I have a question.

if these cameras 100,110, 200,250
are so bad then why are they used on so many major shoots, and used by so many pro's
they are a pain in the ass at times but the end product makes it all worth while
just my opinon

Joe

i had a Canon, lots of problems

Joe, we are not saying that the JVCs are bad cameras... quite the opposite, i think that they are awesome little cameras, just looking at some of the sample videos i've seen, they are clearly very nice....but that is not the issue. I think the real issue here is the reliablity of the camera namely the HD100/110s, and i for one am currently looking to upgrade my camera from a canon XL1s to a high definition camera... and being a small production company i don't have that big a budget to get an expensive camera. That being said, if i throw down the cash on a new peice of equipment i think that i should after spending X amount of dollars have peace of mind that the camera is not going to crash while i'm producing an important Doc Video for someone.... i like just about everything about the JVCs.... small, light weight, and professional, interchangeable lenses etc... the only things i'm not that fond of are: HDV, and the inability to perform in low light (i'm talking about all 1/3" HDV cameras in general). Other than those things I think the JVCs are very nice and do produce nice video... my other option i'm seriously considering is getting an Panasonic HPX500, peice by peice if i have to... but anyways, thanks to all for the input...i'd just like to hear more on the HD200, because if i go with the JVC it'll likely be the 200.

They also seem to be very sensitive to using different tapes. I recomend sticking to one brand and not cheap tapes. One can get great footage from the cameras.
Another thing to consider is the post production workflow.
We could not edit HDV (from JVC) on our Avids. They don´t support the codec yet.

Dude, it's a total mistake to assess a given camera's reliability based on the amount of complaints one reads on internet discussion boards or what the random dealer says. It's not scientific, it's not logical, it's wrongheaded. If anyone can tell you it's JVC and I have no idea how forthcoming they would be with such data.

Further, there are often unsavory backstories as to why a given camera might be getting lousy ink on the net. Ulterior motives etc.

However, you won't much of that underhanded crap in these parts as this board is patrolled by a tough texas ranger and his hanging judge.

I agree with Brian, I wouldn't base my purchasing decisions on forum feedback alone. You have the potential for reliability issues with any of the manufacturers. Go with what works for your budget and end production goals. What works for you.

It was interesting when people started criticizing the HVX200 for some of it's technical shortcomings and gliches. Man, with that fan base, to paraphrase Dennis Miller, taking shots at the HVX200 was like going over the middle against Ronnie Lott.

This is my 'short' list:

SSE (in my case a complete block breakdown after some 10 months in use)
serious dropouts (not too often but when they occur they are bad)
TC continuity (a major problem for Avid and FCP)
on the stock lens a pretty bad chromatic aberation at the far end
poor quality of VF build and colour reproduction
poor quality of LCD colour reproduction
loud fan on HD200/250
lack of support with Avid

All in all, I would have been happy to pay another $3-5 more for the camera in the first place to have these issues addressed. Like this, it remains a camera "that could..."

One more note, yes, JVC repaired the problems but thankfully they happened in the 1 yr warranty and also it meant being without a camera for significant periods of time.