Really leaning to this cam over the Sony PXW-X70. Just kinda waiting for the reviews to trickle in on low light capabilities and overall performance. A couple specific questions if anyone can answer, thanks:

1. I currently use Varizoom VZ-Rock controller. I can't tell if this will work with this cam, can it?

2. I'm looking at the Lexar 128g UHS-II SDXC Memory Card (Class 10, UHS Speed Class 3). Available at B&H for $165 2 pack. Would these be sufficient for all the recording options, including highest quality 4K?

3. I currently use Premiere CS6, not CC. Don't wanna pay more for the upgrade if I don't have to. Will CS6 be able to import all recording options without having to convert or re-encode (like on the X70)?

This camera is a big mystery Rick. I too am interested in it, and like you, would love to know how it stacks up against the Sony PXWX70. There was some footage and initial thoughts on the camera here Shooting with the JVC GY-HM200: 4K handheld camcorder on Vimeo, but other than that it is as though the HM200 doesn't even exist.
Think about all the buzz the Sony PXW X70 got--and is still getting, and this camera is the perfect counterpart and is getting no press. Very strange. It has been available for quite some time but there is no evidence that anyone has bought it. JVC, where are you??

Exactly - been available at B&H for two or three weeks and ZERO reviews, strange. I really like all the specs for this cam, but I shoot a lot of run n gun and events that are dark and do not allow external lights. That's why the low light quality is important. These low light events don't require 4K, so hoping the standard HD settings result in positive results. I still use my Sony FX-1 because of the low light capabilities, hoping it is comparable.

I also love the fact it has built in Live Streaming. Was gonna buy a Teredek Cube for another $1500, but a major plus included with this camera.

One thing going against this cam from the outset is the lack of what the x-70 has: A mountain of vetting, reviews, fixes and adaptations. It helps when there is an active community giving constant feedback.

I would like to see more on this cam as well, but why should I be the guy to take the risk?

1. I currently use Varizoom VZ-Rock controller. I can't tell if this will work with this cam, can it?

2. I'm looking at the Lexar 128g UHS-II SDXC Memory Card (Class 10, UHS Speed Class 3). Available at B&H for $165 2 pack. Would these be sufficient for all the recording options, including highest quality 4K?

3. I currently use Premiere CS6, not CC. Don't wanna pay more for the upgrade if I don't have to. Will CS6 be able to import all recording options without having to convert or re-encode (like on the X70)?

1. The HZ-HM600VZR is the remote that is designed for use with the GY-HM200. While there may be similar products in the marketplace, the HZ-HM600VZR has been co-developed between JVC and VariZoom to ensure the operation signal protocol is in sync.

2. UHS-1 Speed Class 3 is the media needed to record 4K with the GY-LS300.

3. You can download a sample file of the 4K 150Mbp/s H.264 file and test it on your existing NLE system for editing compatibility. The link to the zip file containing the sample file is as follows: JVC Pro Video Clips (http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/vid_clip.jsp?model_id=MDL102318&feature_id=19)

- Craig

Craig,
Thanks for the 4K download link. I can report back that the 4K .mp4 file does import perfectly into Premiere version 6.0.5, which is good to know. I let premiere pick the sequence settings, and it chose:

RED Cinema
3840x2160

Looks really good. I take it this clip was shot on the RED camera? Are there any HM200 or LS300 4K clips anywhere we can download?

I did my first gig with the HM200 and I am impressed. It was a conference indoors with interviews in a park (outdoors, night, with lights only lighting the trees) Very dark!. The hall was poorly lit (to create some soft ambient, not because they didn't have lights) and the camera was kinda struggling but once I adjusted the white balance it did OK in 1080 @12DB f/2.

The white balance plays an important role in luminosity and the camera gets a cold reading by default. (too much blues in my opinion). The HM200 can adjust the WB in both full auto and manual, so no problem there: set a warmer tone and the scene will light up!

4K would've been difficult indoors. Didn't even try. Noticed some hesitation focusing on full (optical) zoom (so careful with close-ups @ full zoom, in case just a small pull back will do). I had a small LED with an orange gel and the interviews came out stunning in 4K. Used the face recognition and it did a fantastic job! well behind my best expectations. I was even using the main face in the rule of thirds position with no problem whatsoever. By far one of the best performing tracking for interviews in AF that I had the pleasure to work with (even better than the X70 because once the HM200 "locks" then it stays!). (AF speed set on slow). Interviews shot @ 3.5 (with the light ON) 6 DB (I wanted to get some backkground as well): perfect skin tone, perfect sharpness and contrast, perfect everything. Used XLR1 for shotgun on phantom and XLR2 for a sennheiser g3 with handheld. shotgun in auto and radio mic in manual. Didn't notice any problem with the audio from the shotgun (in auto usually gets some noise when they don't talk but on HM200 it went so clean.. no idea how they did it but it works!) so the next time I'll use auto for both. I knew that the HD422 didn't import correctly in vegas so I did the "regular" 50Mbps in HD, in MOV. No problem with the files, either Vegas or any player (I use KMP that is a little more fluid than VLC, 4K in particular). No problem with 4K in both vegas and KMP. For me (coming from X70) this portability of the footage was a big relief.

the little things : the FULL Auto button is difficult to find and really small. I wish I had the choice to assign it to some other custom button)

The WB adjustments are (simply put) perfect! If I had to design it myself I would've done it exactly as the JVC designers did.
The Remote Lanc works fine. I was using a vivitar that gives also 8 speeds for the zoom (constant) and it worked like a charm.
Did use few shots in MF that night (in the hall for close-ups, shooting 50-60ft away) and I was able to control the focus from the remote. Great!

Rolling Shutter and blur panning is fine in HD, a little more evident in 4K but still good enough (in 4K) for fast pans. Means the the sensor read-out is fast enough. Good.

If you use an external monitor (sdi or hdmi) remember to put it in the settings, by default it won't output anything if you don't select it. It goes out on both sdi and hdmi at the same time in case)

yes this is a good and honest camera. It will get the job done and beautifully.

So there, after complaining so much I have to hand it to the guys with JVC: well done. (so I'll shut up about the lens now)

Thanks for the very interesting and informative report. Will any of this footage be viewable on-line in the near future? If not, don't worry.

I am currently leaning towards buying this cam (rather than the Sony X70 or more expensive JVC LS300) as a "dip a toe into the 4K water without breaking the bank type experiment." The idea of having a small and very affordable 4K cam in my kit bag (but one that can still use all my XLR mics etc.) appeals enormously for some B-roll scenarios…That and the decent bit rate, Mac NLE friendly codec - nice one JVC! The debacle over the Sony X70's XAVC 4K codec incompatibilty thing with most NLEs (and its lowly 60Mbps) is becoming almost embarrassing....

One other question Anthony. How good in practice are the focus assist tools (when using full manual focus) on this JVC HM-200? The face detection stuff appeals but (up until now) I have tended to be a full manual operation type of guy, including with focussing (apart from occasional use of the DPAF feature on my C100 in very fast run-n-gun situations where making sure something is in the can is the primary concern). I have never used AF on my PMW-300 or the EX3 I had for 5.5 years before that.

The debacle over the Sony X70's XAVC 4K codec incompatibilty thing with most NLEs (and its lowly 60Mbps) is becoming almost embarrassing....

the X70 is a good 28Mbps HD camera , cheap . The XAVC-L didn't work and will never work (in my opinion) maybe because there is no 10bit 422 in the X70 at all. In any case we compete against cell phones today and there is no time for the marketing departments pushing proprietary stuff (that don't even work). Today if the footage is useable then fine, and if it's not then we go to the next camera (like I did)


One other question Anthony. How good in practice are the focus assist tools


It's fine, goes in black and white. But the ONLY reason why I buy camcorders instead of a DSLR is because I need zoom and AF. If not then a GH4 would be the better option (in my opinion). cheap, 4K, high quality and you get to change lenses easily.

HM200 now : 4K is (obviously) impressive but nowadays there are cellphones giving that, so it's not something "magical" and difficult to produce (anymore).

The Achilles' heel is without a doubt the lens. You should consider that you have a limited range of apertures in there, f/2 to 5.6. and that's it. 12DB is clean, 15DB is watchable , 18DB is risky.
so you do the math :)

The use of a LED light is a big help, for my interviews was night and day compared to the high ISO alternative.

Once again to the friends using the HM200 : guys adjust the WB , get it warmer and it will light up the whole thing. don't use the auto readings, it will get darker and cold.In a camera that needs any possible help in low light the WB alone makes a difference.

Andy : you come from EX3 and C100 in manual , sorry but why don't you try a GH4? that's the natural step to go 4K in my opinion. (and HD as well)

that miniscule full auto and MF/AF switch ! I had to do something because I was sick and tired of having to turn to the side to locate those switches. SO I took a thinkpad red track-mouse thing (any other will do, I had that one on hand). A little gaffer's tape (yes I did a fast and lousy job with the tape, but I'll fix it, someday...). Now I can locate the switch without looking. Finally.

http://i1234.photobucket.com/albums/ff416/clistsales1/myhm200-1_zpsgvidudbc.jpg

I need to explain the other stuff in the pic: on the base I put a focusing rail , works well when on a tripod to move the camera to get the to the center without going crazy with the counterweight.

On the rail I attached a little bar for the grip. It works as it is in the pic (up) but most importantly can be reversed and attached down. It gives a tremendous help hand holding in mid air, thanks also to the other point of contact of the viewfinder on the eye.

The viewfinder cushion is the wrong size (extra large, blue star): I had it for the X70 but I'll get the small oval soon. In any case the extra large works as well (a little big).

On top I put a vertical (I mean almost vertical) mount for the sennheiser receiver. I like to have the antenna looking up and leaves the handle to actually handle the camera. Can't attach it on the front shoe because I have a led light there (and I hate those bars for multi shoes because give a bad balance making the camera too much front heavy).

The shotgun is a sony (same mic as the audio technica 875R - I had both and they are exactly the same)

The ergonomics of the HM200 are first class, too bad for that full auto and MF switch. But with a little work we can fix that.

Hi Anthony,

Thanks again for more info (...pity about that lens) and the GH4 suggestion. I've looked hard at the GH4 and sure, for some, it would be the right way to go but:

1. I don't have any MTF glass - just lots of Canon EF and EF-S glass
2. I want a simple XLR on-board solution/really don't like the bolt-on/under approach to getting that on the GH4
3. I don't generally like "DSLR form factor" cameras - my 7D taught me just how hard it is to use, whilst the C100 has taught me how, when adapted specifically for video shooting, things can be dramatically easier (whilst still not perfect) ergonomically.
4. Relating to point 1, I'm not keen on the reliability/ruggedness of using MTF to Canon EF mount adapters (Metabones etc.) in a professional environment - plenty of reports of issues on this forum about that (and this is what's keeping me a bit shy of the JVC LS300 and the FS7 too).

Right now (and this could change again!) I'm thinking mid-term I'll probably get a C300 MkII (say start of 2016) - I very, VERY, nearly pre-ordered one on launch day. However, I have decided I don't want to commit THAT much money (plus the huge extra on-cost of the camera media for it/storage costs of huge 4K file formats) until I KNOW my corporate clients are going to pay for that increase in my workflow costs. By the way, I still think it will be some time before I need to DELIVER 4K in a distribution format to my (typical) multinational corporate client base. My clients don't care what cameras I shoot with, only about the end result looking good in HD.

Plus, I'm nervous about spending over £10K on a camera body when things seem to be moving so fast in 4K camera development. Don't get me wrong, I could afford to buy a C100 MkII or FS7 tomorrow, no problem, as my business is doing well/they would be paid off fairly quickly. It's down to what's the best business decision for my specific client needs over the next 18-24 months more than anything else. Hence the idea to try a low cost "test the 4K water" approach with a £1,500 to £2,000 cam (ex VAT) that uses cheap media and a moderate file size that's easy to edit on my Mac Pros before I jump in with both feet. I'm sure I'm not alone with struggling with that aspect!

To complicate matters further, I've also got a keen eye on the Panasonic DVX-200 as that might be a VERY good middle ground (in terms of cost) 4K cam for me that seems to tick almost all the boxes needed for my kind of work. I await the opportunity to view images from it when they become available this summer!

To complicate matters further, I've also got a keen eye on the Panasonic DVX-200 as that might be a VERY good middle ground (in terms of cost) 4K cam for me that seems to tick almost all the boxes needed for my kind of work. I await the opportunity to view images from it when they become available this summer!

I hear you, Andy. Loud and clear!

I'd like to say it again (please don't get upset now!): the tool to get now is the GH4. XLR Audio? Ok. true, but the GH4 needs a rig, or at least a shoulder mount, and by then finding a little room for a juicedlink won't be the end of the world.

I shoot sports for a living (soccer), twice a week and for me a servo zoom , SDI and a working lanc is mandatory. XLR for interviews on the sidelines, but I use a sennheiser handheld so I could easily attach the receiver to the lesser 3.5mm stereo, the signal is clean enough even for that. So we have different needs and I can't get a GH4.

The future is 4K on SD cards , no questions. For now we use it like we did HD few years ago: to put it in a 1080 timeline and it looks great (same as HD on DVD instead of SD, remember?). But 4K is here to stay, and I have the feeling that once we find a proper media to distribute 4K TVsets will be already there and sooner that we expect (in my opinion)

There is a marketing battle going on right now, prices are shot to the sky just to see what happens. blackmagic, the panasonic (the red face one), sony with all the proprietary things (boy they are obsessed with those things, aren't they?).

but what strikes me is that all need to distance the offers from the GH4 and again the ONLY reason why the GH4 stays with enthusiasts and very few working pros is because there are no servo zoom lenses (and they know that, of course they know!).

will that be enough to price the cameras with a servo zoom 5-10times more? hmmm ... don't think so.

the HM200 is a decent and honest camera. but the GH4 is better in any way sans XLR and servo zoom. (the XLR attachment for the GH4 is by far the most ridiculous and expensive -for no reason- piece of equipment in the history of video cameras!).

The Panasonic you mentioned (the red face one) should do it. it will be 4 times the price of a GH4 and in the end the only difference could be (again!) the servo zoom and XLR, because the pictures won't be that much better in my opinion. And I say GH4 because of the price, of course.

I believe that you do events and corporate , so the cost of the equipment is not THAT important but we can't spend 5-10 times more for basically the same pictures. The other reason to go 4K now is to compete , and let's remember that cellphones do 4K too. if you know what I mean. They go on youtube too (the clients). They see things.

by the way: I saw Cinderella and those 35mm pana millennium look as good as the reds or arri digital! LOL it used to be the other way around and it feels like yesterday .... see what digital did to us?

good luck , Andy
let's stay in touch please, I'd like to know what you decide to get!

Anthony,
Thanks for the informative writeup. Just about to pull the trigger. First cam purchased since my sony fx1 6-7 years ago! Can u compare the low light capabilities to any existing cams? Also, when u say "warmer white balance", what do u mean? I simply let my cam balance by aiming at a white card. Do u use a color other than white when balancing?

Anthony,
Thanks for the informative writeup. Just about to pull the trigger. First cam purchased since my sony fx1 6-7 years ago! Can u compare the low light capabilities to any existing cams? Also, when u say "warmer white balance", what do u mean? I simply let my cam balance by aiming at a white card. Do u use a color other than white when balancing?

the readings are cold.

OK on "paper" you carry a white card (I find a 18% grey better in digital, the best should be a 12% grey but that's not easy to find and I had to make one myself). In reality what you do is to find something white, zoom in and put the camera in manual an do the reading. Still cold after that. Now the HM200 has this clever function , different between manual and full auto (the camera I mean).
in manual you assign a preset for example, then open up the temperatures and choose the temperature manually judging by the colors on the screen (which is accurate by the way, not like the sony's that give "spectacular" colors but different than what you actually shoot)
in full auto (and where it gets interesting) you adjust the white balance selecting the levels of reds and blue manually. it's called "paint" and that's exactly what it does: literally painting your colors. Perfect. Seriously

For that I had to assign a custom button (the custom7) to white balance. So 1 button goes straight to one of the best WB controls I remember in years.

lemme recap: when you shoot in full manual the WB will be automatic , but you can change the red and blue freely.
when in manual then you do a reading, and after that you can change the temperature (Kvalue) freely.

fast and easy for both manual and full auto!

I had the FX1 too! decent camera, but the periodic cleaning of the heads and that firewire port... for interviews was a MF only camera.LOL the AF ALWAYS wanted to go to the background

Anthony,
Thanks for the informative writeup. Just about to pull the trigger. First cam purchased since my sony fx1 6-7 years ago! Can u compare the low light capabilities to any existing cams? Also, when u say "warmer white balance", what do u mean? I simply let my cam balance by aiming at a white card. Do u use a color other than white when balancing?

sorry, forgot the low light question.

first I must say that I love the HM200 very much, every new day I like it more.

that said here's the problem in low light:

THE LENS

if I could use 1.2 then would've been fine. But since 1.2 looks like the XL1 in SD then I can't.

it is that simple.

so you don't have 1.2, 1.6, 1.8 at all.
pretend that you have a f/2 max lens. and on that 1/2.33 sensor F/2 is a little dark

compared to the X70? well, with the X70 you don't have to work THAT hard to shoot in low light. With the HM200 you need to pay attention.
it is useable in low light? absolutely. But you have to set the WB warmer first, then shoot at F/2 up to 15DB and you'll like the footage.

again for interviews you carry a light , THEN if you go 4K prepare yourself for some breathtaking footage!

The other thing is 4K actually, that crops a little (obviously) but east more light. So in the end F/2 in 4K may not be enough @15DB .

I take it this clip was shot on the RED camera?

No, the clip was shot on the GY-LS300, hence its placement under the model.

It's interesting that the NLE "thought" that the clip came from a RED camera...

Does anyone know... The camera list the SD card needed for 4K to be a SDXC UHS-I U3. Would it be possible to use a UHS-II or does it have to be a UHS-I?

Good question Howard. These card types are a moving target. I just asked the same question in an email myself and hit the Send button before checking out this thread.

And then there are the HC1 and XC1 card versions.

What is also important about the card is that the write speed needs to be continuous throughout the use of the card and that it doesn’t diminish/slow down as it is filled up so the UH1 U3 is apparently what is needed. Just a guess.

HC1 or XC1 - which is best?
XC1: Amazon.com: SanDisk Extreme 64GB UHS-I/U3 SDXC Memory Card Up To 60MB/s Read-SDSDXN-064G-G46 [Newest Version]: Computers & Accessories (http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extreme-Memory-Read-SDSDXN-064G-G46-Version/dp/B00MBFPT3A)

Also, for the write speed for 4K does it have to be 80MB/s or higher?

I use a Transcend 64GB SDXC I class 10 U3 . No problem in 4K on HM200 (rated R95-W60MB/s)

I am in the process of getting my HM200 ordered, just waiting to get a bit more $$$ together. At B&H, these Lexar cards are listed under accessories, so I assume they will work. They are UHS-II, and says they work for 4K. Someone even commented that they were using these cards on their GH4 in 4K with no issues. I will be ordering these unless someone chimes in on another better card to order. These look to be a great deal for the price.

Lexar 128GB Professional 1000x UHS-II SDXC LSD128CRBNA10002 B&H

[At B&H, these Lexar cards are listed under accessories, so I assume they will work. They are UHS-II, and says they work for 4K.]

After reading the overview on these cards it says that tthey are backwards compatible for devices that are UHS-I. So my best guess is that they will work. And right now it seems that there are far better deals on UHS-II cards than the UHS-I cards.
But if anyone has tried it we sure would like to know what your real world experience was. Thanks in advance!

By the way, I have been using Lexar CF cards in my canon 7D for photo and HD video, they have worked flawlessly.

Just wanted to let anyone who is wondering know that I have purchased the HM-200 and the Lexar SDXC 1000X UHS-II U3 128GB cards. So far the cards are performing perfectly. They are capable of 150MBs so should be able to handle the load thru the entire GB.

That's great to know. I'm still trying to decide between the HM200, Sony NX3, and Sony X70.

What do you think of the HM200 so far? Specifically, picture/low light quality? Can you compare it to any of your previous cameras? I've read/watched the couple reviews online, most have been good.

Also, is there anyway you can shoot some 4K and post that clip online, full 4K, so we can download and see the quality?

Thanks.

Howard, there have been a couple of users, and a decent reviewer, who have indicated that the camera is "unusable" and too soft when the lens is at f 1.2, f 1.4 and basically below f 2. Are you also finding that this is the case? I understand that all lenses have a "sweet spot" in the middle, but "unusable" is really a different story. It seems like it would be completely unacceptable to anyone. Certainly for me.

Also, are the LCD screen and viewfinder "live" at the same time. Thanks.

Howard, there have been a couple of users, and a decent reviewer, who have indicated that the camera is "unusable" and too soft when the lens is at f 1.2, f 1.4 and basically below f 2. Are you also finding that this is the case? I understand that all lenses have a "sweet spot" in the middle, but "unusable" is really a different story. It seems like it would be completely unacceptable to anyone. Certainly for me.

Also, are the LCD screen and viewfinder "live" at the same time. Thanks.

yes lcd and VF go live at the same time. The problem with the HM200 is the "COLD" white balance in auto, that makes the picture darker and coder than is supposed to be. Correct the WB and the HM200 will be fine in low light with a decent noise up to 12 or even 15db. The fact that both the LCD and VF are very close to the actual footage recorded make the WB temperature crucial. I'm used to sony where the LCD shows a spectacular fiction because the actual footage will be very different, so the HM200 does it right.

1.2 is perfectly useable in 4K. but not in HD. I don't know why but that's how I see it. So it's 1.2 in 4K for me and 1.8 in HD at the widest aperture. Anyway I don't shoot HD anymore.

That's great to know. I'm still trying to decide between the HM200, Sony NX3, and Sony X70.

What do you think of the HM200 so far? Specifically, picture/low light quality? Can you compare it to any of your previous cameras? I've read/watched the couple reviews online, most have been good.

Also, is there anyway you can shoot some 4K and post that clip online, full 4K, so we can download and see the quality?

Thanks.

Hi Rick, So far I like the camera.I think the picture quality is very good. I've only had it a short time and so far have only tested it in 4K. The low light performance is not as good as I'd like, but what I've learned to expect from a single sensor camera. I am a slow adapter so I just started working with HD in the last year when I purchased a Canon EOS 7D DSLR. Prior to that I used a Sony SD DCR VX-2000 3-CCD camera that did very good in low light, but it was SD not HD.
I think the HM200 does better in low light than the 7D does. And I find the picture quality to be excellent. I have set the picture quality to Cinema, Vivid which makes the focus a little softer and the colors richer in my opinion. This is great for the kind of work I do. And the autofocus works very well and is quick.
I have shot a little test footage in low light and using F1.2 thru F2.4 in 4K but don't know where I can post it on line. If you can tell me where to upload the .MOV files created by the camera I would be glad to do it.

Howard, there have been a couple of users, and a decent reviewer, who have indicated that the camera is "unusable" and too soft when the lens is at f 1.2, f 1.4 and basically below f 2. Are you also finding that this is the case? I understand that all lenses have a "sweet spot" in the middle, but "unusable" is really a different story. It seems like it would be completely unacceptable to anyone. Certainly for me.

Also, are the LCD screen and viewfinder "live" at the same time. Thanks.

Hi Kevin, I don't consider myself a pro, but I think the focus is good (not perfect but definitely useable) at 1.2 in 4K. Especially if there is good light. I have found that when using the autofocus while zoomed all the way tight it seems to have a problem finding the focus, but if you just back it off slightly then it is able to do it's job. But manual focus works fine when you are all the way tight. As to the sweet spot, I would say between f4.0 and f5.6.

Hi Howard,

First off, Welcome Aboard. [Navy pipe welcome]

I think the HM200 does better in low light than the 7D does. And I find the picture quality to be excellent. I have set the picture quality to Cinema, Vivid which makes the focus a little softer and the colors richer in my opinion. This is great for the kind of work I do. And the autofocus works very well and is quick.
I have shot a little test footage in low light and using F1.2 thru F2.4 in 4K but don't know where I can post it on line. If you can tell me where to upload the .MOV files created by the camera I would be glad to do it.

One good place to post videos, and the site without commercials on your work, is at www.Vimeo.com. If you use FCPX for editing the upload (Share) option is already built into the application so the workflow for to upload is just a few clicks away.

We'd really like any comments and to see anything you have to share on this cam. Hope this works for you.

If you get or have an Outlook (live.com) account, you can upload a clip to Onedrive, and share a link to it. I have posted ProRes files previously, and it not only transcodes very high quality playing back on the link, but offers a download button for the ORIGINAL POSTED FILE. Not sure if there is compatibility with some strange JVC camera MOV raw file though, worth a try.

Also, on the f1.2 thing.........if the lens is f3.5 at telephoto, would that mean it would get sharper, or are we talking a few f-stops of blur from wide open as a problem?

Paul

Also, on the f1.2 thing.........if the lens is f3.5 at telephoto, would that mean it would get sharper, or are we talking a few f-stops of blur from wide open as a problem?

Paul

Like Paul, I really need to know more about the poor quality that has been reported when the lens is at the widest aperture settings. The review below says that it is unusable below f 2. Really?? Talk about deal breaker. Sure, it may not look as good as when shooting at the middle settings but "unusable below 2.0" is a way different scenario.
Review: JVC GY-HM170 / GY-HM200 4K camcorder - YouTube

Yeah, the term "unusable" is very subjective. Some people consider anything above 6db on practically any camera UNUSABLE. Obviously, a donut spare tire on a car is unusable for normal driving, but it is usable for limping hope. If f1.2 on the JVC brings consistent "what's wrong with the video" comments from ANYONE viewing the footage, that may indeed be unusable. :)

A JVC rep has offered to let me demo an HM200, but told me I would be happier with the HM650 or HM890 as they do better in low light. My X70 is better in low light than my X180. My X180 in turn is better than my HM790 in low light. If you look at earlier posts, someone says the HM200 is same/better than the Canon X25 in low light, and the X25 is similar to the X70 in low light according to online comparisons.

I would put the X70 side by side with the HM200 at night, and do a full wide angle to telephoto zoom in comparison at 0db, middle gain, and maximum gain settings. that would solve the confusion.

Paul

Paul, I hope you get to test the HM200. It would be great to get a perspective on the camera as it compares to the Sony X70. These are the two cameras that are on my radar presently. I am not as concerned about night shooting as you are, but my concern is how the camera performs when shooting below f 2 under natural, but low light settings (interiors, etc.)
Have fun with the camera and I look forward to your findings.

As a night shooter, as you can imagine, 90% of my footage is shot WIDE OPEN, no alternative. Low light "capability" takes 2 forms in my book. The ability to add gain without horrible grain/noise, and the ability to even be able to gain up. MyX180 stops at 18db, and that is simply not enough. Sure, they want to make cameras that look great at ALL settings, but that is akin to traction control on a car not letting you win a race. :)

Paul

Kevin, thanks for that link with an overview of the HM200.
“Review: JVC HM170 / HM200 camcorder”

The take away:

1. Lens cap is clip-on and not integrated. Comment: Even the old 2006 JVC GZ-HD7 had it built-in.

2. This is a two-ring cam with with a Zoom, and switchable Focus/Iris control; the default being for focus. There is another control for the iris. The Sony X70 has only one ring.

3. ND filters - For me, since I’ll be doing a lot of shooting in bright light on the water with boats, it will need a ND filter in front of the lens. Question: Will there be vignetting???

4. OIS “is quite good” At full zoom it kept the video “relatively stable”. Sony’s is a benchmark. Personally, I’d really like a good OIS like the one Sony has but this isn’t a deal breaker.

5. The Røde Video Mic Pro picked up handling noise and a slight hum from the cam. Good to know but not a big deal.

6. Constant apeture: Need to find out the details on this. In the video he recommended setting it to f/3.5 and working the zoom from there.

7. 0.24” EVF Viewfinder: doesn’t work well with glasses and it is quite small. “Seems distant.” He had to try and look around at the sides to see the image. The Sony PMW-200 is much better. The viewfinder is very small, easy to knock out of adjustment, and the adjustment is very sensitive. Seemed very fiddly. Don’t think this would be a biggie but possibly annoying. Use masking tape on it?

8. 3.5” LCD Flip-out Viewfinder: is “okay”. It has a joystick so one can keep finger smears off of the screen! Excellent option. Perhaps the screen could be a little sharper for focusing. Use an Atmos?

9. Lens: (at ~15:00) Image at f/1.2 is noticeably soft vs. f/2.0. Ditto again above about f/8 or f/9 in bright light. For me, with bright light and only two ND filter settings, this may be a deal breaker. Screwing on and off a ND filter won’t be good. The sweet spot is between f/3.5 and f/8 and “all will be well.”

10. There are lots of buttons, many of which are assignable, a plus. Ditto with the menu in the flip-out viewfinder.

11. Memory is UHS class 3 which is inexpensive and has been coming down in price.

12. Reviewer feels the 4K image when cropped down to HD size isn’t quite as sharp as the native HD image. Some other reviewers have mentioned that the HD image from a 4K file is better than the native HD image, presumably because there is more data to work with. This is a bit confusing.

13. Bottom line: The reviewer said that “Over all, given the lightness, the compactness, the feature-set, and the decent image if you keep it within the parameters, for the money this is a very good little camcorder.”

Also of interest, there were a couple interesting low-light reviews of the Panasonic HC-X1000 in the sidebar of this link.

As an comment: It would be nice if JVC would use this form factor and apply it to a, say (suggested name), HM250 model that would have an upgraded lens and upgraded viewfinders, and an upgraded …. lens cap. How much would this be and how much would it add to the cost? And would it be cost-effective on a 1/2-inch cam?

@ Paul Anderegg: As a thought, do you ever get up to LA? Maybe you could touch base with Jim Martin at EVS EVS Online: Home (http://www.evsonline.com) to test one out. Or, maybe easier, if David Hausman, JVC Field Service Engineer ever gets down to your area maybe he could bring one and you two could work with it. You could invite him out on one of your Breaking News assignments!

For your purpose, though, doesn't look like f/2 is going to cut it. FS300 with it’s large sensor and a power zoom lens would seem like an option but you already ruled this one out, yes??? For me, f/9 and using a screw-on/off UV filter isn’t necessarily a deal breaker but it sure is a bummer. The low-light end isn’t nearly as critical for me but, even so, this might not be quite good enough. The devil is in the details.

It's a little disappointing that JVC did not manage to get the optical design good enough to stay sharp wide open. Especially since it's a 4K camera, soft images will get noticed pretty quick.

But I love the design and features of it and it would be a nice step up from my HM150.

the 4K image when cropped down to HD size isn’t quite as sharp as the native HD image. Some other reviewers have mentioned that the HD image from a 4K file is better than the native HD image, presumably because there is more data to work with. This is a bit confusing.

If I may clarify, you're confusing my reference to a *cropped* HD image with a scaled HD image from a 4K source.

I concur that a 4K image from the JVC scaled to HD looks marvellous but an HD-sized crop from a 4K image appeared less sharp to me than an image from a good HD camcorder.

Regards
David