JVC Previews NEW Pro HD Camera Specs to Select AVR Resellers


Model: GY-HD100U

SPECS

Approx 5lbs

Heavy Duty Magnesium Body

Shoulder Mount Balanced Light Weight Camera

3 - 1/3" 1.1 Mega pixel CCDs

Interchangeable Lenses 1/3" - Stock options 16X and 13X Fuji

Recording: TRUE 720 24P, 720 30P, 480i,480P (1080i Playback)

DUAL MEDIA Mini DV Tape /Option (Hard Drive)

Memory Stick

Camera Presets

Image Control - Including Cinema Gamma

Motion Smoothing Filter

Dual XLR

Component Out/Composite Out/ Fire Wire I/O

Flip Out LCD

Enhanced Focus

Monochrome Viewfinder

Data 19Mps

Shipping June 1, 2005
List Price <$10K with Lens



COMPANION DECK ALSO SHIPPING in June

Model Name: BR-HD50U
FULL and Mini DV Tape
Integrated Small LCD
Component Out
Fire Wire I/O
(Additional Specs TBA)



NEW HDV FORMAT ANOUNCED!!!!

JVC PRO HD XE
Recording 720 24P,30P,60P,1080i
4 Channels Audio

First Product will be a 3 2/3" Camera with true 1080P CCDs
Higher Bit Rate
DUAL Media DV Tape/ Hard Drive
To Ship LATE 2005???


-----------------------------------------------

I got to touch and feel the prototype...let me just say this if you are thinking of buying a Z1U - you may want to wait 3 months and rethink your options.....

Sean Dinwoodie
Engineer/DP
indietoolbox.com
Chief Engineer - Hollywood Studio Rentals


PS For All those interested, as select JVC Pro AV Reseller we will begin taking deposits in the next few days at the shop. Please contact us through our website http://www.HollywoodStudioRentals.com or call us at 818-526-0101

At $10,000 this won't change people's minds who were and are considering the Z1U.

All I have to say is "Data 19Mps" - a joke for $10,000. You can get a cheap $399 Mini-DV camera from Best Buy with a higher rate - 25Mps!

<< At $10,000 this won't change people's minds who were and are considering the Z1U. >>

No, but it's important to realize that pricing is relative. At $10,000 it represents an excellent value to the working professional who has been waiting for a shoulder-mount, interchangeable lens pro camera using the HDV format in this price range. It's priced just right in my opinion.

<< All I have to say is "Data 19Mps" - a joke for $10,000. >>

Hardly. Don't you remember how people doubted and feared 25mbps HDV, saying it would never be workable? Your statement here falls right in line with all those who used to diss your HDV format. You have to realize that you can't knock it until you've seen it, because until then you just don't know.

<< You can get a cheap $399 Mini-DV camera from Best Buy with a higher rate - 25Mps! >>

Sure you can, and it's standard definition to boot!

C'mon, Murph, please back off from the fear, uncertainty and doubt. Thanks,

Chris, I don't have "fear, uncertainty and doubt" about anything. That sure reads like you wanted me to get mad and respond? For the record, I was making a comment about a piece of plastic and metal. Your comment to me was personal. I've never once been able to ascertain someone's "fear, uncertainty and doubt" through text unless they've stated it. Your post came out of left field on my end.

Let it be known that my statement was intended to be the opposite of what you thought.

Thanks Murph,

No, I don't want you to get mad, as you know that's not how we work around here. I just want you to understand that nobody is in any position to call this thing a "joke" until they've seen it for themselves.

There's nothing at all personal about it; I just want the ground rules established that:


a.) pricing is relative; to some pro shooters, $10k is an excellent price;
b.) the bit rate can't be judged until it's been seen; and
c.) the comparison to a cheap consumer camcorder based on bit rate just doesn't hold water.

Let's please learn about it first before we start knocking it. Thanks,

Ok, we love each other again. :)

I'm sorry for the "joke" comment/verbage and I after some thought I agree with everything you've just said.

Ah, I'm still a little bit jumpy from a recent troll invasion in one of our other boards. But that didn't last long... heh.

Thanks,

Hay guys, personaly i'll just wait until NAB. JVC, prove you are the better choice and we'll come a knockin down your door to get your camera.
it will be an uphill fight for JVC at this point. i can't wait for the rumble to begin.
Darrell
FIRST CINEMA PICTURES

Regarding the 19mbps -- keep in mind that it's actually a higher bitrate per pixel (i.e., less compression per frame), than 1080i HDV. That plus it has a much smaller GOP, six frames vs. 15. Should be every bit as competitive, for a 720p camera, as the FX1's implementation of 1080i HDV.

Very interesting about the 1/3" bayonet-mount interchangeable lens, and just like Panasonic, we don't know what "under $10,000" means yet! Could be $5,000. Maybe it's a price-positioning game they're playing between themselves.

Chris, since you've devoted a forum to this, rather than placing it in Area 51, does that mean you're confident that the specs are accurate? I'm sure they are, just wondering if there's been any official JVC statement.

Hi Barry,

<< Chris, since you've devoted a forum to this, rather than placing it in Area 51, does that mean you're confident that the specs are accurate? >>

I can't say that I know the specs to be accurate, but I do consider the official JVC teasers (their links located in this thread (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40866)) to be ample justification for the validity of that camera's existence, at least, and therefore the impetus for this board. Now if I can only lure Ken Freed back in here and get him as involved online as Jan is... then we'd all be in great shape!

As for the under $10k thing, last year at NAB 04 Sony was showing off the prototype of their new HDV camera that was going to cost under $10k. That ended up being the FX1/Z1 and they are both way under $10k. So this new JVC could sell for way under $10k.

JVC does not have all that good a rep, they'll have to bring it in at $4,995 to match the sony.

I'm kind of wondering if anyone supports a 720p 24p hdv codec...that's not in the HDV specs.

JVC has A VERY GOOD reputation when it comes to mpeg compression technologies.

When you watch Monday night football the sky shot are encoded by JVC mpeg encoders and sent back to the switch. Jerry Bruckhiemer has been using JVC mpeg for his digital dalies for several years now....remeber the JVC created the HDV format; Sony and Canaon adapted it and agreed to the intial standards...but JVC created it.

$5k??? The JVC specs put it in another class compared to the Z1U. To say it needs to be 5K is rediculous. I'd love it to be priced so low, but it's the specs are worth more than that.

"it's the specs are worth more than that."


I have to completely agree.


Interchangable lenses and true 24p recording will definitely justify this JVC camera costing more than a Z1, in my opinion.

Just as the XL2 came out to compete with the DVX100, and yet cost 1000 dollars more, and rightfully so.

I agree with Luis completely. Ten grand with lens included is a very good price for this thing. It's not in the same class as the Z1... the Z1 is a handycam which follows the excellent handycam lineage of PD170, PD150, VX1000, VX3. This new JVC is more comparable to (but looks a bit smaller than) its shoulder-mount ancestors, the GY-DV5000 and GY-DV500.

These are two completely different classes of cameras. The Z1 is a compact, highly portable all-in-one handycam and the HD100 is a shoulder-mount with interchageable lenses. Two very different worlds.

Plus with the dollar dropping like a lead weight, they will probably wait as long as possible to anounce actual pricing. Pana included.

Sean, you've seen it, handled it. Assuming
a) You are not breaking the dealers solemn oath not to tell anything more
b) The camera you handled could be powered up,
Tell more!

How good is the VF?
Size of LCD
See any evidence of stabilization?
Similarities or differences of controls cf current JVC models
Anything new on the lens (macro or)?
Focus assist details

June is a long way off, and by that time $10,ooo should be long forgotten as a price point, no matter what JVC lists it at initially. The 7000 (2/3" camera) may have no immediate competition and can be priced much higher. This 1/3" one will duke it out w/Panasonic and Sony at the low end, so expect aggressive pricing action, especially by the time Panasonic ships, as that has potentially higher quality output.

I like the mini-sizing of it, could be even better if the top handle breaks down, VF hunkers down, etc. I doubt it will have built-in stereo mics like the Z1 (very handy, btw), but this class benefits from light weight and compactness, so the more config options, the better.

I bet they'll have a good 6 month lead on Pana to market. I hope they get this camera right.

LOL....I can say no more at this time...hmmm I do have pictures...nope can't post those by order of JVC.

I will comment regarding the quality of this verses the yet to be announced Pana. If you watch this season of American Idol in HD you saw JVC HD-10 footage cut together constantly thoughout the episodes as they traveled around the country. I watched it with severla others and they could not disguish much of the HD-10 footage form the Varicam footage. There you had a single chip 1/3" camera for $3500 being cut with a 3 2/3" 60K for a body camera. BTW Hollywood Studio Rentlas provided gear, assecories,and support to to Idol.

Those shooting with the sony cameras now are noteing HDV's awsome quality with a low bitrate. JVC does MPEG very very well. They are known for their MPEG compression technology. Remember the HD-10 for the most part was created by there consumer division. This camera wil have no problems competing against any mini Pana.

And think about this Panasonic has $60K HD camera (no lens)...next shooting on the same format there is a BRAND NEW $20K SD 24P camera (no lens) - That's a P2 camera!!! They have a lot to loose and therefore a lot to protect in ther other models and customers.....I don't think the lists of specs everyone is dreaming for on the mini Pana will be as long as the pipe dreams....we shall see....not mention I can buy 400 hours of tape for this camera compared to one 4gig P2 card.

......be realistic.....oh yeah hmmm and hot swapable Hard drives???...how much are 4200rpm drives running these days??? A much cheaper option, no?

anyone heard any news about pal frame rate(s)? 25p? (50p?)


thanks,

filip

Any word on sensitivity? Sean? At such a small sensor size you never know. It does have the potential to be slightly more sensitive to light than the FX1/Z1 because the target resolution is lower, so it can perhaps get away with slightly larger pixels.

Well they get to be the king of mini-cams for 4 months until the Panasonic model comes out. 4:2:2 is tough to beat.

4:2:2 Is not that nuch of a step up from 4:2:0 for 5 times the bitrate. I'm also not to impressed by the DVC100 codec. Take a look at http://www.cineform.com/technology/HDQualityAnalysis10bit/HDQualityAnalysis10bit.htm this test from cineform . And you failed to address all of the points I brought up regarding the specs wish list verses the prices of there other cameras including a SD P2 camera with no lens that hasn't even started to ship yet priced at $20K.

In a new pana p2 mini. You will likely not see a removable lens. For two P2 cards you will need to spend $8K. So now you have a fixed lens camera for $18K. If I had that kinda coin why not get the forth coming JVC ProHD XE 2/3"???

Until the DVX-100 arrived the sales of all the other Pana cameras were just as far behind Sony as JVC. Even when the varicam was released the sales were slow.

It appears we have a new generation of shooters from the past few years since the release of the DVX are being led like sheep...sad.

We are not Pana dealers but we do resell Pana cameras at our shop. Don't get me wrong I like Pana and they make good products, but to say they will be able to beat the HD100 with a DVC100 mini cam priced under $10K is really reaching.

Answer me this (hypothetical) 6 months from now we both have $10K to buy a camera and stock to shoot a feature the next day in HD. What camera and stock do you buy???
I know you don't know enough about the Pana, but you can see where I'm headed here......maybe you could aford on 2Gig card if the camera comes out for list a at $9K.


What am I not seeing? How can the Pana compete for a HD camera under $10K???

<<<-- Originally posted by Ignacio Rodriguez : Any word on sensitivity? -->>>

No I'm sorry, but I'm looking forward to testing! :)

What am I not seeing?
Any details. None have been released yet.
How can the Pana compete for a HD camera under $10K???
Once the details are released, we'll see how it may (or may not) compete. Of the little that we do know, we know that DVCPRO-HD is 4:2:2 vs. 4:2:0, and has no GOP, and the solid-state recording system means no dropouts - ever, vs. HDV's rare but potential 15-frame dropouts. To some of us, those are significant issues. And we have no idea whether the Panasonic will offer interchangeable lenses, larger chips, wireless video transmitting, who knows> We don't know the form factor (shoulder-mount? Handycam? Palmcam?) We don't know whether it has tape or not, whether it supports hard disk recording or not... whether it works with remote camera CCU's, whether it can jam-sync timecode, etc. And we don't know what P2 cards cost. And we don't know if P2 is the only recording medium -- for all we know, the thing may have a hot-swappable hard disk interface built on it!

In short, there's no way you can even begin to hope to think about considering comparing the cameras, because we don't know anything about the Panasonic yet. It's a little premature to declare the war "over".

Hey Barry,

That's exactly what I've been trying to say. We don't know what the Pana will have, but we do know the other cameras in the line for panasonic.

I think JVC's announcement is just fascinating. Even though it may "break" from the formal HDV standard, introducing the 24P as a new standard is great news -- the camera is still fully HDV-compliant in "regular" mode, so you have the choice: full HDV compatibility, PLUS a new 24P mode. If HDV won't support 24P, JVC will make a new format that does -- that's really cool!

I've been looking forward to this camera's introduction for quite a while, I really want to see what they've done with it. I thought the DV500 and DV5000 were excellent little cameras for the money, an incredible value, and I've been hoping they'd produce an HDV version of that camera. Looks like they probably have (just substituting 1/3" chips instead of 1/2" chips, but HD instead of SD).

I think the ones who are kicking themselves right now aren't Panasonic necessarily, but rather Canon. Interchangeable lenses was supposed to be Canon's domain, and now JVC may have trumped them. Remains to be seen what the lens mount is (or did they announce that?) If it uses a standard 1/2" bayonet lens mount or something else that's likely to be industry-standard (rather than proprietary), that'll be a huge advantage for the JVC!

Well if the JVC has interchangeable lenses, you're going to have to get yourself some more lenses, right? I imagine those little Fujinon's won't be cheap. If you shot a feature with a canon xl2 you'd have to get the 16x AND a 3x wide angle. Runs up the price a bit.

"Hypothetically" speaking, both cams could be way over 10k properly outfitted.

I think I still might take the Panny just on form factor alone. Although I, like everyone else except Sean, would like to see what JVC's hdv 720p looks like versus Panny's solution. And I still don't know where you can edit 720p 24p hdv.

Other things to consider...viewfinder quailty, mobility, etc etc.

One more thing, in my mind - JVC has more to prove than Panny.

You make a point about the lenses -- assumedly you'd need HD-caliber glass. On the one hand, that can make it quite expensive, certainly a lot more expensive than SD-caliber glass.

On the other hand, if you *do* use something like Zeiss DigiPrimes, the quality could be phenomenal.

I guess we'll have to wait until they announce specifications about the lens mount and lens options.

<<<-- Originally posted by Christopher C. Murphy : At $10,000 this won't change people's minds who were and are considering the Z1U.

All I have to say is "Data 19Mps" - a joke for $10,000. You can get a cheap $399 Mini-DV camera from Best Buy with a higher rate - 25Mps! -->>>

yeah but it is avi @ 25 mbs not mpeg @ 25mbs you know more than anyone that 19mbs m2t will have a ton of more data than 25mbs avi.

<<<-- Originally posted by Michael Struthers : And I still don't know where you can edit 720p 24p hdv. -->>>

I can do that today in FCP by transcoding to DVCPROHD 720p24 on capture. It's not HDV strictly speaking, but it's an out-of-the-box solution using HDVxDV and FCPHD. DVCPROHD 720p24 is already in there as a native codec.

<<<-- Originally posted by Christopher C. Murphy : At $10,000 this won't change people's minds who were and are considering the Z1U.

All I have to say is "Data 19Mps" - a joke for $10,000. You can get a cheap $399 Mini-DV camera from Best Buy with a higher rate - 25Mps! -->>>

19Mbps is plenty of bandwidth for 720p, substantially more bandwidth than the 720p of ESPN-HD or ABC-HD, and about 1.5 times the bandwidth (relatively) of the Sony Z1.

Also, you are dealing with MPEG2, not DV. MPEG2 is around 4 times more efficient than DV, which is why 6 Mbps MPEG2 looks as good as 25 Mbps DV. Likewise 19 Mbps MPEG2 should look pretty close to DVCPROHD (a DV-based codec), all other things being equal. We should be getting pretty close to Varicam country here, with the bonus of true 1280x720 resolution. Of course, we aren't going to have 2/3" CCD's :)

The nice thing for me is that I could theoretically rent this camera for a reasonable rate ($400/day), and not have to completely overhaul all my HDV editing tools. The thing stopping me from using a Varicam is not just the rental cost of the camera, but I also have to have much heftier editing equipment and disk space. There is no DVCPROHD over firewire with the Varicam (need the special DVCPROHD deck for that), and I'm on a PC using Vegas (I don't even think Vegas can capture DVCPROHD via firewire like Final Cut Pro can). So that means I'm looking at SDI, and that puts me into another price category.

The GY-HD100 gives me the best of both worlds - a true "PRO" camera with true 720/24p, but at a bandwidth I can already handle and in a format I can already edit, and without having to go buy disk arrays. I'm in love if this thing is for real.

P.S. Didn't mean to jump on you Murph, just wanted to point out the numbers could be deceiving.

Ben

Excellent post Ben. I think that sums up my feelings to a T.

The only thing I'm not entirely sure I agree with is 6mbps MPEG2 being as good as 25mbps DV. This of course, depends highly upon your MPEG encoder, but I can usually tell a difference between my MPEG2 encoded files and the DV originals.

"19Mbps is plenty of bandwidth for 720p, substantially more bandwidth than the 720p of ESPN-HD or ABC-HD, and about 1.5 times the bandwidth (relatively) of the Sony Z1"

I've heard this comparison made before, and the problem for me is that you are comparing a delivery format with an aquisition format.

How well do you think that the HD signal sent out by ESPN-HD or ABC-HD would hold up to a postproduction workflow (ie. editing, graphics, color timing, etc).

They don't start out with less than 19Mbps, they deliver their final programming in less than 19Mbps.


Now, this doesn't mean I think the JVC camera is not a SERIOUS contender for "Camera of the Year." I just wanted to point out that I thought those numbers, while true, are not really the best comparisson.


"The GY-HD100 gives me the best of both worlds - a true "PRO" camera with true 720/24p, but at a bandwidth I can already handle and in a format I can already edit, and without having to go buy disk arrays"

I'm with you 100% on that Ben.
(although the new panasonic DVCProHD is also rearing it's head into the mix).

It's going to be an exciting year, no doubt!

<<<-- Originally posted by Aaron Shaw : Excellent post Ben. I think that sums up my feelings to a T.

The only thing I'm not entirely sure I agree with is 6mbps MPEG2 being as good as 25mbps DV. This of course, depends highly upon your MPEG encoder, but I can usually tell a difference between my MPEG2 encoded files and the DV originals. -->>>

That's why we use ProCoder :) Keep in mind the HD100 will have a hardware encoder (just like the HD10 and the Z1) which is going to be pretty spot-on (if the encoder in the HD10 was any indication, it was pretty close to perfect).

Ok, maybe I should have said 8Mbps :)

Ben

ProCorder's a great product, that's for sure! I'm quite excited about the possibilities this camera opens up. Excellent point about the hardware encoder. Can't wait till NAB - should be fascinating!

<<<-- Originally posted by Luis Caffesse : I've heard this comparison made before, and the problem for me is that you are comparing a delivery format with an aquisition format.

How well do you think that the HD signal sent out by ESPN-HD or ABC-HD would hold up to a postproduction workflow (ie. editing, graphics, color timing, etc). -->>>

Sure, if I tried to take the HD feed off of my HD cable-box, OTA receiver, or Sat receiver, it would be a nightmare. But that signal has been sent through who knows how many distribution points, at that point I'm sure the MPEG2 compression is the least of your worries.

However, if it was delivered at a full 19 Mbps (most of the time it is under 15 Mbps), I could plug directly into the source feed coming out of the originating MPEG2 encoder (instead of getting it at the end of the chain), and if I used an intermediate format to edit (like Cineform), I think it would hold up pretty well :)

<<<-- It's going to be an exciting year, no doubt! -->>>

You got that right! Did I read correctly this camera has a tentative release date of July 2005? NAB might actually amount to something this year :)

Ben

"I think it would hold up pretty well :)"

Fair enough, I guess the proof will be in the pudding.
I really hope you're right.

If not, we've still got the HDX100 to look at.


ProCoder is an excellent encoder by the way!
And fast....

And let's not forget that those expensive top-notch MPEG2 realtime encoders for digital broadcast are usually made my JVC, so they have en expertise that Sony, however good a job they did, did not have. If you sum up the fact that 4:2:0 is sweet for proscan, we will probably see far better compression with the JVC HD100 that with the Sony FX1/Z1.

I think the bottom line that newbies to HDV format should understand is:
25Mbps DV is not the same as 25(or 19)Mbps Mpeg2ts.
There are 8 years of compression technology to put into that equation. If one could see compression artifacts in the footage then there would be a problem. As far as JVC's first gen product, this wasn't the case. It had about the eqivalent artifacting as DV but at 2.5X the resolution. The new HD100 I assume will only be better.

...on the JVC encoders, Steve Mullen states that the HD1/10 use the NTT "SuperENC" decoder/encoder chip. Not sure how that factors into the argument about JVC making more broadcast mpeg encoders or not.

<<<-- Originally posted by Joel Corral : <<<-- Originally posted by Christopher C. Murphy : At $10,000 this won't change people's minds who were and are considering the Z1U.

All I have to say is "Data 19Mps" - a joke for $10,000. You can get a cheap $399 Mini-DV camera from Best Buy with a higher rate - 25Mps! -->>>

yeah but it is avi @ 25 mbs not mpeg @ 25mbs you know more than anyone that 19mbs m2t will have a ton of more data than 25mbs avi. -->>>

By definition, no matter what the codec, 19 Mbps is always less data per unit of time than 25 Mbps. MPEG-2 is arguably a more efficient encoding scheme.

Lawrence, it is more data than 19mb but it isn't more data per pixel. We need to compare the amount of data in relation to the image size to determine how much of that data goes to each pixel.

Actually what you really need to do is compare the quality of the video output by eye. That's the true measure.

I mean, not to rant or anything (who, me rant?), but making an assumption of image quality based on numbers alone, with the actual video going sight unseen until this camera is released, there's really no way someone can say "well since it's 19mbps it can't be any good." We don't know that. And since we won't know it until we see it, there's hardly any point on making such assumptions sight unseen. Right?

The question here fellas is if the component out is pre-compression. If it is, it should provide opportunities unheard of for 10 k. I assume the firewire out won't be pre compression (or the composite, but who cares on that).

Pre-compression output would make this competitive with the high-end systems. That's the tantelizing possibility. Hey, if not, Panny's got us covered with DVCProHD 4:2:2 100Mbps.

Were talking about that here.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&postid=289570#post289570

Quite right Chris! My comment was only in reference to comparing the data rates. The true test will always be, as you say, what you see :).

Oh, trust me Aaron, my remarks were definitely not directed toward you.

I was just trying to head off some of these numbers guys that tend to get hung up on specifications, having never laid a finger on the camera. You know who I'm talking about... the kind of mentality that thinks, "well, if it's 19mbps, it can't be any good." I like to discourage that element.

There's nothing wrong with talking about numbers, of course... but as we both agree, the proof is in the image. Cheers,

"There's nothing wrong with talking about numbers, of course... but as we both agree, the proof is in the image."

This is aboslutely right.
A friend of mine always reminds me when I get carried away with numbers that it is perceived quality that matters.

If the amount of data were all that really mattered, why would most of us think 24P looks so good? Obviously 30fps should give us a better image...I mean, it is giving us more information per second, right?
:)
And before anyone jumps on my analogy, i realize I'm talking about temporal samples and not datarate....I'm just trying to illustrate a point.

Obviously numbers can't be completely discounted...but there is much more to an image that it's datarate.

Four weeks left and then we'll have something concrete to talk about (hopefully).

Personally I don't think 24P does look good. 24P is an effect to simulate film shot at 24fps ( which is played back at 24fps but with at least a 3 blade shutter to mask the flicker!!!) I like to see smooth motion with clear sharp images so for me the faster the frame rate the better. So for me 30P is better than 24P and 60P would be even better but for now 60i is the best compromise.

Ron Evans

3:2 pullup is the equivalent 3 blade shutter for 24fps content displayed on 720p 60hz refreshed monitor.