DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   JVC GY-HM 800 / 700 / 600 Series Camera Systems (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-gy-hm-800-700-600-series-camera-systems/)
-   -   GY-HM700 Pre-Production Model Test from Germany (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-gy-hm-800-700-600-series-camera-systems/143030-gy-hm700-pre-production-model-test-germany.html)

Tyge Floyd February 14th, 2009 01:24 PM

The only thing has has kept me from buying a JVC 100/200 series camera in the past has been the lack of the 1080/60i format. I would have been an owner of one long ago had they offered that and have been surprised as the newer models came out over the years without it. This new camera is definitely getting me to thinking about jumping the Canon XL ship I've been on since my first XL1s back in 2004 and now the XL-H1a.

Having shot a Sony XDCAM/Fujinon 18x lens on several shoots last year, I've become a fan of the glass not to mention the workflow that tapeless recording offers. (I've added a Firestore FS-C to my bag since) If this camera's low light performance is as good as my XLH1a, then I'm going to be shooting one this year for sure. I'm anxiously waiting on some low light video clips posted to see how it performs.

On the 14x4.4 lens issue. I understand that a lot of the JVC shooters are excited about the wider lens but for me I need reach more than wide angle performance. Maybe I can do some swapping with one of you who has a 17x or 18x lens and wants the 14x?

Shaun Roemich February 14th, 2009 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian Withnall (Post 1011166)
I was that close to going to the Sony 270 but if this JVC can compete on price I'm in.

Check out the reviews on the 270 at B&H. Underwhelming user responses. I had been VERY seriously considering the 270 before I bought into the HD200's. No regrets though as virtually everything I've bought for the 200's moves right over onto the 700.

Chris Hurd February 28th, 2009 07:30 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich (Post 1009309)
If you want kitschy stabilized lenses with auto focus, go elsewhere. I want the option for REAL lens choices from my choice of suppliers with decades of experience building broadcast lenses.

Shaun, wouldn't you consider this to be a real lens, despite the fact that it has auto focus and image stabilization (not to mention a 100x zoom)? Just playing devil's advocate here...

Canon DigiSuper100AF

Shaun Roemich February 28th, 2009 09:34 AM

I think I can safely give you that one Chris. I think I may be allowed to save a bit of face by pointing out that the lens in question costs more than the cars that most of us drive and more than some of us paid for the houses we live in, thereby placing it "in a different league" than the $1k to 3k kit lenses we are all discussing here.

Besides, one does not mount that lens to a camera. One mounts a camera to that lens... <sly grin>

And, in rereading my post, I believe that my intent at the time was that I wanted a real CHOICE of lenses. Not back pedaling here, just have become increasingly less a fan of servo actuated focus rings like one finds on the Sony Z1 et al which are speed sensing/damping and don't allow for ACCURATE and REPEATABLE focus adjustments on the same level as manually actuated rings that physically move the lens elements.

And as one who has used box lenses in live sports and live television applications, I personally have never found a need for auto focus. When a box lens equipped camera is operated and focused using a studio kit monitor ESPECIALLY nearing the end of the telephoto range (possibly with peaking actuated), it is readily apparent when one is in focus and when one is not. The image stabilization of such a lens is paramount however with focal lengths approaching or exceeding 800mm.

BTW:A favourite pastime of mine is playing devil's advocate...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network