JVC HD100 or Sony HVR-Z1 ???

If you were to buy a new camera right now, witch would you buy?

I bought a Z1 and would make the exact same decision today. This is going to vary considerably based on what you want in a camera. But my reasons for buying the Z1 have not changed:

1. I need PAL and NTSC SD capability. JVC doesn't offer this in the current model.

2. I prefer the "handycam" form factor for general use. Interchangeable lenses with true manual control would be great, but it's more than I want to lug around most of the time.

Aside from that, I'd be a little concerned about the problems some people are having with the JVC. Hopefully these will all be shaken out, but I prefer to let someone else do the beta testing....

I have a FX1 and Im more than happy with it. My friend is planning on buying a new HDV camera and he is faced with the option of SONY or JVC.
He is planing to use it in a a wide range of things from shorts to docus to ENG.

I recommended Sony but I did tell him Im a huge Sony fan and having used Sony, Panasonic and Ikegami I always liked the way Sony cameras are built, their reliability and "look" they produce. I haven't used JVC, but Im yet to hear something good about them, all I hear is that they are poorly built and plagued with bad pixels and other problems.

I didnt mention the Panasonic because with the P2 thing they are absolutely out of the question, I dont care how good they are.

So since you can see Im clearly biased, Im asking for some help so I can better advice my friend.

The choice between the Z1 and the HD100 should be a no-brainer. The cameras are nearly direct polar opposites -- so just decide which features are important to you, and the camera choice should be simple.

If you need interchangeable lenses or progressive shooting or shoulder-mount form factor or true manual lens control or high-def 24p for "film"-looking footage, or 720p, get the HD100.

If you want a smaller, more compact camera with long-lasting batteries, autofocus, optical image stabilization, 1080i recording, and the ability to shoot "reality"-looking video (i.e., news, events, sports, etc), get the Z1.

Neither camera does what the other one does. If you need one camera that does all of the above (minus lens interchanging), you'll have to wait a few months for the HVX. If your set of requirements is answered by one of the cameras described above, you can get it now.

I have an FX1, and I would not hesitate in buying another one if needed (No brainer)

Barry hit it right on the nose. It all depends on what you need and need it for. Both cameras are good.

Well for one thing the shoulder mounted form factor of the JVC HD100 means a nice steady image which means a lot of job security. If I showed up with a JVC HD10 or a Sony Z-1 and I started shaking the camera too much I would be fired. The ergonomics of the camera is a very important consideration.

Well for one thing the shoulder mounted form factor of the JVC HD100 means a nice steady image which means a lot of job security. If I showed up with a JVC HD10 or a Sony Z-1 and I started shaking the camera too much I would be fired. The ergonomics of the camera is a very important consideration.

Fair point, but then that's what tripods are for. Also, for me personally I didn't like the way the HD100 balanced on my shoulder, so it's really something to try for yourself and see what you think.

A tripod isn't really an option for all types of situations and shoulder mount will always provide more stability than a handycam sistem. If tripods were that versatile than pro cameras would all be handycams...

As to the FX1/Z1 being better, take into account that a lot of people that 'love' this camera haven't touched a HD100 so their opinion is not going to do you much good.

As Barry said they offer different options and the price is quite different. Think what you'll mostly use your camera for, go to a shop and test both of them. If you make your decision solely based on what others tell you than you'll most likely regret your choice later on.

I have the same decision to make and currently I'm leaning towards the JVC.

My reasons are in no particular order:

720p vs 1080i. The likleyhood of HD being seen on a CRT is less and less in which case you are deinterlacing a field out of the signal anyway.

720p has more bandwidth per image than 1080i.

I might have to soften the picture less with 720p in post. I don't think so much detail is necessarily a good thing especially with long DOF.Which I guess I mean that the JVC might be slightly more forgiving.

6 frame GOPs versus 15 frame GOPs. I think it makes a big difference in editing when you have 4-5 keyframes a second verus 2. When dealing with mpeg artifacting and etc... it take a lot shorter time to recover from the error.

Interchangable lens

better form factor. Shoulder mounted.

Deck. The JVC deck takes large format DV as well as miniDV which the Sony does not. It is possible to use the JVC deck to record over 3 hours at a time. Furthermore, I have other video work and the ability to take large format will be extremely helpful. Also the JVC deck has HD-MI out.

That said the thing preventing me from buying the JVC right away is the following...

The JVC 24p format might be a dead format. With the new Canon out almost spec for spec the same as the Sony HDV format, it will probably become the new standard.

COmpletely manual lens. I do like the option of relying on some automatic features. I don't have the confidence for comepletely manual controls especially when focus will be hundreds of times more important.