Hollywood.

Matt Norman.
www.theactorscafe.com
www.salutethemovie.com

i really do not understand why could Angenieux build a 35mm to 2/3 adapter, why could JVC build a 16mm to 1/3 adapter...

And why don't they build a 35mm to 1/3 adapter ?!!!

with nikon mount of course... ;-)

The laws of physics (Lagrange/Optical Invariant) say that the largest usable aperture would be F/5.6 ¼.

Max aperture on camera x (entry field size / exit field size) = maximum aperture on taking side

Rated opening on ProHD cameras: F/1.4
35mm field size (academy motion picture): 21mm horizontal
1/3" field size (16x9 used on ProHD): 4.8mm

1.4(21/4.8)=6.125 or f5.6 ¼


You would theoretically get much more transmittance (equivalent to F/2 and a half when set to F/5.6) but your depth of field would be based on F/5.6 even if you opened as much as F/1.4. That would kind of defeat the purpose.

Angenieuz/Zeiss' adapter has a maximum usable aperture of F/3.5 because they are only compressing down to 2/3". (and that adapter sold in the $25,000 + range)

very great math answer ! didn't saw it that way...
possible does not mean usable...

thanks tim

TapeWorks Texas Inc currently has QTY 1 Demo'd HZCA13U adaptor available at discounted pricing. Please contact us toll free 866-827-3489 if you are interested.

Best Regards,
Scott Cantrell
TapeWorks Texas Inc - HDVinfo Sponser
scott@tapeworkstexas.com