HM100 & HM700 + Canon 14x Lens Field Test
 

thanks Tim! Still downloading some of them. I'm happily surprised at how good the HM100 looks to my eyes! I wonder if I can rationalize one for some bi-plane arial work i might get next month.

The Canon lens so far looks to me to be similar to the 17x quality.. basically at it's worst is about the same as 16x at it's best? I'll have to stare at them some more for a couple days to say anything else.

Thanks for posting!

Thank you Tim!!

Thank you!

Hey Tim,
I can't seem to play the .MOV files (im on a macbook), even tried to import to FCP, but it won't let me see it, just a little audio? also tried VLC... any ideas?

If you have FCP6 they should play fine (even though the Macbook may drop frames with 1920x1080 35mbps media).
If you have an earlier version of FCP just download and install the PerianXDCam component into your Macintosh HD/Library/Quicktime folder.

Great images from both cameras especially considering the lack of filters and the strong sunlight. The 100 is amazingly close to the 700 in this situation. Gross MPEG artifacts are minimal compared to what I would expect HDV to have in a similar setting. I have a question about the apparent grain in the image. Would you ascribe this to the MPEG or the camera itself?

Looking at the raw clips, particularly looking at the sky, it appears the HM100 has a lot of grain/noise. The HM700 has less noticeable grain, but more MPEG-induced banding in the gradient of the sky's colors.

Thanks Tim! works fine now

did you shoot any 720p?
 

Tim,

Did you or anyone else shoot any 720 @ 24fps at 35mbs? Just wondering if the daylight noise is lower and if we gain anything in the extra headroom we get with 720p 24fps 35mbs vs 1080p 24fps 35mbs. Thank you.

Simon, you might also try Apple software update to get the latest version of Quicktime. I had the same problem, but it did the trick for me.

These new cameras by JVC intrigued me, but after seeing these clips, I am pretty shocked. What's with all the video noise? In sunny situations, you should have to be magnifying the image by 200% on a monitor to see any noise, even with a 1/3" chip camera. Looks like JVC has failed. Their previous offerings only had 720 resolution, and now their 1080 stuff looks like garbage. But that's just my opinion. I definitely won't consider a JVC for a future purchase. Sorry to be real about it, but these images look terrible to me.

Tim,
Are the linked files actually raw from the camera's?

Thanks amigo..

I found also a lot of noise.. but lately I am changing my mind on it. It doeasn't look such a problem... If I compress in MPEG2 at the end of my editing (either DVD or Blueray) to give the final product to my client, the noise seems to disappear and become a nice cinema-look grain.
Check this MPEG2 (DVD quality) file:

http://www.siroma.com/AreaRiservata/...glia10.m2v.zip (280 Mbytes... 10 minutes)

All footage is shot with HM700, Fujinon 16x (same like GY200) also with macro use. Many shots made with automatic settings (also allowing gain). Colour settings are personal (black compressed to reduce noise in dark gray areas and colours enhanced). Seagul shot is shot at 1280 60p and slowmotioned to 25 while also upscaled to 1920 (before compressing to 720 16/9 mpeg2)

Thanks for the test, but the CA on the car on the left side looks not so good.

But I read the Panasonic HP300-manual and find the important point
"CA-Correction works only in horizontal line", so I see some CAs on
Phil Blooms-Testclips from his walk on the sea.

So the CAC is not so good, as I thought. When Canon builds a really good
new optic with the 14x4,4, so the HM700 will be really better then the HPX301.

-----
Hi Marcello, I see your Clips and find the colour fringings etc. really bad.
But the in Europe available Fujinon 16x5,5 is not so good for really
HighDefinition - and the 17x5-Fujinon is not available in the German shops.

Exactly. We both got tricked, me and my reseller, by JVC Italy (who appears to be just a sales office with 4-5 people, no expert, nobody to call, ....). The had this "special" deal: HM700 + SxS Recorder + 16x Fujinon Lenses for 5.700 € + VAT but I was always told something like "the Fujinon Lenses" and knowing that the HM700 was due to be sold with 17x I assumed that was what I was getting. Fooled. Shame on me. CA can be controlled a little but sometimes you just have to decide.. I do the shot (and then clean it) or I just forget it? I'll be buying new lenses later.. but surely this was not a nice surprise.

The only possibility for you is the newest Canon 14x4,4 or to buy via internet the Fujinon 17x5.

As comparision, many people think that the HPX301 from Panasonic will be better in CA
with their CA-Correction, but the HPX301-CAC only works in the horizontal and so only
the vertikal CAs will be corrected and so I can see on some footage a lot of CAs also
on the HPX301-Shots on horizontal- & diagonal-lines.

Too late. Can't affor another HD Camera ! :)

RE: 16x5.5 Fujinon.
As I'm sure you've already found out the long end of the zoom (past 45mm) has some pretty intense vignetting and CA. Try to stay in the stop range of F/2.8 to F/5.6 for the least CA, and try not to zoom too much further than 45mm. We've seen many great images created with the Fujinon 16x5.5 lens over the last 4 years. It is unfortunate you got that lens when you were expecting the Fujinon 17x5, but if exchange is not an option then there are ways to work with it.

I would add (having the 16x lens) that f4 to f5 from 60mm to 88mm is the WORST and is NO LONGER the sweet spot for the stock 16x lens. Try wide open or f11 to f16 at 88mm. At f4.5 at 88mm the center is in focus but the left and right thirds are out of focus. If you are at f11 or f16 at 88mm then the sides come into focus to match the center. Overall not as sharp as 40mm at f4.5, but it's more usable.

recap: As you move from 40mm towards 88mm move from f4 towards f11 or f16. I've gotten great shots at night wide open at that lengths as well. Bizare I know... I almost wonder if my lens is an oddball made friday afternoon or monday morning.

Thanks.. I'll try to get the best out of them. Sometimes it will be possibile (when I have time to shoot). Other times I have to end the dy with 1h30mins of footage... not easy to do all at the best! :)

Thanks Alex too. As above.. I'll try when it's possible. SOmetimes you just have to go for what you get.

Unable to view your files
 

Hi Tim,

I am unable to open your files I'm using WinXP. what codec do I need to open and view your files?

thanks,

-kaj

Windows XP users can download the Calibrated Software XD Decode quicktime component.
Calibrated{Q} XD Decode

The demo will "gray out" the middle third of the image so its usage is limited.

The german test-magazine video-aktiv Digital says that the max
resolution is only 700 lines with the 18x4,2-Fujinonoptic,
in this configuration the price will be arround
17.000 €. They say that the CAs will be a problem,
and the other great problem is the formfactor,
That a user must stabilize the Cam with
the other hand, but the Cam tilt to the
cameramans head.
Many in Germany say that the HPX301 will
the better oportunity.

But Video-Aktiv-Digital comes to the result
that the resolution is horizontal & vertical
the same between 700 & 800 lines.

So I think the HM700 with Canon-Lens
will be sharper than HPX301 with AVC-Intra,
the second opinion is the bad workflow
when you edit Avc-Intra with AppleProRes4:2:2.

ok I'll give it a try thanks.