New XDCAM EX camera - JVC not Sony
 

New XDCAM EX camera - JVC not Sony.
I thought this deserved to be in the Sony XDCAM EX forum since it's a feature set some will want to consider and it CERTAINLY is XDCAM EX codec using camera. List Price is $7,995 so it's in the ballpark of the original EX1 release.

JVC HM700 description
JVC Professional Technical Description page

Pics
JVC Professional Attributes page

I'd thought I'd list some of the obvious differences to the EX cameras

Some differences:
Only 1/3" chips CCD
Real Shoulder Mount unlike Sony EX3
With optional SxS Media Recorder it'll record to SxS and SDHC simultaneously for archive.
Has Pre-Record Cache up to 3 seconds (2.9 in NTSC frame rates).
4 Mode Spot Exposure Meter in which user can select which part of scene to monitor in manual mode.
Supposedly FAST Focus Assist.
Optional Remote offering full paint features.
Over/Under Crank but it's not clear if that requires SxS or whether it can be done to SDHC.
Records to MOV for straight import into FCP without re-wrap. I think this may be the first camera to record to MOV natively for FCP compatibility.

Thanks, Craig. Looks like a nice camera - major step-up from my old HD100! Still, I'd have expected them to release it with 1/2" sensors.

Between the long lens, the body, battery, and SxS adapter, it's longer than I am tall!

Yes, it is nice, but I don't see this as being in direct competition with the EX cameras.

Dont know if I'm reading the info right, but will it only record the xdcam ex format with an optional adapter??

Stuart

awesome. thanks for sharing! this looks like the next best camera in the $7000 range. curious to see how Sony and Panasonic combat it during the rough economy.

definately will compete.
also it's ccd not cmos! no more jello or problems with flashes and strobes! I am excited because of the PL mount and the ability to flip the image. So no need for flip 35mm adapters.

CMOS vs CCD.
People now have a choice. Why not 1/2" CCD? For the same reason Sony couldn't do it in a small camera. HEAT. So you've got 1/2" CMOS in Sony for DOF control or 1/3" CCD in JVC if you don't like CMOS rolling shutter. Note that CMOS doesn't "smear/streak" when hitting hot spots so I don't necessarily consider CCD better. Different technology, different advantages/disadvantages. If you want 1/2" chips in a small camera it's CMOS.

It's nice to see a real shoulder mount. I suspect we'll see that in EX5.

I like the ability to record to SxS and SDHC (with optional recording driving up the price of course). It really does indicate SDHC as the "new tape" (archival).

I'm REALLY ANNOYED that Sony doesn't have Pre-Record cache. OBVIOUSLY it's possible with codec and cards!.

I'd love to find out if it can overcrank to SDHC. That would be another hit on Sony.

It certainly DOES compete. It gives people a choice between 1/2" CMOS or 1/3" CCD. It gives people a real shoulder mount form factor. Don't forget Sony is in "partner" with JVC so I think we may see some of these features in a future EX. I'd hope Pre-Record is added in firmware though.

wow, this looks really nice! love the shoulder mount as well.

Really thoughtful layout of functionality around the camera. Lots of key stuff that is buried in Sony EX1/3 menus that is on the side of the camera and in a sensible place.

EDIT:

Looks like the viewfinder is removable.

I like :
"Unlike some oversized hand held models, the GY-HM700 becomes part of the shooter "
:)

Personally, I much prefer the CMOS - never real had any problems with the "jellovision" problems others complain about. Not to say that I don't see it when looking at footage frame-by-frame, just that it isn't an issue. Also, I've been able to successfully mitigate strobe flash issues to the point where it's not an issue. I always hated the vertical smear of light inherent on the CCD cameras. It always seemed so unnatural and unprofessional, yet I was stuck with it until CMOS. I don't think I could switch back happily!

Also, I'd expect the overcranking to be successful. As we've learned, the EX cams have been the limitation on this working with SDHC cards. The cards are much more than fast enough, yet it seems the USB bus in the EX cams is crippled. I suspect that built in a more robust USB bus since SDHC is THE recording format and is to provide full functionality. The SxS option is just for going straight to MOV.

I'd like to see pre-roll added via firmware as well!

I expect that Sony and JVC have an agreement to not produce similar/competing cameras.
1/3" CCD compared to 1/2" cmos on the EX1.
However the preroll cache of 3 sec is very nice.
Hopefully one can get that on the EX series with a future upgrade.
Edit to add:
By attaching the optional SxS media recorder, the GY-HM700 will record in the .MP4 format used by Sony's XDCAM EX™ onto high speed SxS memory cards.

it's a shame really, even if it produces nice images it will always have the stigma of being a 1/3 inch camera.. Looks like it will be an awesome camera either way!

I note that in the technical specs they talk about a new design of optical block with pixel offset but when they mention the CCD's there is no mention of any new design or higher resolution. This hints at using existing 720 CCD's from their other cameras but with pixel shift to get better resolution. With small 1/3" CCD's it would be very difficult to get full 1920x1080, low noise and good sensitivity all at the same time, so this might be the best approach but it often leads to excessive aliasing and other issues. So we will have to wait and see how the pictures look.

I do like the form factor. Full shoulder but still a lot less bulk than a traditional full shoulder camera. I have a JVC HD101 and it does sit on my shoulder very well. I just wish the pictures were less "electronic".

Alister's comments had me searching the specs and I found this.
So I'm a bit confused. I take it that this new offering will shoot full 1920 x 1080 at 35Mbps, an improvement over the 25Mbps HDV I have been shooting with a Canon XL-H1a. That's basically the same compression rate of the older XDCAM. Alister hinted that the 1/3" sensors might struggle to produce good detail without problems.

Any others have an opinion as to what the image quality should be on this rig?

I'm definitely watching this camera, very interested.
~Records to SD or optional SxS recorder.
~Great glass available.
~HUGE LCD
~High res VF
~HD/SD SDI Output

But the EX3 has the stigma of being a 1/2" camera.
These 2 will definitely compete as long as the image from the JVC is good. If it's the same chips as the HD200 etc., and up-rezzed I get the feeling it'd be way way below the EX cameas.
I like the idea of having CDD rather than CMOS and rolling shutter. Also if you shoot wildlife then smaller chip gives more magnification to lenses, always a good thing.

Steve

It will make a 1920x1080 RECORDING, but that's not to say the camera front end will be capable of producing a picture with enough resolution to fully take advantage of this. A little like printing a 16mm film negative on to 35mm stock - you end up with a 35mm print, but the actual resolution is mostly determined by the resolution of the 16mm neg.

I fully agree with all Alister says - that JVC haven't mentioned pixel counts, just H,V pixel shifting, leads me to suspect 1280x720 chips. I also fully agree about the form factor. I do note the power consumption is quoted as 20watts that seems pretty high considering the new Panasonic HPX300 is 18watts with full res chips (and a lot of other features) and the EX3 is only 13.5watts, and that with 1/2" chips!

Thanks for that, David. I get what you're saying. It may RECORD at 1920 x 1080 but the real question will be what does the image look like. I guess we'll just have to wait and see when it starts shipping.

I found the other huge thread on this camera and am reading through it.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-pro-h...camcorder.html

I'm still excited about this camera and can't wait till it's released and we get some feedback from those who are shooting it.

I'm wondering if Discovery will give it the same respect as the EX series. I'm also wondering about low light performance with the 1/3" chip.

Mick Haensler
Higher Ground Media

It's a shame they cant make the HZ-CA13U adapter that allows you to use 16mm lenses a lot cheaper. I think many would then be tempted.

Why not just get a simple metal adapter made, there should be plenty of space to do it? Not sure what benefit you'd get from 16mm lenses though?

Steve

Just a guess on my part, but I seriously doubt it.

Considering all the speculation about the JVC being comparable to the EX, put yourself in Sony's position. Would you share all such technology with your competitor to produce a camera that would be in direct competition with two of your products? Or would share only part of that technology in order that the competing camera maintained a step or two below yours?

EX stigma for 1/2" chips? In all the comments I've read it was more like buzz and excitement! The JVC will have it's place, but you can see in this very thread the disappointment in the chip size.... whether it's misplaced or not is another discussion all together. :)

1/2" CMOS Sony - The ONLY way any manufacturer can currently get 1/2" chips in a camera as small as the EX series is with CMOS. It has to do with, at least in part, heat. CMOS chips generate less heat than CCD AFAIK.

If you want 1/2" CCD you must have a bigger body to disperse the heat.

1/2" chips in a small body is a BIG PLUS if you MUST have a small body. Sony is the only one to have done this. It's a trade off. You want Big Body, Big Chips, CCD OR you want Small Body and you either have 1/2" CMOS or 1/3" CCD.

Unless there's another design breakthrough, you will NOT get 1/2" CCD in a small body.

It seems some people don't get that.

Can you even get full 1920x1080 from a 1/2" CCD? Seems Cmos has more than one advantage below 2/3 inch.

Hi Steve

This link may help to understand better. The idea is to use 16mm lenses IE in my case Zeiss superspeeds that would give the same dof as 16mm film cameras or you can use 35mm camera lenses.

JVC Professional Features page

so this adapter is like a relay lens? It condenses the 16mm or 35mm image down for the 1/3 inch image block of the HD camera and keeps the original depth of field?

The adaptor mounts right up to the 1/3" lens mount on the JVC and allows you to mount PL mount S16 and 35mm motion picture lenses and take advantage of the FOV and DOF characteristics of those lenses. I own the adaptor and just spent several hours Thursday at our local ciné rental house trying out lenses.

One note: don't bother with high speed lenses, unless you already own/have access to them. The adaptor/camera combination has an inherent T2.8 maximum aperture. Don't be discouraged though: the adaptor, through the magics of physics, imparts a 1.5 stop INCREASE in light over 1/3" zoom lenses. Check out this thread for more info.

HD200 and Primes - Help Me Understand, please. - The Digital Video Information Network

BTW, the PL adaptor is NOT just a piece of metal to allow one size mount to adapt to another. There are all sorts of adaptors out there for 35mm still lenses to be used on cameras. All of these impart a magnification factor (in the case of 35mm to 1/3" the factor is 7x) due to the different size image target.

The PL lens adaptor takes the image from the ciné lens and using multiple optical glass elements, refocuses the image so the camera's sensors can acquire it with FOV and DOF intact from the ciné lens.

There's a reason it's $5-6k. Well built and HEAVY.

They don't have to combat it.

JVC released an inferior camera with 1/3" sensors and wants to charge more for it. I'm not fooled.

This post reminds me of the stickers I see in the back window of pickup trucks with a certain cartoon character performing a certain bodily function on either a Ford football or Chevy bowtie.

You're welcome to your opinion and choice of platform but some of us are quite thrilled about the possibilities of this new camera. We've been given a choice. I made mine and it sounds like you've made yours.

My little SR11 does a damn fine job as a B cam, I imagine there will only be a few areas where the JVC cams falls short of the EX cams.. plus it will be full shoulder with a proper ear speaker. It will find it's niche.

Hi Mark, I didn't realise it was a relay system, thought you just wanted to attach 16mm lenses. Can you not use the 35mm adapters from LETUS etc.?

Steve

Yes you could but the 16mm zeiss lenses dont work that great with the letus. Actually I was very interested in the JVC lineup before the EX-1 came along and blew it away. I dont really now see the 1/3 chip in the JVC makes any difference if your going to use an adapter to control dof If its now using the EX-1 codec and is true 1920 with interchangeable lenses then it seems to me for the purpose of getting a film look the JVC might be a better option now. we'll see.

If somehow in your wildest imagination you can convince yourself that 1/3" is just as good as the EX1's 1/2", then you should work for JVC.

Without seeing output from both cameras that's a bit of wild guesswork. You probably would have guessed that the 1/2" sensors on the EX1 would not be as good a picture as 2/3" chip cameras but it seems that's not neccessarily the case at all.

Steve

Actually I currently work for the most grueling and oppressive employer I've ever worked for: myself. And please, refrain from making this personal. It depends on your definition of what "just as good as" entails: some of us have ZERO interest in CMOS. Again, all personal taste based on workflow and our own perception of quality. The JVC cameras are positioned differently than the EX series.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the Sonys and I'm pleased as punch to have Sony's codec available to me. Had Sony given us the option of a shoulder mounted 1/2" CCD camera shooting in XDCamEX at around $10-15k, I would have bought in. They stuck to the semi-shoulder mounted and I bought JVC in HDV. Now I'll be buying the HM700.

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that their choice is NOT universal and some of us are looking very differently at specs?

So it's okay to assume 1/2" is as good as 2/3", but to imagine 1/3" could be as good as 1/2" you should work for JVC?

Obviously a camera is more than just it's sensors and there are a lot of factors that contribute to image quality.

But do the math.

If what you are saying is that the 1/2" sensors on the EX are as good as the 2/3" chip cams AND your are also saying there is the possibility that the 1/3" chip may be as good as the EX1's 1/2"

THEN... what you are ultimately suggesting is the possibility that the JVC 1/3" sensors are as good as 2/3" sensors. Doubtful to say the least. In fact, I now fear the thread will be moved to AREA 51.

I think what I'm saying is that you can't really assume much until you've seen the kit, and that there is much more to a good picture than chip size.
It's not me that's done tests with 1/2" EX3 vs 2/3" PDW700 and found they look almost identical - in fact it's a bit of a disappointment to me as I own a 700!
Steve