Sorry, but software has a lot to do with it. The heart of the camera is not the image sensors, but the Digital Signal Processor (DSP). And of course the processor is affected by software. So yes, a firmware update can significantly improve a camera's low-light performance.

Well I just checked the latest software at JVC and I don't see anything about a "new software upgrade" that improves low light performance.

The only option there is still the last firmware upgrade which was "VTR CPU V0101" for the 200. "VTR CPU V0105" for the 250.

What are they talking about?

I guess it's too early for JVC to have added the firmware upgrade on their website. I tried calling JVC, but after about 15 minutes on hold, I gave up. Try to be patient; we've just learned about this new info.

The previous firmware upgrades were to lessen or eliminate NLE issues between the HD200/250s and FCP (or was it Apple in general?).

There isn't even a press release on the JVC Pro site yet, so it seems that Studio Daily must have jumped the gun a little on the article. Maybe there was a presentation at Infocomm? Was anyone there?

Cinegear starts on Friday so maybe we'll hear more then.

I just talked to one of the service guys at the JVC center in NJ today and he said that they all are tied up in a day long event.

Maybe there is some training or updating on the new firmware going on.

Also, Robbie Yarish at the Midwest service center told me today that he thought there was going to be a firmware update for the HD100 like there was for the HD200 and HD250.

All of this is passed on third party, so please don't take it as gospel, just an idea of what might be coming soon.

Dan Weber

Does the LoLux reduce the noise levels on the normal gain settings?

I can only recall one occasion when I wanted more than 18db gain on a BVW 400, so the use of really high gain levels tends to be specialist. That one occasion was at night in the countryside filming a fly on the wall documentary on "the troubles" in Northern Ireland.

I've spoken with a guy in JVC's New Jersey plant about the LoLux upgrade. He had yet to hear about it, but was going to check with the engineering staff and get back to me. Here's another link to the article and a link to the author's email:

http://www.studiodaily.com/hdstudio

I tried writing to the auther, Michael Grotticelli, but my email came back as undeliverable. Perhaps someone else can have more success. I just wanted to know if Michael had more info.

Here's an interesting Q&A article about Discovery HD's guidelines.

http://www.definitionmagazine.com/is.../discovery.pdf

Hmmmm. I wonder what the standard (if there is a standard) rate of compression is applied by networks at the time of transmission.

I got an email back from my JVC dealer (the technician who did my HD100 updates)...
This LoLux was a betatest a while ago which worked with minimum gain of 24dB, but the image was too noisy and not suitable therefore for professional usage.
Bummer... hopefully this article is talking about a newer version coming up.

Well, this makes no sense in light of that article in Studiodaily.com. I'll admit the thought of shooting anything between 24 and 42 dbs of gain is unsettling.
Is it possible the HD200 line (with the 18x lens) was accepted by Discovery HD without the LoLux firmware? Is it possible the article is flat out wrong?
Questions, questions...

They're not sure they'd allow use of the RED One? C'mon, 4k progressive is good enough for Peter Jackson but not a relatively obscure HD cable station?

Discovery is not exactly obscure...
 

One visit to Discovery's headquarters near the capital and you'll get a sense of who they are. First, they encompass many networks, among them some of the more popular on cable/satellite:

Discovery
The Learning Channel (THC)
Animal Planet
Travel Channel
Discovery Health
Discovery Times
Military Channel
Discovery HD Theater

And there are no doubt a couple I missed.

The building that houses all these networks is nothing less than incredible. You really can get lost in it. By comparison, National Geographic Channel for instance is a log cabin.

Their engineering department sets the standards for all of the above channels, but I understand that rather than reinventing the wheel their work provides standards for other cable channels.

I went through hell and perdition with them because they wouldn't accept my JVC D-9 format KY-D29 2/3" 4:2:2 camera even though they accepted lesser DV format cameras (standard def days). JVC even offered to provide them with a deck to eliminate that possible objection, but they never accepted D-9 (aka Digital-S) which is identical do DVCPro50 but with a 1/2" and therefor more robust tape.

Tip

Can you blame Discovery for not being willing to COMMIT to accepting a format that isn't even released yet? The article says that their engineers put the new techologies through field production tests first. RED will be no different. I'm 99.9999% sure it will pass, but lets face it, NO ONE outside of the RED camp is using them yet (and they have no set release date as of yet, either!)

OK, I received a return email from Michael Grotticelli, the author of the Studiodaily piece. Unfortunately, he couldn't answer too many of my questions and couldn't provide a link to the Discovery HD's newest guidelines (they keep those mostly private).

But he did say that on-camera interview type shows are acceptable for our cameras for D-HD, but they prefer 1080i for programs where outdoor scenes are prominent. That still doesn't clear up the picture. We can't shoot many scenics?? I find that a strange requirement. And I take it he meant 1080i from bigger chip HD cameras.

Oh well, what the heck. We still have kick-a$$ cameras.