I was able to take my new HM700 out for a spin Wednesday evening in Portland, Oregon.

The weather was uncharacteristically warm and muggy for this time of year, but I got some great views of the ongoing Rose Festival fun center in Waterfront Park, and walkers/joggers/bikers enjoying the Eastbank Esplanade.

The lens is a Fujinon 17x5 which currently comes bundled in the USA with the JVC GY-HM700. Most of the shots are fully zoomed, aimed across the Willamette River. As there are extremes of zoom, and a fairly wide iris at times, there is a lot of chromatic aberration in some shots.

The video was shot in 1920x1080, 30p, but edited in 1280x720, 30p (Apple Intermediate Codec), because at this time Final Cut Express does not have a sequence preset for 30p in 1920x1080 resolution. The video was exported in "high" quality, 2-pass h264 QuickTime for upload to Vimeo. No filters or color correction have been applied in FCE -- what you see is exactly the color range, brightness, and contrast that came out of the camera -- yes, the sky at dusk was really that colorful!


Here are links to the two videos on Vimeo, with notes:

SUNSET

JVC GY-HM700 Examples - Sunset on Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com/5024600)

This footage ranges in time from about an hour before sundown, to when the sun finally drops behind the west hills of Portland. A variety of iris settings and ND filter settings were used. The shutter speed is 1/60sec ("no shutter"). The time-lapse portions are sped up in FCE by 20X.

DUSK

JVC GY-HM700 Examples - Dusk on Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com/5025455)

This footage ranges in time from when the sun drops behind the west hills of Portland, to about an hour later, when the color has nearly gone from the sky. The iris is wide open, and no gain whatsoever is applied. The shutter speed is 1/60sec ("no shutter"). There were a few clips where I experimented with longer shutter speeds, but I have omitted these from the edited video.


If anyone _really_ wants to see a particular raw clip from the camera, please note the time index in the Vimeo video and I'll see if I can upload a clip or two somewhere for direct download. (Please don't ask for the raw clips used for the time-lapse sunset, they're huge files.)

OK, I guess I can be rightfully accused of brazenly fishing for comments here, but this footage has been up a week now and I'd love to hear feedback/suggestions/questions/criticism... any takers?

Bob - please do not take any personal offense - it might be a Vimeo compression issue or something.

I viewed both clips and was unimpressed. Out of focus or very soft imagery. I rarely look further when the "resolution" or clarity is not there.

Sorry - but that imagery makes me wonder what is going on with the 700. Rumor has it that the new Canon 14x lens is being delayed due to problems.

Rick, not sure how anyone can judge anything to do with image quality on the net, especially things like sharpness and noise. Fair bit of CA from the lens but that's about all I can say.
Steve

Steve - understood. I have seen varying degrees of image quality from various sites (Vimeo, Exposure Room, Apple Gallery, etc.) - some have much more sharpness than others. OTOH - the HD trailers (1080 or 720) from Apple are generally stunning:

Apple - Movie Trailers (http://www.apple.com/trailers)

Understood that those are BIG $$$ Hollywood shoots with HUGE $$$ gear.

Also - I have looked at some of the downloadable clips. I am hoping the new Canon 14x lens will work some magic for the 700.

Let me pose a question that some of the more knowledgeable members might respond to.

The Apple HD trailers are stunning on my 1440 x 900 laptop when viewed full screen - even better on my higher resolution monitors. So the 720 HD clip was slightly upscaled and still looks wow.

There are a number of cameras with native 1920 x 1200 cmos sensors which should provide stunning detail.

What happens with Vimeo / Exposure Room "processing" that so many (most?) clips look soft or out of focus? It is difficult to tell where the issue is:

Poor performing camera

Poor performing operator (failure to focus spot on)

Vimeo & others apply so much compression to save bandwidth that.......

Some of all of the above :-0

Are there any sites dedicated to delivering short sample clips that would be free from most of the "issues" that are lowering the quality?

It is appearing to me that sample clips on those sites provides little value in a purchase decision. Tech specs may not be much better.

Thanks

Steve - understood. I have seen varying degrees of image quality from various sites (Vimeo, Exposure Room, Apple Gallery, etc.) - some have much more sharpness than others. OTOH - the HD trailers (1080 or 720) from Apple are generally stunning:

Apple - Movie Trailers (http://www.apple.com/trailers)

Understood that those are BIG $$$ Hollywood shoots with HUGE $$$ gear.

Also - I have looked at some of the downloadable clips. I am hoping the new Canon 14x lens will work some magic for the 700.

Rick- majority of the movies are still shot on film. Even if it shot in digital format RED1 is a norm for a bigger budget movie. You are comparing quality of a 35mm film and digital point-shoot (as that would be an equivalent of 1/3" chip). Canon 14x will not work "magic". I predict picture will be good, but you really need to go to at least 2/3" to even get close to "stunning". A lot of channels simply will not accept any content shot on anything below 2/3" (of course your name and your previous work, along with content will go a long way)

Here's the thing about Vimeo. It has a free subscription that gives you one HD upload a week or a paid subscription where you can upload all your videos in HD and present them in HD.
I would say that most of the videos on Vimeo (including mine) are SD resolution only so the only way to judge the video is to download the source file, which shows up in the lower right for registered members.

"HD" should be "on" and scaling "off." Then go full screen.

It is appearing to me that sample clips on those sites provides little value in a purchase decision. Tech specs may not be much better.
They shouldn't provide much value in purchasing decisions. I would never buy a mission-critical camera without testing personally. I always recommend that potential buyers go to the trade shows/roadshows or the local dealer, bring your own SDHC card and play around with the camera.

Robert and Tim - thank you for the replies.

Let me pose a real situation. I took some footage utilizing a Canon HF 100. That has a native 1920 x 1080 chip. The results on 42" and 50" monitors is very crisp - and that is with a small" 1/2" sensor on a $500 camera :-0

I've downloaded some clips and will play them on my larger screen HDTV and compare them to the HF 100 clips.

Thanks again.........

What`s the rumors about the Canon 14x, my dealer say it will be out in June with the new Canon 14x, in Europe with a price between 6.000 to 6.400 Euro.

The sample footage is a little bit with noise, I think the look will be better with a gain of 0 dB, Stretch-Mode for the darktones and cine-gamma.

But Tims footage is really better!

Eric - may be delayed until July due to some "technical issues". I hope to NOT be simply spreading a rumor but read a few threads about that.

The sample footage is a little bit with noise, I think the look will be better with a gain of 0 dB, Stretch-Mode for the darktones and cine-gamma.

The gain was 0db for these samples, the remainder of the processing settings were factory defaults.

Bob - please do not take any personal offense - it might be a Vimeo compression issue or something.

Were you viewing in the Vimeo player, or did you download the original QuickTime h.264 uploaded file? (Vimeo allows downloads of the original files... that's why it's an interesting place to share videos -- I wouldn't trust the results of any re-encoded Flash video in a web player.)

I read nothing about the technical problems, but it can be some CAs in the wide range of the 14x as seen on Tim`s NAB-Testvideos with a B-Version of the 14xCanon.
But I see also CAs on HPX301 (the CAC works only in the horinzontal line, in the other lines you can see also CAs on the HPX301-lense)

In Germany they say the HM700 with Canon 14x goes finally out in June 2009, not July.

Robert and Tim - thank you for the replies.

Let me pose a real situation. I took some footage utilizing a Canon HF 100. That has a native 1920 x 1080 chip. The results on 42" and 50" monitors is very crisp - and that is with a small" 1/2" sensor on a $500 camera :-0

I've downloaded some clips and will play them on my larger screen HDTV and compare them to the HF 100 clips.

Thanks again.........
Rick, yes you always have to compare price vs performance vs workflow. There is no "ideal" camera. Canon- lack of manual controls and AVCHD is an issue. Also lack of progressive scan (24/30 is in 60i stream), so most likely Cineform is a must. Also a big minus is lack of sound controls- you'll need to buy Beachtek adopter.
So the question is- how much shooting and editing are you going to do with it?

Robert - the volume will be low compared to most. The subjects will be varied and the quality MUST be visually high. Distribution will be primarily web and corporate internet / intranet / presentations on high end monitors / projectors.

Subject matter will vary from close in testimonials to small group interviews to cityscapes to nature at her best. Reasonable low light performance will be needed. Prefer to avoid CMOS if I can.

Currently using FC on a Mac Pro - so no issue there. Tape is a no no for me - solid state is here for me.

I took some footage utilizing a Canon HF 100. That has a native 1920 x 1080 chip. The results on 42" and 50" monitors is very crisp - and that is with a small" 1/2" sensor on a $500 camera :-0

I've been using a Canon HF10 (same as HF100 but with internal memory in addition to the SDHC slot) for over a year.

I can definitely say that my results with the HM700 are night-and-day better than the HF10 (they ought to be, for the money!) ... the HF10 is terrific for full auto, lightweight convenience, but as soon as you start using the joystick menus to set manual features such as exposure compensation and focus, you'll be wishing you had something with separate dials/rings/buttons/whatever to control those, and the resolution simply doesn't approach that of the HM700.

One of the reasons I finally dropped the big bucks for a pro camera is that even with 4 accessory lenses, a mini shotgun mic, a 3rd-party XLR adapter, high capacity battery, upscale tripod, etc., the Canon became more fussy to deal with than a real pro camera, and was only getting consumer results. (Very good for a consumer camera, though.) With all the accessories, the $500 camera (which was more like $750 back when I purchased it) is really more of a $1200 camera.

The Canon is also CMOS, and you can definitely see the effects of this when panning.

Maybe I'll do some side-by-side shooting and upload the results.

In the mean time, you can see some of my Canon HF10 footage, as processed by Vimeo, here:

New Streetcar Delivery & Unloading on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/4670302)

Note that more than half of that footage was shot using an accessory wide-angle adapter which has blurring issues at the outer edges of the frame.

As I mentioned before, Vimeo lets you download the original uploaded file, which will be better for comparison purposes than the flash-encoded web player version.

Rick, I would stay away from HF10/100. It is a great little camera, but you will not have the controls for really good results.
For me size of the camera mattered- hauling a shoulder mount up on 1000 ft cliff is a back breaking experience. That's the reason for the switch to HM100. Even new Panny was a bit too big, plus I can't work with AVCHD. However if the size is not that important HMC150 plus Matrox O2 Mini might be the way to go. I think HMC150 is a very nice camera capable of producing quality image. Matrox would allow you to capture in ProRes, with minimal compression. 1/3" chip is way better then 1/4 in HM100, particularly in the settings you might be shooting.

Robert - fully understood. My HF 100 was just to start my learning curve from still photography. Weight and size are not too critical. As I mentioned in some earlier post - way more control is needed and the small size is really a disadvantage. Focus is so critical, the correct DOF, .........

Bob - sorry for the delay in also responding to your post - the contents of which I think I understand and agree with.

Trying to adjust anything on the lil Canon is a challenge.

Which of your clips would you recommend as showing the best of the 700's image capabilities?

I will download it - copy it onto my sdhc class 6 card - insert it into my Panasonic BluRay player via the sdhc slot and watch carefully.

Rick -

I suggest downloading the dusk footage... it was shot without using any gain, and what pleased me about it was how well the colors and overall brightness/contrast (at least in my subjective opinion) matched with reality, basically with just the camera's default settings.

Keep in mind that the file you can download from Vimeo is still not the original raw footage, but rather an H.264 720p30 output from Final Cut / QuickTime. The original footage was shot in 1080p30 (which of course involves some kind of up-scaling by JVC from the camera's offset sensors).