I am just wondering about this camera. Really and honestly I am contemplating selling it. I keep discovering things about this unit, making it almost an unusable equipment. First F stop limited to F8, then lens which makes impossible to screw a filter on, one ND filter, no safe area markings on LCD/ viewfinder. Not to mention stupid dial for exposure control, and zoom impossible to work with. Not to mention no wide angle (39mm is not wide at all) making it necessary to use stupid wide angle converters, attached via 2 plastic threads- wonder how long this is going to last? Now I discovered I even can't use 180 degree shutter with all the recording mode settings. Turns out when you use 720/60p mode there is no shutter speed 1/120 second! The only options are 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 and 1/250. For crying out loud, it doesn't take a genius to figure out if you design 720/60p to give 1/120 shutter speed as option!
My question is also why these things were not caught in testing? And why JVC thinks it's OK to use paying customers as testers of the equipment? Yes, it's obvious I bought this unit and yes, I will make cash using it. But this is truly last time I buy JVC product for exact reason mentioned above. If I spend any amount of cash I want to have a decent product, working and without design problems.

A F8 lens?
Are you sure?

That's one hell of a slow lens.

Lens goes from F1.8 and maxes out at F8.

The design is that way on purpose. Aperture values smaller than f/8 will introduce diffraction.

But yes, I think you should definitely unload the camera and get something else. I can't
understand why a person would keep something they don't like and continue using it.

Turns out when you use 720/60p mode there is no shutter speed 1/120 second! The only options are 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 and 1/250.
I also discovered this and find it disconcerting. Besides the problem of not having a 1/120 shutter speed when shooting 60p to slow down to 24p... I personally need 1/120 speed with certain existing lights, since I am in the U.S. and not Europe. This camera is supposed to shoot handheld on location... and it is a "PRO" camera... so it should have the appropriate shutter speeds to be used in the country in which it is sold, and in the locations in which it is sold to shoot.

While it's true that complaining doesn't solve much and gets tiresome, it's also true that it's appropriate to broadcast far and wide the truly unacceptable shortcomings of the HM100.

But what is more serious to me was to be told to my face by the U.S. national JVC rep/VP three "facts" about the camera that turned out not to be true, and that he knew were not true when he told me.

And when the truth comes to light, silence is not a sign of integrity.

I don't know about this, but is there a chance there are people who might be able to hack the HM100 and add a 1.120 shutter speed, guidelines, etc.?

This can't be that difficult for someone in the know, and I don't think it would be illegal.

Or maybe if we made enough requests JVC would offer a firmware upgrade for $300 or so that had the features that were left out.

The design is that way on purpose. Aperture values smaller than f/8 will introduce diffraction.
Panasonic HDC-TM300 has aperture to F16. Even more- this CONSUMER camera has guide lines, and even live histogram! Panasonic HDC-TM300 Camcorder Review - Panasonic Flash Memory Camcorders (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HDC-TM300-Camcorder-Review-37105/Manual-Controls.htm#)

But yes, I think you should definitely unload the camera and get something else. I can't
understand why a person would keep something they don't like and continue using it.

Simple economics. At the moment I HAVE to (at least) brake even. I am in a middle of a project and also don't want to hassle with trying to match the look of the cameras. I sunk in a whole bunch of cash into this and I can't afford to take financial hit. However I am pissed that this highly hyped up product doesn't have BASIC functions. This is goes beyond hype, it's just plain misleading.
I am also not willing to send this camera back to B&H, as it's not their fault. Some people would, but that would be beyond my set of rules and imo it would be unethical. I am voicing my opinion here for 2 reasons:
one would be to warn potential future buyers about these problems, as in none of the reviews these things were mentioned
second would be for JVC to listen and fix these simple problems.
Does this explain your question well enough?

A colleague uses the HM-700 series camera and swears by it.

But when he shoots for the news, the vision is as juddery as hell. Footy players look like cartoon idiots with legs flashing along at a million miles an hour. The colour is pasty and terrible when broadcast. Even with 'talking heads' its like the frame rate is about 15fps - yet he shoots in 720p with 50fps.

He has tried shooting interlaced, but the camera wont let him.. even a mate at the BBC said the camera should work OK - but it wont.

Me? I personally think the whole camera was tossed together at five to five on a friday afternoon.

Sadly, a really good advertisment not to buy a JVC.

Ben

My intention is not to bash JVC camera. I think it does produce nice picture and reproduces colors really well. I also like the dynamic range it allows- much better then most of the cameras I have used so far. However I am talking about very specific problems and issues with HM100, a lot of them could be fixed with firmware update. It pisses me off when I buy a "PRO" camera with unworkable zoom, no safe area markings on the screen or 1/120 shutter speed missing. I shouldn't be checking for these- this is a set standard at this day and age with PRO video equipment. It was a big chunk of change for me to buy it and the latest JVC firmware update basically upgrades the unit, so it can use class 10 cards!
A+ for concept, D- for delivery and F for follow-up and making customers happy.

Luckily I checked the camera at B&H. The LCD is very cheap looking and viewing agle is low. In addition, there is a lag operating that zoom dial. Not to mention the lack of LANC. I wouldn't buy that camera. JVC - do your homework.

Robert, I share your disappointment with the camera. I have two of them and have struggled to find work-arounds to the shortcomings. The zoom is the biggest problem for me, although I am running up against limitations of the recessed 46mm filter threads. I have made numerous suggestions on this board and others for updates to the firmware that could address some the issues but JVC is non-responsive. The latest firmware update is simply disappointing in its scope.

I must also say that I feel let down by the reviewers who pumped this camera and completely failed to mention the shortcomings. The one review that is complete and truthful is here JVC GY-HM100 Review (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/camcorders/jvc-hm100.shtml) and nails every shortcoming. JVC needs to carefully read this and take some action. Unfortunately this review came too late for me.

I am in a small city and not able the handle the product personally, I purchased based on the strength of reviews and this was a mistake I will never make again. So what to do?

Sell the cameras - I don't want to accept the financial loss
Appeal to JVC for some customer support - Done but non-responsive
Continue too look for workarounds - which is what I am currently doing

Things I have come up with include:
Matt box and rails to mount filters on
TOS link adapter for remote zoom function (hi speed only)
Shoot primarily 720P60 to control motion blur issues
Bought Tim Dashwoods training DVD, which has some good suggestions

I would like to hear from others what workarounds they have come up with. That's it for now. --- Dan

Don't forget that many camcorders let you think (on shooting and on replay later) that you had dialled in an aperture of f/5.6 or f/11 (whatever). Generally any camera that has no switchable ND filter(s) is using undocumented internal ND, and as Chris rightly says, you certainly shouldn't be using a smaller aperture than f/4.5 at the wide and of the zoom with a camcorder such as this that employs such tiny chips. Not unless you don't mind diffraction losses becoming apparent, that is.

But you guys must've known about these 'shortcomings', before you splashed the cash, surely?

Me? Well I got suspicious the moment I read JVC's three page splurge on the HM100. This is a photographic tool, yet nowhere in three glossy brochure pages does it tell me any more than it has a, 'high definition 10:1 zoom lens by Fujinon'. No mention of focal lengths, 35 mm equivalents, no word on the maximum apertures at wide and tele.

Just think how we'd laugh if we opened a Canon EOS brochure and all they said was, 'This is a 5x zoom. This is an 8x zoom' and so on.

Not good enough JVC.

tom.

Yes, I agree with all of these observations. And honestly, had this been a $2000 camera and not a $3500 one, I might not want to be so critical. But you're all right, JVC touted this camera as a 'professional' camera. It says so right on the side. And so many of these things should be fixable in firmware, and yet the first firmware they release has not a single one of these things fixed or improved.

I honestly don't care too much about the annoying to use wheel on the back, but the ridiculously unusable zoom is enough to want to smash the thing to the ground sometimes.

As a 'grab and go' 'prosumer' camcorder I'd have few issues. It does produces sharp images and good color, at least in good light. The workflow is great, I do love the FCP compatibility, and that IS worth a fair amount in my opinion.

But some of these shortcomings are really almost unforgivable, especially since fixing them requires only some new code, and not new or more expensive hardware on JVC's part. It's a real shame that JVC seems completely uninterested in making this camera better.

BUT, I will say, many of these things people are complaining about, should have been easily found before purchase. I would never buy a camera without knowing the focal length of the lens, and was well aware of the 39-380 range of the HM100 zoom. It's not ideal, would have preferred 28-280 for sure. But oh well, I knew what it was going in.

But some easy things they should be able to fix, and don't seem interested to:

1. Refined zoom, somehow this should be able to be improved in firmware, perhaps as others have suggest 'zoom speed settings'. But also reducing the lag in the manual zoom wheel, it's pretty much impossible to do anything with any fineness with that thing.
2. 1/120 shutter speed for 60fps
3. LCD 'flip' mode for use with 35mm adapters.
4. Histogram
5. Intervalometer
6. SD gridlines in LCD and viewfinder

More flexibility with the user buttons.

Again, I want to say that JVC did some things right too, this isn't the worst camera ever made. The use of SD cards instead of insanely expenses SxS or P2 cards for instance, the .mov wrapper to drop right into FCP, is amazing for those who use it, a high data rate and good codec, no AVCHD nonsense.

I just wish they'd now 'refine' the camera in firmware to fix some of these glaring shortcuts that they took in prepping it.

Not sure what you mean by 6, Tim - SD gridlines in LCD and viewfinder. SD is the same as HD, so do you mean 4:3 safe area or do you mean over / underscan?

I'm right with you when you say a 28 to 280 mm equiv lens would have been far more useful in the real world of run 'n' gun, but to equal the sharpness and distortion figures of the dull 39 to 390 mm lens would have upped the price yet again. Upped from $3500 - for a ¼" chipped camcorder - whooh!

I see that Robert Rogoz has had a forum thread pulled. He made a direct request to JVC for information on firmware upgrades. This is too bad, because I firmly believe JVC should respond to this issue, one way or another. Roberts request for information was valid and of high concern to readers of this board. Pulling the thread simply allows JVC to keep their collective heads buried in the sand.

My apologies for this reply. I see Tim has posted a sticky regarding this topic. Way to go Tim.

I see that Robert Rogoz has had a forum thread pulled. He made a direct request to JVC for information on firmware upgrades. This is too bad, because I firmly believe JVC should respond to this issue, one way or another. Roberts request for information was valid and of high concern to readers of this board. Pulling the thread simply allows JVC to keep their collective heads buried in the sand.

That wasn't Robert's thread it was Andy's. I promoted it to sticky because yes JVC does review this board and yes they do find our wishlists helpful. Almost 100% of the items on the now infamous HD100 Upgrade Wishlist (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-gy-hd-series-camera-systems/51147-upgrade-wishlist-updated-hd200-250-results.html) made their way into the HD200 and HM700 series cameras. Wishlists are useful and we should start a separate one for the HM700.

What isn't worth posting is a direct challenge to a representative of a manufacturer like JVC and expect him to address or acknowledge anyone's specific pet peeves in an open forum. It's not going to happen. We have worked hard to provide a unique environment where representatives from various manufacturers contribute valuable information as often as they can, sometimes even when it is outside of their purview. We don't want to upset that balance, especially when we have regular JVC contributors from the U.S.A. HQ like Dave Walton & Craig Yanagi. It's fine to express your disappointment in features of a product and suggest remedies but lets keep it professional.

BTW, we have never pulled a thread or post just because it was a negative review a product, even if that company buys banner space at DVi. If there is merit in any comment it stays. If it is presented in an unprofessional way it may be edited (which is why I pulled Mr. Walton's name from Andy's thread.) Everything else is subject to DVi policy.

As Tim points out, we did *not* pull that thread -- instead, we promoted it as a top sticky:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-gy-hm-series-camera-systems/341508-gy-hm100-features-wishlist.html

This thread is Robert's thread. Obviously it hasn't gone anywhere either.

I think issues raised with HM100 are more then just "pet peeves". I think they are very major technical issues. Unfortunately some of them can't be resolved without changes on camera body (like filter thread, exposure dial and so). However there are other major technical issues that can be fixed with firmware:

safe area for 16x9 and 4x3 shooting

1/120 shutter speed for 720/60p shooting

These 2 things are a major oversight on the part of manufacturing and testing. JVC never advertised interval shooting or histogram on HM100, so in my opinion it would be unreasonable to expect this. However the 2 issues mentioned above go way beyond this. They are the norm and standard on majority of higher end consumer cameras in the past couple of years, and I think it makes this camera somewhat unusable in a professional environment.
I don't expect JVC to answer directly to complaints, however a good PR goes a long way. I would urge JVC to acknowledge some of the issues and assure the customers that the steps will be taken to improve the product.

We're maybe being a bit harsh on this camera because of it's price point, and because Canon and Sony have got us used to bigger than 1"/3 CMOS chips. If taken at face value the HM100 does what the designers set out to do, they've made a camera that can go unhindered where something like a Z1 would be turned away.

I still don't get Robert's .'safe area for 16x9 and 4x3 shooting'. The camera is 16:9 and presumably the v/finders show what's safe. Are you saying that when switched to 4:3 the v'finders are not pillarboxed? So when did any of you out there switch your HDV or HD cams to 4:3? If you switch the HM100 to 4:3 you can kiss any wide-angle coverage goodbye.

I'm thinking it's probably an ok camera, it's just been given the wrong street price for the spec. Just when cameras were moving towards three (much needed) switchable NDs, this camera reverts to the TRV900's one.

tom.

I see that Robert Rogoz has had a forum thread pulled. He made a direct request to JVC for information on firmware upgrades. This is too bad, because I firmly believe JVC should respond to this issue, one way or another. Roberts request for information was valid and of high concern to readers of this board. Pulling the thread simply allows JVC to keep their collective heads buried in the sand.

My apologies for this reply. I see Tim has posted a sticky regarding this topic. Way to go Tim.

I don't want anyone to think I am beating up on them or being hypercritical. When I realized the sticky had been created, I corrected the post (see above). My confusion arises because Tim renamed the sticky and I did not realize it was the aforementioned thread.

I'm thinking it's probably an ok camera, it's just been given the wrong street price for the spec. Just when cameras were moving towards three (much needed) switchable NDs, this camera reverts to the TRV900's one. tom.

If -- and I'm not saying some of the points raised aren't valid -- these issues are serious enough to prevent serious shooting, how would they become less problematic if the price were a $1000 less?

The camera control system is essentially that of the consumer HD7. I used that camera for several years and the fact it cost about $1000 didn't make me any happier with the ackward exposure control system.

Perhaps "price" is an issue for some because IT rather than hands-on-before-buying testing was used to set buyers' "expectations" about what the camera SHOULD be.

Given the yen/$ ratio and the difficulty Japanese companies are having making a profit -- price is much more an indication of the total revenue NEEDED to meet company goals in relation to the number that can be expected to be sold. Which itself is typically a function of what the competition offers -- not some absolute indication of feature set.

So the question is "what are the alternatives?"

I know of only one and with it you are getting AVCHD. If that is acceptable to you -- then that MIGHT make better sense -- given it is only $2000.

I think the primary goal of the HM100 --was to get a SMALL XDCAM EX SDHC camcorder on the market as fast as possible. And, generate as much revenue as possible given demand. To do this, the HD7 was used as a base. Many of the things we want were I'm sure on JVC's wish list too. But, time and money have no doubt delayed these wishes until a design started with a clean sheet of paper can be brought to market.

When demand lowers and IF the tiny Pana cuts into sales -- I would expect the price to drop. I'd love to see a $2000 version with a standard handle. (The Pana ships without the mic-handle at $2000.)

$1500 HD three chip CCD camera? Are there any out there? The only $1500 HD cameras I know of are single chip CMOS.

The HM100 deal breaker for me are the lens controls. There's no way I will struggle with a single ring for focus and zoom. The placement of the menu buttons, and what not, are a pain but once I'm shooting I need manual control over the focus and zoom at the same time. The complaints in this thread are legitimate but where did the idea come from that a pro camera has limited lens control?

The interesting and sad thing is, JVC has never really made a decent small camcorder. Their DV models were always poorly designed in some way. Yet their full sized pro cameras have been well thought out and decently made for their price range as with the HM700. The HM100 seems to continue the JVC trend of poor small camcorders. If they come out with a HM200 with improved lens control, I'll be interested.

If -- and I'm not saying some of the points raised aren't valid -- these issues are serious enough to prevent serious shooting, how would they become less problematic if the price were a $1000 less?


I think for a lot of people it would be much easier to write it off as bad purchase and simply ditch the camera. Yen vs USD aside, usually a complete silence is not the best PR policy in most cases.

I think for a lot of people it would be much easier to write it off as bad purchase and simply ditch the camera. Yen vs USD aside, usually a complete silence is not the best PR policy in most cases.

I can't believe folks would buy a camera without testing it -- or trying one at a show. The HM100 was at CES and NAB, and dozens of smaller shows.

Who in their right mind believes anything said at a show by anyone. No one at a show knows anything about what will ship except those in Japan. These are common sense ways of doing business -- like not buying from certain dealers.

And, if you failed to "check and test" before purchase -- why buy from a dealer that doesn't allow at least 7-days for a return. Years ago I tried a JVC HD10 from B&H and returned it without any hassle. In only a few days I knew it wasn't "enough better" than an HD1. All these HM100 issues could have been found in a day of shooting.

If you thought an HM100 was a tiny, cheap 700 -- you had to be deluding yourself. In the day of multiple internet reviews, how could anyone say they didn't know how the HM100 worked.

PS: If you thought an HM100 was a XHA1 -- because "someone" told you it was, that's a really sad reflection on your ability to comprehend the world.

Easy does it folks. Let's please not make this personal. Thanks in advance,

I second that. Since there is a "HM100 wish list" maybe you can just close this one, as it looks like some folks have too much steam under the hood.

Since there is a "HM100 wish list" maybe you can just close this one, as it looks like some folks have too much steam under the hood.I agree. Done. Thanks all,