I understand what you're saying, but many of the HD networks - Discovery, History Channel, BBC, etc. - have very strict parameters on what cameras they allow for acquisition. All of them pretty much state that they will not allow HDV (including the HPX200, although this may be do to the pixel-shifting) or even Super 16 film for more than 10% of a program's content. I've heard from one producer who said ESPN HD won't accept cameras below 2/3" chip size, but who knows.

That said, what I find interesting is the fact Discovery HD allows XDCAM HD and EX content for full acquisition (on Silver level programs), assuming it's shot at full 35mbs.
Lo and behold, here comes the HM700 with pretty much the same capture parameters as the XDCAM line - 1080i/720p at 35mbs, long-GOP. Except, the chip size is smaller. So, how will this new camera be treated? As previously stated, the HD200/250 are already in full use on a TLC HD program and it seems to do just fine. I own an HD200, so the wider acceptance this camera has, the better for me.
If the low light performance of the HM700 is several steps above the HD200 line, then this camera sounds like a winner. Gotta love the SDHD capture medium.

Just to chip in here that I'm very excited about the evolution to new product here. It's bittersweet of course, when you don't have the "latest & greatest" model anymore, but it's been a good ride!
The higher bit rate formats are what I find exciting. I'm happy to stay with the family of interchangeable 1/3" lenses, and the compromises of this chip size. In the real world, often DOF is your friend with HD.... We have the awesome 13x lens, the 16mm PL converter, and 3rd party SLR adapters for great telephoto capabilities.
Economy and and size are nicely balanced as well. I don't think the interchangeable 1/2" glass is out there yet, and that's a hurdle.
I'll be interested to get more exact specs on this camera. Especially the imaging chip. If it's native 720p, with spatial offset to make 1080, it could be right in the ballpark. Of course, most of us know the proof is in the final mix, and the strength of the weakest link often determines the result.

Re Discovery, or any high end buyer, there are specs, and there are other factors. It's a complex formula of percentages and the subject matter/uniqueness is a major factor. Your personal track record carries a lot of weight too. I wouldn't ever suggest deceit in delivery, but having awesome cinematography in your presentation could go a long way.

The HM-700 can record to both SDHD and SxS cards, correct? Is there an inherent advantage to recording to either format, besides initial costs?

SxS can handle overcranking but I don't see S&Q feature listed on the JVC cameras. If the JVC cameras don't use S&Q then I think there's little reason to go SxS. SxS through an Express port on a laptop does transfer faster since it's PCIe so that might be of value if you're doing ENG work with very short turnaround. It might help if you're doing Same Day Edits on weddings too. Then you could shoot ceremony on SxS and the rest on SDHC.

SxS can handle up to 2.5Gbps (2500Mbps) transfer speed when connected to a PCI express bus so that is approaching the speed of SATA drives. By comparison USB2.0 is 480Mbps, firewire400 is 400Mbps and firewire800 is 800Mbps. The speed of the SDHC cards required for use with the HM series is minimum class 6. All frame rates, bit rates and formats the camera can write should be available on both types of cards.

The other advantage of SxS over SDHC is the physically larger size and overall rigidity of the card. Of course SxS is much more expensive than SDHC, and not widely available at every consumer retail outlet (from Walmart to BestBuy) like SDHC.

Thinking loud...
How about skipping the HM-700 and buy the nano flash when it is out?
Cheaper solution for: higher bit rate flash card recording, and if I am not mistaken the ability to record to Quicktime.

Thanks.

Johnnie

If you already own a HD250. HD-SDI is required for the Convergent-Design boxes.

MacVideo - Camera Technology - Features - JVC introduce the GY-HM100; the world's first camera to record high quality native QuickTime files for immediate editing within Final Cut Pro

Speaking of the HD 200/250, there's a silouette of the 700 towards the of Craig's HM 100 presentation where he alludes to the "big brother" camera. TO my eyes it looked like the outline of the HD 200.

It would make sense to keep the same form factor to me.

Yes, we've kept the footprint and the lens mount the same, as well as the Anton Bauer Gold Mount to keep all of the accessories interchangeable. The internal circuitry has been newly designed to implement the new processing technology and increase the resolution of the captured images. JVC has invested in a new chip design for both the HM700 and HM100, as I had stated in my SuperMeet presentation. You'll also find more tangible feature advancements when the model rolls out.

Please, let one of those feature advancements be better low light sensitivity.

What about us IDX - V-mount users? Do we have to switch to Anton Bauer if we go with the 700?

Dennis Tzeng
dennis@thinkhero.com
http://www.thinkhero.com

I bought a V-mount adapter for my HD200 from JVC, so I'm assuming you can do the same for this camera. If not, B&H Photo sells A/B to V-mount adapters. So, no, you don't have to give up V-mounts.

I don't think any network is going to frown on quality content. Networks are looking anything that is quality now since more and more people are turning away from the trash. Even commercials are getting trashy.

2c

Discovery HD/History/TLC and others have some of the more stringent requirments for accuisition, however many of their top shows are shot 100% in HDV. Anthony Bordain (used to be DVCPROHD, now Sony HDV), Man Vs Wild (Sony HDV, he likes the cameras because they are disposable), Deadliest Catch (HDV primarly) and others mentioned earlier. so I stress it's content more than anything else. SciFi's Ghost Hunters is I believe DVCPROHD with HVX200's... I think... they were in SD just the Panasonic DV30's for 80% of the broadcast.

That being said, I don't know of any broadcaster useing AVCHD. Also most or all of the shows above after editing are output to one of thier accepted formats. This can cost $150 per hour in conversion to full sized tape. (often more)

Now if you shoot with a HPX-500 or better camera and you are pitching the idea with the minimum full length 5 episode sample, it will get it looked at first. No question. But a good show, shot correctly within the limits of HDV technology or 1/3 chip or even 1/4 chip design, I think you will be fine. If your show gets picked up, they may or may not even air your 5 eps, but give you money with a new list of requriments to shoot 5 more to thier liking. As long as your tape (they stilld don't like HDD's shipped in the mail) works seemlessly with their workflow and the results are good, I haven't heard of a problem. Outputting to film (a thing I believe will be perfected about the same time theaters switch to digital projectors completly and hence be meaningless) it is a different story.

Personally I'm quite interested in the 700 specs. What chip size, dynamic range etc.
As far as they comments on too much money for the HM100, the similar camera, the Sony XDCAM-EX is around $7,500 or more. It does have 1080p 1/2 chips and is a dandy of a camera, no question, but it's basically twice as much. JVC has given us the same workflow and a probably a nice image (with lower res/size chips) for 50% of the list price. Nothing to complain about here.

I doubt that direct competition between companies is intended by the companies.

For that matter, it would seem likely that part of the licensing deal JVC has with Sony precludes the manufacture of a 1/2" camera that would be in direct competition with the Sony cameras.

JVC is offering a new professional product that is missing (the small, multiformat camera with detachable handle) and the planned upgrade to the shoulder mount HD line. (As a matter of fact, I was told over a year ago by a JVC rep that a full 1080p was on the big plan for the shoulder mount camera.) 1/3" chip technology will likely improve, not degrade and the top 1/3" Fujinon lenses are pretty good for a modest price when compared to comparable 1/2" lenses.

For that matter, who has rights to the lanc interface? Perhaps the lack of lanc on the new JVC small camera is part of the deal.