1. Went shooting to see the difference between 1/30th and 1/60th. However, I followed the rules of film shooting. The results were very good. Motion aliasing can be controlled.

2. In theory the lower blur of 1/60th should capture clearer images. It also matches the 180 degree shutter of film. I was happy that 1/60th -- when I shot right -- didn't strobe. So I'm settling in on 1/60th when I set speed.

3. The good thing is it didn't make any difference whether I used 1/30th or 1/60th. That means with the right -- I think an 16X ND -- the camera will naturally stay at 1/30th to 1/60th. That means you likely do NOT need to set shutter-speed. Which means its safe to use the Exposure Control to adjust exposure -- and better -- lock exposure.

4. For wide shots, AF works fine. But for close work you can't use AF. It's too slow to keep up with movements. It will hunt. If you shoot off-center -- which you should -- the AF focuses on the space between. And will hunt.

5. Turning ON then OFF the AF works -- but it's a real pain waiting for the AF to get focus. About 3 seconds -- if the subject isn't moving.

6. It's hard to see focus in bright light on the LCD. Thankfully, you can on the way too tiny VF. But focus IS an issue -- which you really see when the pix is 8 feet wide. I suspect the solution is to shoot wide, but move in close. Using an 8X ND also might help as the iris should be more closed.

7. Cloudy days are great for shooting because the contrast is much lower. No burned-out highlights.

8. Used SVHScap to capture footage. Demuxed and edited in FCP 4. Encoded 5 minutes with Heuris encoder. Recorded it back to the HD10 and DVHS deck.

Sorry, moving pictures are dynamic and you need manual controls. If nothing else, you need to lock the iris and the shutter, unless you shoot a home video. The double exposure is not seen at the slow panning speed; still it exists and subjectively this double exposure effect is equivalent to interlaced image. So this camera becomes 720i, which is subjectively equal to 480p in sharpness.

Incorrect; the "double exposure" is an optical effect as explained here (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthre...15&pagenumber=2). Hope this helps,

Chris as your link didn't seem to work. Jay Nemeth just posted this excellent description.

link (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11779&perpage=15&pagenumber=2)

The camera is a true 720p source.

Varicam records at 720p and it does not have the double exposure problem. CineAlta does not have this problem either. Digi Beta does not have this problem. I am positive that the image is scanned twice per frame and the 2 images are combined, giving you interlaced level of sharpness, making this camera equal to 480p; adding all the other defficiencies, and you have a camera on the overall level of Digital 8. I would definitely wait for a new Canon HD, or Sony.

Joseph, this theory is easy to dispell. The frames themselves contain no double image, they are true 720p. I have worked with output from the HD1 and HD10, neither has a double exposure. You should download any of the sample sequenced that are available online. Use a player that can single step, every frame is discrete.

Joseph, as I understand it from your posting history, you were previously paid to "hype" the JVC HD cam by someone, then you were let go from that job. Are you now hired by someone to put-down this camera? Could you give us all the current status of your "opinions for hire" work please? ...as the flip in attitudes and blatent put-down of every aspect of the camera is so obvious that it's got very hard for anyone who's followed your postings to put any credibility in anything at all that you say.

Will be leaving for Europe soon, so this is my last post.

1. I never worked for JVC. I was hired by a PR company that worked for a company that was going to do modification to the JVC to give it pro features. I was under NDA. As it became clear that the camera's image is poor, the project was canceled. I was paid the full contract amount.

2. It still appeared that the camera would be good for student-type budget movies. Now it is clear that it is not the case. The DVX with the Century Optics anamorphic adapter is a lot better camera to make low budget movies.

3. The question is: What is this camera good for? Is it better than any another camera in its price range, for any type of production? My opinion is that it is not.

4. If someone ever worked for JVC, I would question the crowd with the sudden positive posts.

5. Image quality: someone needs to do a shootout against the Panasonic DVX in progressive, with anamorphic adapter.

6. Overall usefulness including the lack of manual controls, jittery image, etc.?

7. I think that the new HDV standard is a positive development; I'm sure it was worked on long before it was announced. I would not be surprised if Canon would come out with HD version of XL1 soon. I'd certainly wait for that, or for low cost HD Sony, Panasonic, Hitachi. I'm willing to bet that even Sharp will have a better HD camera. They have the capabilities to make their own MPEG2 processors. JVC does not. Sharp does not have to worry about competing with $60K cameras; they don't have any.

Originally posted by Joseph George : ...The DVX with the Century Optics anamorphic adapter is a lot better camera to make low budget movies...
I have seen you make reference to the Century Optics anamorphic adapter in a few different posts now. I have been meaning to ask, but haven't taken the time to until now - It's my understanding that Century Optics only has a working prototype anamorphic adapter at this time. This comes from Ken Robings, an engineer (I believe) at Century Optics as well as a phone conversation I have had with Century 2 weeks ago.

Production units may or may not be made, as no firm decision has been made as of last week to produce this lens -- This based on Ken's posts at 2-pop as well as the phone conversation mentioned above. Should this lens actually reach production, it is still 4 to 6 months away. This is what I was told and understand.

Do you know something different? Or, are you just presuming that the Century Optics anamorphic with the DVX100 "should be" a better camera?

-Rodger

::::at the dock, waving my hanky as the boat sails off into the sunrise::::: points well taken, Joseph.

But, HD is still HD. :::drooling and making Homer Simpson "b-uh-e-e-e-e-r" noises:::

So I'm about 2 inches away from getting the HD1 or HD10. Help with a few more questions, please?

1) I thought I understood that the HD10 only has a XLR mount. Forgive my non-professional naivete, but on pictures of the HD10 from the B&H website it shows a relatively (for me) honking big microphone on the top. Does that microphone actually come with the HD10, or is that a "serving suggestion" picture only? And if there is no microphone, is there a cheap built-in something-or-other that can suffice until I survive the blow of buying the HD10, ND filters etc. and can afford to buy XLR?

2) I'm still a little concerned about losing data integrity from camera to home theater projection screen. Did I understand correctly that unless one uses the firewire, some signal is lost? I have a Denon DTS home theater receiver that has S-video, component and "optical" I/Os and coaxial inputs but no firewire. I also have an In-Focus LS-110 projector that has composite, S-video, VESA and HD15 VESA inputs. To avoid signal loss, what's going to be the best way to go from camera to screen (via computer is fine), and do I need any more equipment/cables? I'd hate to buy this and find out I'm not getting any HD . . . then Joseph would have the last laugh indeed . . .

Thanks, you guys are great.

- Marla (last post as a "tourist")

if you buy one marla be sure to get the HD10, not the 1, the oversharpening destroys the picture quality in the hd1 (what i have and will probably trade up for the HD10 soon).

<<<-- Originally posted by Joseph George :

5. Image quality: someone needs to do a shootout against the Panasonic DVX in progressive, with anamorphic adapter.

-->>>

I have already done a shootout between these two cameras. Barry Green from the International Cinema Expo talks a little bit about it here:

http://www.2-pop.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=PanasonicAGDVX100Camera&Number=610309&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1

Jay

<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Russ : if you buy one marla be sure to get the HD10, not the 1, the oversharpening destroys the picture quality in the hd1 (what i have and will probably trade up for the HD10 soon). -->>>

If you manage that I'd like to know how you did it. I'd like to trade versions myself.

Marla,

I hesitated answering your question because I can only answer part 1 confidently. Plus I was also very distraught over Josephs departure from the forum. Sniffle, Sniffle.

1) I have an HD10 and it comes with the standard carrying handle as well as the XLR adapter handle. It does not come with an XLR or any other external microphone. However, both the HD1 and HD10 have built in microphone for casual use.
2) As I understand it the firewire cable is used to transfer digital data from digital media to digital media without loss. Camera to computer or camera to DVHS. Most, if not all display devises eventually convert digital signals to analog using component inputs. I don’t know about DVI computer monitors or VESA and VESA HD15 inputs. Doesn’t the LS-110 have component inputs? I’m also interested in this line of projectors.

<<<-- Originally posted by Marla Mathias :
1) I thought I understood that the HD10 only has a XLR mount. Forgive my non-professional naivete, but on pictures of the HD10 from the B&H website it shows a relatively (for me) honking big microphone on the top. Does that microphone actually come with the HD10, or is that a "serving suggestion" picture only? And if there is no microphone, is there a cheap built-in something-or-other that can suffice until I survive the blow of buying the HD10, ND filters etc. and can afford to buy XLR?
- Marla (last post as a "tourist") -->>>

No mic, and that sucks!

heath

Joseph will be back. When things get a bit warm he usually departs---last time he was going to some unamed place to work on a script with an Academy Award winning writer (of course he wouldn't tell us who he was!) I suspect that his mode of transportation is a black helicopter and his final destination is area 51. Bon Voyage--take a couple of extra weeks1

"if you buy one marla be sure to get the HD10, not the 1, the oversharpening destroys the picture quality in the hd1 (what i have and will probably trade up for the HD10 soon)."

Is there actually a difference in the picture quality between the HD1 and HD10? i thought they were the same. If this is true what is different that causes the oversharpening on the HD1. Is this like edge enhancement? I've seen clips from both cameras and I am not sure I can tell the difference and I am using a Dwin TV3 on an 8 ft screen to view.

I will probably purchase one of these soon but I am not sure if the HD10 is worth the almost $800 price difference. I can get the HD1 for about $2500 and the HD10 for $3300. Is the HD10 worth an extra $800? I don't think the added resolution of the viewfinder in the 10 would justify this difference but if there is truly a difference in picture quality it might. The camera will be only for amateur use.

<<<-- Originally posted by Raymond Krystof :

Doesn’t the LS-110 have component inputs? I’m also interested in this line of projectors. -->>>

The LS-110 has component inputs, but of course you still do get signal degradation. But I'm getting the sense from everybody (or I'm just deluding myself) that there is enough "HD-ness" left after the component conversion to make it still worth it.

The LS-110 is indeed very sweet. And of course the price continues to move south.

Now I have to decide how unethical I am. Do I try and pretend that the HD10 is an incredibly generous birthday present for my husband? Or do I 'fess up that the camera is for myself? ("But darling, I only got the camera so that I can record how handsome you look in your new birthday-present tube socks....")

By the way - now that we have established that the rules of shooting film must be followed to avoid "ghosting", can anyone recommend a nice "Rules of Shooting Film for Dummies" book or website? Not looking for a supercondensed version of a 4-year degree, I just want to be warned about the most bonehead of amatuer mistakes.

Do please respond to my post quickly - Condoleezza Rice is sending me to the Middle East solve the pesky PLO/Israeli problem, and I must stop and pick up Kofi Annan on the way...

'rules of shooting film' should really be applied to everything that you want to be graceful and beautiful. 30p and 24p have just enough frames that the eye buys the movement but that it can easily be tracked. so of course its important to shoot accordingly...anyone who thinks its a fault of the camera should look to whoever is behind the camera first.