Ok, I trying to research different HD cameras to buy, and I thought I had it narrowed down to a couple of sonys. but then I started looking at prices and I noticed that I can get the JVC hd110 for about the same price as the HRV-Z1.

Now I always thought that the HD110 was a really sweet looking camera, and really I like some of the features on it. but other then that, I don't know anything about it.

Are there any advantages to the Hd110 vs. the Z1?

How does the quality compare?

Is there any reason why I shouldn't get the HD 110?


What are your thoughts?

William.


Until better brains than mine come along here's a few thoughts.


The Z1 is 1080i HDV/DVCAM/MiniDV.

The JVC is 720P HDV/DVCAM playback only/MiniDV.


The number of available pixels is about the same.


Ergonomically, the Sony is pretty much a handycam and is branded as such in its HDR-FX1 form. Handhold it for a series of extneded takes and you will become rather weary and shaky as you have to hold it in front and outboard a little unless you are using the LCD.

The JVC is styled after larger ENG type cameras and the layout of controls is familiar. YOu can cart it around on your shoulder all day and feel fine.

Robustness. - The JVC is of hardy construction with more external metal structure. The Sony is made of plastic with a light alloy internal frame. Both are strong enough to deal with the occasional bump or knock.

One item on the JVC which will get you into trouble is the 6pin firewire port. The shield which doubles as mechanical support for the plug (jack) is little better than formed tinplate and soon becomes spread wide which then allows intermittent loss of pin contact.

This may well be a cause of much of the firewire port failure of both the camera's internals and Mac computers as there is a hot power conductor in 6pin ports. The Sony uses a 4pin port and the shield is robust and a snug fit, to the point of awkwardness of plugging in.

It is also poorly placed ergonomically facing downwards however this is an attempt by Sony to give some mechanical protection to the plug by directing the lead in a path parallel to the camera body.

Power-wise, the JVC is very greedy. It has to have a lot of horsepower to process 1280 x 720 images progessively.

The small handycam batteries are good for about 30 minutes and will succumb over a shorter timeframe due to more frequent deepcycling. You really need the vee-mount battery system. The Sony is less greedy as it is dealing with interlace only. The available batteries can be larger and run the cam much longer.

In the JVC, there were issues, now resolved of a split screen contrast/brightness defect.

The JVC offers the ability to mount different lenses directly. The Sony has a built-in zoom lens. You can add consumer style accessories on front for wide-angle or tele conversion, but you cannot improve on the lens itself whereas with the JVC some producers of TV broadcast material rent in high-end lenses and mount them via B4 to JVC adaptors.

I have used both camera types and I like both for their different features. The Sony when left to fend for itself out of the box will work fine and give you some good images. Once you want to finesse and manipulate the images in camera, then you have fewer choices.

The JVC on the other hand requires the operator to get off his backside and do some homework and learning. The reward is more creative control and of course progressive versus interlaced images which the Sony cannot achieve except by post-process and at a small resolution penalty.

There - my two bob's worth. Hopefully better than I will now advise you more competently and with less wordstuff.

Get the SONY Z1 never regret once you press record and playback. Look at the Format and Resolution Comparison, hope can help you more on looking between this 2 cam.

HDV Video Tips and Tricks (http://www.martin-doppelbauer.de/video/indexEN.htm)

Get the SONY Z1 never regret once you press record and playback. Look at the Format and Resolution Comparison, hope can help you more on looking between this 2 cam.

HDV Video Tips and Tricks (http://www.martin-doppelbauer.de/video/indexEN.htm)

In horizontal resolution terms the JVC usually comes out slightly better in tests than the Z1, in vertical resolution there's nothing to chose, they're roughly the same. Ergonomically the JVC is better and has less silly buttons, but again it depends what you're used to shooting with.

Look at the whole package, including how well your editing package can handle the JVC's HDV1.

The Z1 is a common documentary camera, so if it's important to match in with other cameras on a production that might be a consideration.

Having an interchangeable lens mount, the JVC has a wider range of options for different lens including a PL mount adapter for 16mm film lenses.

In the end, the main deciding factor will be if you wish to shoot progressive or interlace.

I was in the same boat 4 months ago and chose the JVC HD200 - in fact, I'm so impressed, I now own two of them. I would advise that the stock batteries on the JVC 110 will be a disappointment in terms of run time, especially compared to 6+ hours on the Sony. The 200 will set you back more cash but you get what you pay for here. My Anton Bauer Dionic90 batteries that came as part of my kit run the camera for 4 - 4.5 hours. As well, there have been significant reports on this forum about the 1xx series blowing fuses with professional power packs attached.

I have hundreds of hours on the Z1 and the thing I could NEVER get used to (even with thousands of hours on the PD150/170 family) is the servo focus control. I can't dial in an accurate rack focus to save my life. The full manual lens on the JVC was the clincher for me.

I should mention, I come from a broadcast background so the JVC's form factor and all manual controls were a blessing for me and not a hinderance. Make sure you know your own abilities and limitations before buying a manual professional camera.

Bob/Brian,

I know that Progressive is the better option over Interlaced when choosing an HDTV, but how critical is the difference in selecting a (less than $8k) camcorder?

(I'm primarily an event videographer with distribution to SD DVD's and web Quicktime and Flash).

Bob/Brian,

I know that Progressive is the better option over Interlaced when choosing an HDTV, but how critical is the difference in selecting a (less than $8k) camcorder?

(I'm primarily an event videographer with distribution to SD DVD's and web Quicktime and Flash).

I really depends if you want more of a "film look". Live events are usually shot interlace or 60p for smoother motion, so you don't have that 24p/30p/25p look that you get when shooting film.

If you want to shoot 60p you'll need to use a JVC HD200/250 series camera.

It really comes down to personal taste and the style you wish to use.

Brian continues to bring up good points: I shoot exclusively at 60 fps as I find the motion at 24 and 30 fps to be unnatural for my subject matter (documentaries and training videos destined for either broadcast in SD, DVD in SD or computer based viewing in HD). Take a good luck at motion in 24p and 30p before committing to the 110. The interlacing of the Z1 OR the 60 fps of the 200 might be more of what you are looking for. Again, you may like 24 or 30P. Personal choice, really.

Hi Brian,

I was looking at your paper on setting up a rendering template in Sony Vegas.

I don’t understand why you would set your template up as progressive. and then render out to interlaced.
From your web page :
2. Change the project settings to 50 frames Double-PAL (or 60 frames Double-NTSC), progressive, interlace method 'Interpolate Fields':
3. Render the video using your favorite SD-template (in interlaced format)

Why change to 50 frames Double-PAL?
Why render back to interlaced?
Could you explain why you use this method.

Nick

Hey! Thanks for all the input!
It's been really helpful!

I think I'll probably end up going with the Z1. It sounds like it fits my style and application better. Even though I'm a sucker for big fancy cameras, but I think I'll get over my ego trip and buy the camera that works best for me.

Hi Brian,

I was looking at your paper on setting up a rendering template in Sony Vegas.

I don’t understand why you would set your template up as progressive. and then render out to interlaced.
From your web page :
2. Change the project settings to 50 frames Double-PAL (or 60 frames Double-NTSC), progressive, interlace method 'Interpolate Fields':
3. Render the video using your favorite SD-template (in interlaced format)

Why change to 50 frames Double-PAL?
Why render back to interlaced?
Could you explain why you use this method.

Nick

Hi Nick,

I think you must be thinking of a different Brian.

I've got an older version of Vegas, but all it ever gets used for is updating the showreel.

I'm assuming that he renders back to interlace because that's the standard that will create the least problems for people playing back the SD video. The Double PAL being a workflow that allows you to render the two interlace fields from I assume a 25p original. That's just me guessing why he's doing it.

Sorry Brian,

I clicked on the link from one of your posts ( quote) and thought it was you.

Nick

Ok, I trying to research different HD cameras to buy, and I thought I had it narrowed down to a couple of sonys. but then I started looking at prices and I noticed that I can get the JVC hd110 for about the same price as the HRV-Z1.

Now I always thought that the HD110 was a really sweet looking camera, and really I like some of the features on it. but other then that, I don't know anything about it.

Are there any advantages to the Hd110 vs. the Z1?

How does the quality compare?

Is there any reason why I shouldn't get the HD 110?


What are your thoughts?


I would look at the Z5 it will be close to the same price point as the Z1 with progressive modes and better low light.

Sony HVR-Z5 Camera Review - WWW.URBANFOX.TV (http://www.urbanfox.tv/articles/cameras/c35sonyZ5camera.htm)

That would be nice, but I need it to shoot a wedding on Dec. 6th. I already sold my XL1 to help pay for it.

That would be nice, but I need it to shoot a wedding on Dec. 6th. I already sold my XL1 to help pay for it.


William take a look a my site most of my Wedding demos were shot with the Z1, FX1 and V1u

Hey! Thanks for all the input!
It's been really helpful!

I think I'll probably end up going with the Z1. It sounds like it fits my style and application better. Even though I'm a sucker for big fancy cameras, but I think I'll get over my ego trip and buy the camera that works best for me.

Really? Why? After reading the posts here I thought anyone would choose the JVC. To me its toy vs pro camera.

Different horses for different courses.


You can toss a Z1, two of the largest camcorder-fit batteries and a tape in a backpack of clothes and go, No frigging around with half-hour camcorder batteries and dragging a solar around to charge them or dragging around a heavy IDX or Anton Bauer or vee-mount.

The JVC is a familiar toolset for previous users of higher-end cameras.

Both cameras share user anecotes of downtime due to breakdowns.


In my experience.


Sony Z1 - got dusted at a rock gig - head clean and tape path alignment.

JVC - Two firewire boards - refasten carry handle - LCD detached - service and clean.


Both have about 90 hrs up on the drums.


Each offers a unique benefit to particular users. It not Chevy versus Ford here.

Well I get about 4 hours for each of my IDX batteries and about 1 hour out of the stock replacment IMPACT brand batteries before I went to the IDX battery system..... (probably should have just bought $300 in the IMPACT brand batteries would habe been the smarter move. Replace tape and battery at the same time and call it good).

I shoot 24p exclusivly, and the Sony HDV platform simply doesn't deliver. 60i great, 24p sony doesn't do that great, and I refuse to spend hours rendering and converting 60i to 24p. But the thing to remember is I shoot 24p. The JVC is a real 24p camera. 30p I think is worthless except for You-tube and if you need a 60i look at the Canon or Sony HDV platforms. My next camera (assuming it's not a used HD100/110 as a B camera) will likely be a Panasonic HPX-500, though I wouldn't turn my nose up to a HVX-200 used if it where the right price. I'm not a big fan of HDV color handling regardless... but it is cheaper to shoot than P2 cards.

My next camera (assuming it's not a used HD100/110 as a B camera) will likely be a Panasonic HPX-500, though I wouldn't turn my nose up to a HVX-200 used if it where the right price. I'm not a big fan of HDV color handling regardless... but it is cheaper to shoot than P2 cards.

Hi Alex,,
I am thinking the same way about my next camera. I was wondering what would make you choose the HPX500..I have the 13x lens on my JVC111 so would have to have a wide on the HPX500 as well.

Hi Alex,,
I am thinking the same way about my next camera. I was wondering what would make you choose the HPX500..I have the 13x lens on my JVC111 so would have to have a wide on the HPX500 as well.

I'm not overly happy with HDV in general, howver unlike HDV 1080i 24f, our 720p 24fps works as advertised and the 1080i HDV sony and canons don't. Your glass is exceptional. If you Panasonic or the better Sony's you will have the same issues of the stock lens being OK, but for $3,000 to $6,000 more you get a substancially better lens. Looking around at the 2/3 lenses they range from $2,000 to $30,000 and I'm sure it's a long gradual curve. BH had over 111 2/3 different lenses for instance.

Now....

If say the new Sony/JVC/FocusEnhancements gear that is coming out in a few months for the JVC 200U has the XD-CAM or similar file format, that might be a real winner. A little less compressed for 24p and a LOT less compressed for better 60i/60p as well as 1080i for those clients, combined with a 17x or 13x lens. I wouldn't have a reason to jump ship.

I wish I had gotten a 200u instead of a 110. Hindsite is 20/20, but then again, I shoot 24p, even for sports footage.

Just to help prove myself wrong before anyone else does. Sony is releasing in Dec 2008 (this month) the HVR-Z5U. I hadn't paid much attention to Sony recently because of my 24p interest for myprojects... HOWEVER, Sony is releasing a 24p camera. Sony Fan Boys I'm sure know all about it. Reportedly 24p/30p (only? No I don't believe it either... it must have 60i as well) 3 x 1/3 Clear Vid Cmos sensors (diaganly rotated as the other recent Sony products) The 24p is said to be captured then recorded in the 1080i 60i format with flags for NLE reconstruction. Will this be better than Canon's 24f? Perhaps. Canon's 24f is pretty nice I admit. They are still in the 60i transport streame which means lots of number crunching in longer GOP's than I think is necissary. MSRP at $4,950. Even if street is $1,000 less it would make more sense for someone to get a Canon unless I discover something thrilling in the sony manual I just downloaded. Again, 60i, both cameras are good. I probably like physically Sony more than the Canon. Up till this one, Canon had the Sony beat for their flavor of 24f. Both took a lot more CPU time than JVC 720p did (12 GOP 1080i vs 6 GOP 720p) and downconverting 720p HDV to SD DVD took 1/3 as much time as similar footage from 1080i 24f to SD DVD.