Here's JVC's new cameras from NAB. They look like hand held versions of the HM700 line, but now with 1/3" 1920x1080 CMOS chips.

JVC Professional Features page (http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL102154)

JVC Professional Features page (http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL102153)

And the press releases:

JVC / NAB 2012 News Releases (http://pro.jvc.com/pro/pr/2012/nab/index.html)

In fact there will be two models: the GY-HM650U ($5695)
http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL102154&feature_id=01

and the GY-HM600 ($4695).
http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL102153&feature_id=01

It will be interesting to compare them to the Sony EX1R and to the Panasonic AG-AC160 & AG-AC250.

Thanks to our amazing product design team, we will have an operational GY-HM600 concept unit in our booth, C4314 in the LVCC central hall.

Looking forward to seeing you all,

- Craig

I wish I was in vegas to see it. I'm impressed with some of the innovative features of the 650. The ability to record to two codecs to two cards, one HD and one 1/4 HD is great for us. We are constantly posting to to web-sites and our internal intranet.

Also, it looks like you can Wifi push files from the camera via ftp?? Wow. And if I am reading this correctly you can use an iPAD for monitoring via Wifi from the camera? If so, that's really cool!!

Very smart design, I wish i could see it in person.

Good job JVC!

Way to go JVC! F11 @ 2000 lux is quite a stat for a 1/3" camera. That is laregeshoulder mount light sensitivity. Looking forward to seeing the images.

I know this might be a strange question but will this new chipset be available in the mini-shoulder mount design? I have always been drawn to this form factor. It would be a shame if one of the most innovative parts of the JVC line would be stopped along with the imaging update.

Wow!

Initial impression I'm very impressed.

What are the differences between the HM600 & 650? FTP transfer in camera, what is that!?

It doesn't look like I'd like the lens as much as the EX1 (I love the hard stops on zoom, focus and iris & this is hard to beat w/o going to a "real" ENG lens). But it is nice there is 3 rings & looks like all the switches were they should be.

Longer zoom range than Panasonic's 22x zoom AC130 / AC160 / HPX250. I wonder if Panasonic got the memo that they can't say they have the longest zoom in this class.

Though the Panasonic's 3 cameras go wider at an amazing 3.9mm lens, making even the XHA1 able to zoom in closer with it's 20x zoom. If you want to get closer, it looks like JVC is king of the hill at 94.3mm lens for 1/3" chips.

I know what I'll be looking at on my lunch break.

Codec flexibility looks to be what may make this win in some workflows' minds. AVCHD AND MPEG-2 on the same camera is unheard of until now.

I wonder if Panasonic got the memo that they can't say they have the longest zoom in this class.

Isn't JVC owned by Panasonic?

From: JVC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JVC)
In 1953, JVC became majority owned by Panasonic Corporation.

To me it seems like JVC releases very, very different cameras than Panasonic. So either they do that intentionally to not compete, or they just operate as two independent companies.

One thing I really like about JVC over all of the other manufactures is the photos of new cameras they put online & all of the detailed information they have on the same page. (Heck, you can even find that info from discontinued products too!) Everyone else releases one, maybe two or three photos of a new camera. JVC releases three high resolution print quality images & then another dozen photos creating a nearly 360 view of the camera. I love that.

Nice lens, specs and very competitive price point too.
Color me interested.

Isn't JVC owned by Panasonic?

No, it isn't. JVC Kenwood is the formal company name.

Craig,

Do these new cameras offer a rear zoom control option? Maybe a rear iris control as well?

Thanks

These cameras will have LANC standard.

Craig,

If I am reading the specs right, it appears that the AVCHD codec recording mode is 60i only while the 35mbit/sec codec is all of the progressive frame rates.

Is there a reason for this? Just curious.

Also Craig (or anyone who can stop by the JVC NAB booth & can get an answer)...

Variable frame rate record options?
1080p60? Now, or firmware upgrade later?

These cameras will have LANC standard.

Thanks for your reply but will it have zoom and iris control or just zoom?

Craig,

If I am reading the specs right, it appears that the AVCHD codec recording mode is 60i only while the 35mbit/sec codec is all of the progressive frame rates.

Is there a reason for this?

The GY-HM600 will support standard AVCHD. The GY-HM650 adds H.264 recording with the additional frame rates.

Both camcorders will have variable frame rate recording. Specifications aren't finalized, yet.

AVCHD standard format of 1080 60i is the current specification to conform to broadcast standards. AVCHD Progressive implementation is something we will be looking into as well.

VFR... #@*& YEAH!

Thanks Craig. I look forward to seeing what they are. I don't know how you could beat the 1-frame increments of Sony's EX series, but if you can implement that, it would be fantastic. As long as it isn't fewer options than the HM700, I'll be excited.

---

I'll have to say since I'm still on FCP7, the HD MPEG2 is better for me to work with at the moment (quicker log & transfer), but AVCHD I think is great future proofing, because what I've seen it is a better codec. When I move past FCP7 to something that can edit more video natively (like FCPX or Premiere Pro) I'll probably be more open to AVCHD.

I think it would be great to have all the same recording rates in HD MPEG2 & AVCHD, when my post production flow changes, all I have to do is go into the menu of my camera instead of looking for a new camera.

Carig, if possible for AVCHD & HD MPEG 2 to have the same offerings (or at least most of the same), that would be ideal.

Thanks for your reply but will it have zoom and iris control or just zoom?

The LANC control will be for zoom, focus, iris and start/stop.

Thanks Craig! A true event camera. I will give this camera a look next to my XF300. Though it will be hard to pass up the 4:2:2 of the XF300.

Any updates coming to the GY-HM 710? I am done with the hand held camera game.

Any updates coming to the GY-HM 710? I am done with the hand held camera game.

There aren't any immediate changes to our current HM700 series line. They're all doing quite well in their respective segments.

Thanks Craig! A true event camera. I will give this camera a look next to my XF300. Though it will be hard to pass up the 4:2:2 of the XF300.

I will be curious to see if you observe differences, if any, with the recorded material.

- Craig

...if possible for AVCHD & HD MPEG 2 to have the same offerings (or at least most of the same), that would be ideal.

To quote the engineering team at JVC Professional, "Anything's possible from a technology standpoint."

We'll be looking into this as we get closer to the shipping date later this year.

Hi Craig,
And whatabout the interchangeable lens version of the GY-HMQ10, that was shown during the CES? Is it still on tracks?
That would be great for wildlife documentary.

2. questions 1.When the info says its low light is f11 what are the condidtions? ie is f11 @ 0 gain now special low light modes? is at @ 2000 lux? 2. How does it compare to the 710s? about the same or better? In low light.

I will be curious to see if you observe differences, if any, with the recorded material.

- Craig

Probably true but I am in the habit of using secondary color correction on everything I shoot and the 4:2:2 MXF just does a great job. This is where I would test between the two.

I too am hoping the F11 number is in a normal shooting mode and as clean as the XF300s.

2. questions 1.When the info says its low light is f11 what are the condidtions? ie is f11 @ 0 gain now special low light modes? is at @ 2000 lux? 2. How does it compare to the 710s? about the same or better? In low light.

1. F11 @2000 lux, 0db gain.

2. Better.

F11 @ 2000 lux! sounds like were back to the DV days finally!

F11 @ 2000 lux! sounds like were back to the DV days finally!

What does F11 @ 2,000 lux mean, exactly? How does this compare to the HM600's competitors?

Craig - the 650 looks like an interesting camera. I've always been a Panasonic P2 person, but I'm willing to consider switching. For me, the final needed spec is 1080 p 60, preferably at better than 28 Mbps. I know that this is asking a lot, but for sports, many of us need 60 fps. I'm sticking with 720p 60 until a good 1080p 60 option arrives. I have read that both the US and Europe are looking at 1080p 60 for a future-proof television standard - JVC could be a leader in this format.

I'm with Mark, I'd love to see 1080p60 on this. If not there is still the AC130 / AC160 out there. For me, 1080p60 isn't a deal breaker, but just one more feature it would be nice to have.

What does F11 @ 2,000 lux mean, exactly? How does this compare to the HM600's competitors?

Roughly it means that you light a scene with 2,000lux & to get the f-stop, you close the iris down to for proper exposure. The higher the f-stop, aka the more the iris is closed, the less light the camera needs, the more sensitive it is & the better it will perform in low light.

I believe I've seen the 1/2" CMOS EX1 quoted for F10. Panasonic's new 2/3" MOS HPX600 is rated at F12.

If HM600 / HM650 provide a clean picture at F11, then we might have the best performing low light 1/3" HD camera (please correct me if I'm wrong).

All I can say is: Witch craft; typo; or the HM600/650 is going to be the next leading camera in this class on the market.

If the camera's sensitivity is accurate, that's very impressive! Especially considering it has 1/3" chips.

When a company prints the low light performance like f11 @ 2000 lux thats very promising. when the camera are not good in low light they usually just say .5 lux but thats with 1/30 sec. 30 db gain and or some special low light mode that is only usable if no one moves. F11@ 2000 lux is what my old Panasonic DV 200 was rated at which is the best camera I ever owned.

I have read that both the US and Europe are looking at 1080p 60 for a future-proof television standard.
May I ask where you found this information? For the US, I am sure it is correct. But 1080p60 as television standard in Europe is highly unlikely as Europe uses 50 Hz, not 60 Hz. All I heard is that the European Broadcasting Union (representing 74 TV stations in 56 countries in Europe, Africa and Asia) is thinking about 1080p50 as a future format for HDTV, but 60p would be really strange.

You are correct, Bernd. For Europe, it will be 1080p 50, but US cameras that do 1080p 60 almost always do 1080p 50 in their European versions. Sorry for the failure to fully explain - I keep forgetting how international DVInfo.net really is. One reference for this information is Wikipedia, under the "1080p" title. I have also seen references from other sources.

@ Craig Yanagi;

Craig, I was VERY impressed that you took the time to return my call! That shows that JVC is a company that really cares about customers. I had tried to reach the persons in your position at Sony and Panny for many months with no success.

I must echo what others are saying about the GY-HM600U. Please, please find a way to give it 1080/60p! JVC has six months to work on this. I will keep my $5K parked and ready for at least a few months, waiting with bated breath for good word about this. Every other aspect of your new cam looks perfect, almost as if you were reading my mind - except for the lack of 1080/60p.

I posted the details of my latest test/rejection (a Panny AG-AC160) in my quest for my first "pro" camera here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/506594-new-sony-xdcam-pmw-100-a-5.html#post1729328

Thanks again, keep up the excellent customer interaction - it IS a way to win and keep customers.

Steve

I'm with Mark, I'd love to see 1080p60 on this. If not there is still the AC130 / AC160 out there. For me, 1080p60 isn't a deal breaker, but just one more feature it would be nice to have.

Zach, you might want to check out my post below in the other thread.

I had my eye on the Panny AG-AC160 for months, finally bought one after very serious research. Unlike you, I simply MUST have AVCHD 2.0 with the 1080 50/60p, having gotten a taste with a Sony NX70 that I bought and then rejected for reasons related to terrible image quality. The Panny AC160 arrived yesterday; I did not need to test it for more than 2 hours to realize it was not worth the price, despite all the great features and the promise of 1080/60p with the firmware update due in late May:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/506594-new-sony-xdcam-pmw-100-a-5.html#post1729328

I realize your mileage might vary, but I was shocked and saddened. I had such high hopes. There were other problems than just those mentioned in my post above.

Steve

Craig - the 650 looks like an interesting camera. I've always been a Panasonic P2 person, but I'm willing to consider switching. For me, the final needed spec is 1080 p 60, preferably at better than 28 Mbps. I know that this is asking a lot, but for sports, many of us need 60 fps. I'm sticking with 720p 60 until a good 1080p 60 option arrives. I have read that both the US and Europe are looking at 1080p 60 for a future-proof television standard - JVC could be a leader in this format.

Although a lot of cameras that use the original AVCHD standard do 1280x720/60p at up to 24 Mbps, the new AVCHD 2.0 standard specifies 1080 50/60p at up to 28 Mbps. It is possible to double the frame rate with only a 4 Mbps increase in data because of the way h.264 encodes differences in frames. In most cases, the actual change in detail between two frames that are separated by only 1/60th of a second is not very large. All this is a big part of the reason that 1080 60p is doable with AVCHD but not with the MPEG-2 broadcast standard codecs such as the ones used by Sony XDCAM or Canon XF100 - 300.

I personally have been very pleased with the footage produced by the AVCHD 2.0 cams I have used. It is a LOT better at capturing details and motion. I benefited tremendously from just shooting everything in 1080/60p, because I never knew when something would happen that lent itself to a touch of 2.5x slo-mo in post. I also have completely given up on 720 - the images are just too soft when I render to BluRay, or even to YouTube!

@ Craig Yanagi - again, I urge you to put your engineers in the basement, throw them pizza and not let them out until the new GY-HM600/HM650 supports AVCHD 2.0! With it, your new cam will sweep the ENG world. Without it, it will seem old and tired the day it is born.

FYI:

AVCHD INFORMATION WEB SITE (http://www.avchd-info.org/)

Steve

Just a few thoughts:

I would be interested to see the visual difference once footage goes to Blu-ray between 720p60 and 1080p60. I have been very pleased with 720p60 as a shooting mode. Anything broadcast on US television is 720p or 1080i. Tell me a Sunday Night Football broadcast is soft!

This is territory where the quality of the cameras & lenses and the quality of the encoding is going to play a major part in the process right next to the format. I would rather have a high quality 720p camera & lens than an o.k. quality 1080p60 camera.

Stephen, If you are unhappy with your 720p footage, you might get some mileage out of examining or improving your encoding process. I purchased TMPGenc and my finished output is a lot more detailed compared to my previous encodes from the Edius timeline.

Please, please find a way to give it 1080/60p!

Since delivery is 1080i or 720p the main advantage of 1080p is having source that will hold up better when further processing is done in post. The main difficulty when color grading and chroma keying 4:2:0 1080i footage is that the UV color planes have a resolution of 960x270. A modern camera priced $4000 or more should do better. Either 4:2:2 1080i or 4:2:0 1080p possess 960x540 resolution color.

If engineering constraints dictate a maximum recording datarate of 35 mbps, I would suggest JVC consider a 4:2:2 1440x1080i60 recording mode or 4:2:0 1440x1080p60 mode.

Hi Tim;

Thanks for taking the time to reply, I was beginning to worry that this thread was dying ...

Sure I would rather have a great 720p can than a bad 1080p cam ... but I would also rather have a great 1080p cam than a great 720p cam.

I'm a total focus-freak. It comes from all my years as an amateur astronomer. I'm the kind of person who will get up in a movie theater and bang on the projection booth door to get them to fix the focus. I see things that don't bother other people. Edge coma and aberration that no one else sees drives me nuts. I've had better than 20-20 vision all my life, and even with age-related deterioration in close-focus ability, my distance vision is still very sharp.

The difference between the best 1280x720 image and the best 1920x1080 image is instantly apparent to my eye. No amount of encoding techniques can impart more information to a 1280x720 image; the raw data is just not present.

I don't use broadcast signals as any kind of a standard of comparison. None of them are up to what I can get on my Samsung TV or my large computer monitors when I either play high-quality commercial BluRays (such as Avatar) or what I render myself. Not that I watch much football, but I can state that *anything* coming from broadcast looks soft by my exacting standards. I can take a project shot in 720 and compare it to a project shot in 1920x1080 and the difference is stark.

However, there is no need to go through all those steps to see the difference. Just connect the HDMI output of any cam capable of 4:2:2 10-bit to a large, high-quality monitor. 1920x1080 blows away 1280x720.

In any event, I'm not the only person who can see the difference and wants 1080/60p. There is real demand for AVCHD 2.0, and that demand drove Panny to engineer the firmware update for the AC160 to support 1080 50/60p. All of the early reviewers of the JVC GY-HM600 are puzzled by the lack of 1080/60p

Steve

Stephen,

Your enthusiasm is very positive. Wanting to get the best image is always a great pursuit. But, after reading your last post, I think there is some mixing of ideas going on.

I would first say that if your exacting standards are to be on par with finished Blu-rays like Avatar or Inception, a $6,000 1/3" chip camera is not even in the same conversation. To put these two goals together is a mis match. Same goes for broadcast signals. To say that the signals coming from NBC Sports or ESPN are soft in the midst of wanting 1080p60 on a 1/3" chip camera is bordering on absurd imho.

Sure 1080p offers more detail at the tradeoff of more compression to handle the larger amount of info. But that is kind of beside the point. The Blu-ray standard maxes out at 1080p24. Some recent players might playback 1080p60 but nowhere near the level that one could safely delivery a purchased product.

So in reality we are looking at 1080p60 footage delivered in 720p. The real comparison is original 720p shot footage vs 1080p shot 720p footage.

I know this is kind of a downer post, but I come across a lot of folks who still have never seen Blu-ray or high definition.

To say that the signals coming from NBC Sports or ESPN are soft in the midst of wanting 1080p60 on a 1/3" chip camera is bordering on absurd imho.

There is no reason a 1/3" chip camera can't deliver full 1920x1080p resolution. In fact, the greater depth of field which comes from a smaller sensor size should lead to uniformly sharper images. While sports broadcast over highly compressed satellite feeds is lower quality than the recording formats of the new JVC camcorders, it still makes sense to offer higher resolution 4:2:2 1080i and 4:2:0 1080p formats.

I am not against 1080p60 and sure a 1/3" chip camera can have a lot of detail. I am very impressed with my XF300. My point was that talking about a $6,000 camera compared to $100,000+ cameras and saying the $6,000 gets the nod because it has 1080p60 is not my experience. Just pointing out that there is more to video images than resolution numbers.

Stephen ...
I know this is kind of a downer post, but I come across a lot of folks who still have never seen Blu-ray or high definition.

Hi Tim, no worries, not a downer at all! There is always something more to learn. And, we are keeping this thread alive - Hey Craig Yanagi, you still there? ;-)

When I burn disks for friends, even if they don't have a HD TV or a BluRay player, I always give them two disks - a DVD and the BD. I tell them to hang on to the BD - they will be able to play it sooner than they might think.

All technical gyrations aside, I still notice a big difference when I shoot 1080 compared to 720 on the same cam. I use Vegas 10/11. I've never found any setting that can make my 720 stuff look as sharp as 1080.

When I shoot in 1080 with a cam that has 1000 TV lines of res, and render in Vegas to the highest possible data rate for BluRay, and then burn a disk and play it on my TV, it pretty much looks as sharp as Avatar - and both look better than my HD cable.

Here's another reason to always shoot in 1080 - at 60p if available. I often do pan/crop in post, to simulate moving the camera, zooming, etc. If you try that with 720p original footage, the degradation gets pretty bad pretty quick. 1080 gives me the latitude to work with the footage more in post.

I have not put any of my cameras into 720 mode for over a year ...

Steve

I am not against 1080p60 and sure a 1/3" chip camera can have a lot of detail. I am very impressed with my XF300...


The XF300 is a beautiful piece of engineering. I drool for the 4" LCD and love the way it stows under the handle.

But, aside from not being able to afford CF cards or the cam itself, after having had a taste of 1080 60p I just can't go back to 30p. Keep in mind that I am not a "pro" - I don't want to sell footage to broadcast venues or even sell my work. I'm an amateur looking for a three-chipper with true 1000 TVL resolution, a big, fast lens, deep DoF, etc. etc.

I had such high hopes for the Panny AC160 and was devastated by the problems with build quality and noisy servos. Sure, it had other annoyances like the lack of a built-in dust-cap in the hood, bad positioning for the LCD, fiddly menus and such, but I could have lived with that - the image quality was great, waaay better than the Sony NX5. But the servos were so loud that even with my mike on a second stand 6 feet from the AC160, the sound of the servos came through. It was bizarre, I had never encountered anything so horrible. They were even louder six feet away than the servos in my Sony HDR-CX550V when using the internal mic on the Sony!

The JVC GY-HM600U is the only three-chipper left in any price range that will work for me. Other cams might be great for other people, but I have many requirements such as light weight, SDXC cards and AVCHD that rule out cams like the Canon XF series or the Sony XDCAM line. That's why I'm so excited about the JVC - if they just give it the AVCHD 2.0 standard, which is pretty "standard" these days for AVCHD cams, it will be perfect.

Help me Craig Yanagi Kenobi - you are my only hope at this point.

Steve

But the servos were so loud that even with my mike on a second stand 6 feet from the AC160, the sound of the servos came through.

All the competing cameras seem to have little problems: the near IR sensitivity of the EX1 turning black into brown, the viewfinder of the FX300 which is easily damaged by the sun as well as this servo noise issue with AC160 not to mention the auto focus bug. Including both 4:2:2 1080i and 4:2:0 1080p recording modes on the HM600 could prepare JVC for a big success.

Hi Stephen,

Just wondering if you considered the possibility that you may have a faulty AC160?

I have both an AC 130 and an AC160 and neither are any noisier than the two Sony EX 1's they replaced, even to MY aging ears!

As an avid reader of forums, I have never seen anyone mention "noisey servos" either here or on the "other" mainly Panasonic forum about the AC 130 - 160 series, and I've certainly never picked up server noise through a shotgun mounted on either camera.

It seems you may have got a faulty one.

Cheers,

Vaughan