So what do we actually wish for in an HD camera, if the JVC ain't it? I'll give my wishes:

- 3 CCD, 16x9 native. Sorry, but the color beauty and low light performance is simply better with three than one, and always will be

- Ok, so I'm not gonna ask for 1080p, but I definitely want 720/24p in there, regardless of the other formats.

- ALL MANUAL EVERYTHING - including exposure, white balance, etc.

- Under $4000.

Too much to ask? Ask JVC. :)

Well I'm sure that Sony and Canon will come through with these things.

i doubt they will make it 24p and all these other things for 4000.....they want money and consumers dont have it (at least in the quantity of the pros).....they will most likely never compromise their profesional products value with equivalent or superior consumer technology....why would anyone pay 60,000 dollars for a camera thats slightly better than a 5,000 dollar consumer version. capitalism is crap if you ask me, but im pretty sure thats how they are operating.

Even if that is what's going on, you would think someone would break ranks and do it anyway. Like Panasonic did with the DVX100.

Originally posted by Peter Moore : Even if that is what's going on, you would think someone would break ranks and do it anyway. Like Panasonic did with the DVX100.

Panasonic is the "king of sly". The DVX100 was and is meant only to "wet the appetites" of all the would-be pros out there. It is no more then an "open door policy", inviting in "all the masses" to take a taste of "what could be" if they think they have the "right stuff".

Hey, how about all those trite clichés... Still true though!

Someone should take a poll on the current DVX100 owners who are actually using their cameras. Ask them if they can ever see themselves buying an SDX900 if they get a higher budget film opportunity. Those who own and like the DVX100 are or would be drooling over the owning the SDX900 if they had the money to spend on one.

No, I think the DVX100 is Panasonic's way of applying a little teflon grease to the already smoothly spinning wheels in their pro line.

-Rodger

If I could ask for anything, I'd sure ask for 1080i. Why not? I wouldn't insist on 3CCD though. I'd just like the best performance possible whether it's one or a hundred imagers. Give me good light sensitivity, good dynamic range, and good resolution. I don't presume to know how to design it and don't know why so many others do.

I'd like interchangable lenses like the XL1 but smaller than the XL1. Of course I want to house it for underwater use. The XL1 strains the limit size-wise for that application. The current JVC or PD150 is a nice size.

I also don't think 24p is interesting to anyone not printing to film.

<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Russ : i doubt they will make it 24p and all these other things for 4000.....they want money and consumers dont have it (at least in the quantity of the pros).....they will most likely never compromise their profesional products value with equivalent or superior consumer technology....why would anyone pay 60,000 dollars for a camera thats slightly better than a 5,000 dollar consumer version. capitalism is crap if you ask me, but im pretty sure thats how they are operating. -->>>

True, but what about Sharp and a few other manufactures? They don't have a professional product line... :D

>>i doubt they will make it 24p and all these other things for 4000.....they want money and consumers dont have it (at least in the quantity of the pros).....they will most likely never compromise their profesional products value with equivalent or superior consumer technology....why would anyone pay 60,000 dollars for a camera thats slightly better than a 5,000 dollar consumer version. capitalism is crap if you ask me, but im pretty sure thats how they are operating.<<

Canon already announced that the XL2 is going to have 24p, and unlike Sony and Panasonic, they don't have any higher end cam sales of their own to harm. Sony and Panasonic will have no choice but to keep up. And remember, these are still high compression HD cameras with cheap lenses, so they will be FAR from the likes of a VariCam or F900.

I'd like to see:

-720p60/50 - Yes thats right.. higher frame rates for this fella!

-Actual resolution Stats Vs Real REsolution of its footage. IMO the JVC doesnt really have 1280x720 pixels of resolution.

-Higher-ish bitrate so quality is kept to the max :D

-No less then say 12x Zoom (pref 18+ lol so if its fixed lens thats ok if its passes in this regard) (yeah sport/action orientated usage for moi)

-fully manual controls... THAT WORK

-Native 16:9 LCD High Rez Display As possible on cam.

- =<6000AUD :D lol (tho if it was all these things i'd probably pay 8k for it, but as if it'll happen )...

-includes kitchen sink

-and a lovely lady to operate it (j/k.. stereo type joke ladies go easy) :D

See I could live without 60p because I suspect that sort of thing would legitimately add huge cost to the camera. Think about it - you need double the internal bandwidth to process that (leaving aside the tape), and a very sensitive (e.g. large) CCD to capture good images at 1/60th of a second.

1080/60i, however, is a different story and should not be a problem. AND, 1080/60i can pretty easily be turned into 1080/24p just like the DVX100 transforms 480/60i into 480/24p.

<<<-- Originally posted by Rodger Marjama :

Someone should take a poll on the current DVX100 owners who are actually using their cameras. Ask them if they can ever see themselves buying an SDX900 if they get a higher budget film opportunity. Those who own and like the DVX100 are or would be drooling over the owning the SDX900 if they had the money to spend on one. -Rodger -->>>

I won't shoot a half-million dollar film with my HD10, only the CineAlta. Then again, people do movies in the millions on specially outfitted XL-1s....

My HD10 is to make better $500 movies.

heath

<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Moore : See I could live without 60p because I suspect that sort of thing would legitimately add huge cost to the camera. Think about it - you need double the internal bandwidth to process that (leaving aside the tape), and a very sensitive (e.g. large) CCD to capture good images at 1/60th of a second.

1080/60i, however, is a different story and should not be a problem. AND, 1080/60i can pretty easily be turned into 1080/24p just like the DVX100 transforms 480/60i into 480/24p. -->>>

Well i dont see how it could really add huge cost. No differne tto one day us thinking HD will add huge cost.. untill JVC shut every one up :D hehe. Think about it. :P

1080i60/50 is very similar bandwidth to 720p60/50 so technically it'd be easier to do native 720 then 1080 as its a lower frame size and their for less cost as a "higher end" CCD(s) is not needed. Work it out and you'll see what teh bandwidth is. But its 50fps i want and its teh standard for 720p - thats just for my wants and desires :)

My HD Camera wish list:

720/24p, one 2/3" CCD with full effective 1280x720 pixel count

F1.0, 28-280 mm lens (35 mm photography equivalent)

excellent MPEG2 processors

diversity microphone receiver built-in

built-in shotgun microphone

3D lens attechment that would work in interlaced mode

excellent optical image stabilization

manual everything with a lot of knobs and switches, not just screen menus

Audio levels with auto-manual-limiter switches

audio level meters

zebra paterns for adjustable 3 levels

large LCD with 1280x720 pixels, viewable in sunlight

Wireless synch to a second and 3rd camera

Blu-ray HD DVD based with 37 Mbps transfer rate

48 and 96 fps speeds, with some picture quality degradation

Price $10K

Less expensive version with less features and smaller CCD for $5K

More expensive version with 3 CCDs and interchangable lenses. Price $20K

Same but 1080p -- $40K

"1080i60/50 is very similar bandwidth to 720p60/50 so technically it'd be easier to do native 720 then 1080 as its a lower frame size"

Yeah you're right, I miscalculated. But still, in that case 720/60p or 1080/60i is going to be double the bandwidth (and required CCD sensitivity) of what the JVC can do. So I think that that could shoot up the cost. If I had to live with 30/24p to keep the camera under $4k, I wouldn't complain. :)

<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Moore : "1080i60/50 is very similar bandwidth to 720p60/50 so technically it'd be easier to do native 720 then 1080 as its a lower frame size"

Yeah you're right, I miscalculated. But still, in that case 720/60p or 1080/60i is going to be double the bandwidth (and required CCD sensitivity) of what the JVC can do. So I think that that could shoot up the cost. If I had to live with 30/24p to keep the camera under $4k, I wouldn't complain. :) -->>>

yeah tho i think in reality its not that much more cost. But of course us consumers have no choice. They put a price on "cool" things simply becuase they can. So we have to wear it unless we buy "old" technology thats cheap as chips. ehhe.

CHeers

PS. i want high fps tho... i can have lotsa fun with such things! :D

<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Russ : i doubt they will make it 24p and all these other things for 4000.....they want money and consumers dont have it (at least in the quantity of the pros).....they will most likely never compromise their profesional products value with equivalent or superior consumer technology....why would anyone pay 60,000 dollars for a camera thats slightly better than a 5,000 dollar consumer version. capitalism is crap if you ask me, but im pretty sure thats how they are operating. -->>>

I dunno. I don't see it as really eating into the sales of their big guns. The studios and big production and rental houses aren't going to switch to consumer camcorders just because they start having more of the usable features that the pro models have. On the other hand, for every one of those $60k models they'll probably sell wanna-be filmmakers 30 of the "prosumer" models and open a relationship that could sell more upscale hardware down the road. Anytime pro features start to become available in consumer lines I think it translates to a more aggressive sales model across the board.

"You've seen our Varicam, right? The same technology is available right here in our new Vari-cheap. You trust our name and when you're ready to move up to one of the big beasts we'll be waiting."

I imagine we're going to see some very exciting product introductions in the next year or two.

My own wishlist?

- Interchangable lenses on an established mount. As some others have mentioned, I'd love to see at least one very fast lens offered, even if its a prime. As film emulsions have gotten faster the big lens makers have kind of stopped thinking about fast lenses, but it would be great for video.

- A dock for some standard ENG wireless receiver built into the camera.

- A decent viewfinder, even if its optional. Canon has done a nice job with the B&W viewfinder option on the XL-1. If anything needed something along those lines, it's an HD machine.

-A nice built-in zoom motor. I still have never used a consumer camcorder that had a usable power zoom and that shouldn't be something you have to tack onto a camcorder before you can use it effectively.

This may be out of the question, but what about an optical viewfinder? Then you could actually focus properly without worrying about the resolution of the viewfinder.