Hey you LS300 users,

As I've been lurking for a while (and reading every LS300 post I could get my hands on), I wanted to see what you guys still think about the LS300. The $1K instant rebate promotion is ending next week (NAB 2016 is in a few weeks!) and I'm still trying to decide if we should finally upgrade. What are your thoughts?

******************

First of all, here's where we're coming from...

To give you an idea of our current workflow, we're shooting with a Canon XF100 (4:2:2 8-bit HD) as our A-cam which has saved us many times over in post per color correction/brightness and with image stabilization. Our B-cam is a Canon 5D Mk II (and a 60D) with Magic Lantern, which has offered us wonderful shallow DoF, but utilizes an unforgiving 4:2:0 color space and iffy image stabilization with some of our Canon lenses. I've agonized in post to get the color/brightness right...and usually we use the XF100 to match to whatever is baked into the 5D footage.

Given that the LS300's form factor is nearly identical to our XF100, it's a size/format that we're already comfortable with. The idea that we have quite a few Canon EF lenses on hand, grabbing an LS300 and a Metabones adapter (Maybe a speed booster...what do you think?) seems very appealing...particularly as we'd love to have the form-factor of our XF100 - but with the shallow DoF of DSLR lenses. Given that we even have a follow-focus unit with 15mm rails here...it's tempting to set up some sort of rig with that.

Deliverables? 1080p/24 for our masters...but we're most concerned with being able to provide network TV broadcast approved footage if necessary. We film about 65% run-n-gun / 35% narrative.

4K and future proofing our current footage? That would be really nice - particularly if we're investing in a new camera. For HD footage, we'd love to do some zooms in post for extra angles (fake close-ups). We might have occasional access to an Atomos Shogun for 4K external capture, but from what I gather - the LS300's 4K external footage would be 8-bit either way...and it looks like it might still be 4:2:0...so would there really be any point in using a Shogun aside from enjoying a larger monitor?

In this day an age, should we even care in post that the 4k footage is recorded in 4:2:0 and not 4:2:2? The J-log upgrade stuff looks great per nice contrasty stuff...

I am concerned about resale value; this camera seems like a true underdog here and the price slashing has me worried...given that the cam was first announced in 2014.

Price-wise, we've been considering a used Sony NXCAM NEX-FS700R body instead. We also investigated the Sony A7Rii and the A7Sii...but both of which really don't seem easy to use with run-n-gun situations and seem to overheat...plus no XLR inputs...etc...

Low light? It appears that the XF100 and the LS300 aren't so great. That's probably not such a big problem for us though...

Image stabilization? We typically shoot handheld with the XF100, and on a monopod with the 5D. Particularly for you guys with Canon EF glass with IS, please chime in if Canon's IS really helps! We're used to great image stabilization with the XF100.

The upcoming firmware upgrade for the LS300? No sweat, and the slo-mo in April would be a nice perk. Plus, we're used to upgrading firmware all the time. (Maybe JVC is doing the discount to move their pre-firmware upgrade units?)

Our budget? $3k is our max right now, and we'd sell off the XF100 to partially fund the LS300 purchase. Without the instant rebate, the LS300 would be out of reach for now.

Okay...that's a mouthful right there. I'm all ears and thanks for your thoughts and time!

Concerning low light, it's not a very good performer compared to other large sensor dslr's but it will be a lot better then the xf100 when you couple it with a fast prime.

About it being 4:2:2 8bit, if that worked out fine with your xf100 then I"m sure the ls300 will do fine as well, eventhough it's 4:2:2 it's still a 8bit codec, things start to matter once it becomes a 10bit codec which hopefully would be in a future firmware upgrade.

Others will chime in with metabones experience but I only work with native m4/3 lenses and especially the 12-35mm f2.8 is a great run and gun lens.

I'm not sure if resale value would be the biggest problem, every camera below 3k looses value fast once you buy it, the problem might be to find buyers for it. my camera came with a 5 year warranty which will become it's biggest advantage if I decide to sell it in 3 years

One of the biggest selling points of the LS300 is what it doesn’t come with. A lens. That is, one that can’t be removed.

For years, the fastest depreciating item in the kit has been the cam; however, good glass holds it’s value much better. Depending on what one is shooting, some nice prime glass can really help make the picture. It really makes sense to buy a cam sans glass, if it’s possible. Everyone has their priority but for me, to have a cam that one can put a prime lens on is a real plus.

If you have lenses that can be made to work then that’s like money in the bank.

@Noa - That's a great point per the low light...as I'm guessing it's a similar performer low-light wise...but a fast
prime will be an improvement that we simply didn't have before on the XF100.

The two key things that the 4:2:2 helped us in post, was that we had both color and contrast flexibility. But if we shot in 4k in the LS300...would be lose that?

The funny thing is that we just sold off a few of our primes (to bring in some cash), as we simply weren't using them. In fact, we just sold off our 35L 1.4 (Mk I) as the DoF was too shallow for video for us...as one's nose would be in focus and the rest of the face would be blurry on our 5D! ;)

Generally, per our 5D, we've been more concerned with getting image stabilization out of our Canon EF zooms, which our primes just didn't have. We'd resort to our f/2.8 glass without IS for really shallow DoF. Given that we also use our Canon lenses for stills, we still need them overall.

@John - Resale...it seems like there's never an easy answer. I just figured that maybe it's time to upgrade now while the XF100 still has some value to it. Regardless, we're definitely going to avoid buying any camera with a fixed lens in the future.



Thank you both for your early responses! Looking forward to hearing more from you LS300 guys...particularly per the EF Metabones (and speed booster)...how editable/grade-able the 4K footage been in post (particularly with J-Log...something totally new to me)... image stabilization with EF lenses...etc.

Finally...has anyone recorded 4K out via HDMI? Was it actually 4:2:0?

Thanks!

Seth: I also have an XF100 that bought as a "glove compartment camera" to replace my HV40 - believe me, the LS300 is far superior in every aspect - except viewfinder (both are poor) and XLR input/audio (both are similar and completely usable, with the JVC taking a slight lead).

Resale: At the current price, it's worth buying for just one job - in fact that's exactly what I did - I got rid of my C100 and bought it with the intention of replacing it with the FS5 when it became available. I like the LS300 better than the Sony though, so I'm keeping it until it's worth $0.

As stated above, lenses - it will use virtually any lens that's ever been made. I use mine primarily with five Rokinon and four Leica-R primes, an Olympus 12-40, Lumix 35-100 and - now that Metabones has finally released a decent firmware upgrade - my Canon 24-105 and 17-55 (non-SpeedBooster). The 17-55 is the favorite zoom as of this writing - and yes, the stabilization works. NOTE: The zooms mentioned are, unfortunately, NOT parfocal on this camera, although they do act parfocal on every other camera I've tried them on - this was the subject of one of my first posts here.

J-Log1 is extremely easily to grade, and if your exposure is good the 8bit isn't much of an issue - except with the old bugaboos of long fades to black or vignette overlays (banding can rear it's ugly head). We all want 10bit, but I'm afraid that's going to be a hardware (cooling?) issue on a (hopefully) future model.

The image quality is superb. There's no evidence of highlight chroma clipping, which is what killed the otherwise excellent AF100. I've shot some UHD (the job I bought it for) and honestly don't know if it becomes 10bit (as some have said) when down-converted to 1080p - but the acquired UHD or 1080 resolution is WAY better than the XF100 or C100 in either case.

The Prime Zoom feature is worth the price of admission - especially now that it's remote controllable. It turns the EF-S 17-55 into an f.2.8 17mm (to about) 120mm lens, which is nearly perfect on this sensor. What I do to offset the non-parfocal issue is set the zoom to my intended widest shot and use the Prime Zoom to zoom in to focus and/or reframe (this all in 1080 of course).

And with a sharp prime that uses the whole sensor, like the Rokinon 35 T1.5, you get a 35mm to about 85mm equivalent T1.5 manual focus and iris lens (which I prefer).

To me the LS300's a no brainer - with one caveat - it took me three tries to get a good one. But that was at first release and the QC manufacturing bugs have probably been worked out by now.

Hi guys!

Thank you all so much for your incredibly helpful and fast replies here.

(@Steve - a huge thanks for your last reply! I’ve been busy going through this and your other comments in other threads…you’ve been really on top of all this. Sorry to hear you had earlier issues, and should we go with it – hopefully we’d receive a later-production model with fewer issues.)

So here’s the scoop. After a lot of thought these past few days, the important thing that we’ve used our XF100 as an A-cam for has been for it’s significant image stabilization capability (and 4:2:2 color) for run-n-gun filming as we really do shoot handheld much of the time. The small form factor is outstanding. If we can get significant image stabilization, we may be good to go.

The 5D Mark II has been great for us on a monopod (the XF100 matches it pretty well) for gorgeous shallow DoF shots for composed shots and interviews, but it hasn’t been reliable (even with IS) for steady footage as a run-n-gun camera. Then again, the form factor of any HDSLR doesn’t seem as ideal as that of the XF100 or the LS300.

So the make-it or break-it question, is just how realistically useful the image stabilization from our Canon glass would be, in conjunction with a Metabones adapter. Here’s what we have at our disposal to work with our Canon IS lenses:

* 24-105L f4 IS
* 100L f2.8 macro IS
* 70-200L f2.8 IS (Mark I) with a 1.4x III extender
* 70-300 (non-L) IS f4-5.6 -- but it's a portable and sharp copy

*We’re also considering trading in our 16-35L f2.8 (Mark II) in favor of the newer 16-35L f4 IS, just for IS…

If we were shooting cinema/narrative, the LS300 would be a no-brainer; our 5D is currently fulfilling that role nicely at 4:2:0. However, we’re shooting a lot of “on the go” footage, particularly filming vehicles in motion from support vehicles…and we’d like to upgrade our XF100 to something with both IS and a shallow DoF. (That’s why the Sony A7Rii and the A7Sii are a bit appealing…)

If we go with the LS300, we'd obviously go the Metabones route. But what's the scoop about auto-focus on the EF lenses and Metabones? I read something about a firmware upgrade? Does AF now work? If so, how? It’s not clear at all on the Metabones site; I'm guessing the LS300 wouldn't continually focus like the XF100...let alone have auto-features like "face recognition." Of course these are more amateur and non-cinematic features, but actually helpful for really fast set-ups...

Plus…if we go the Metabones route, we’re thinking of getting the 0.71x SpeedBooster model, particularly in that we shoot a lot of cramped and indoor work…and we’d want to knock down the 1.4x crop factor. Also, has anyone here used the SpeedBooster model?

I was fortunate to chat with another LS300 fan on the phone yesterday, who said that the Canon IS simply wouldn’t be strong enough for what we need…and to just expect to use the camera totally manually. What do you all think?

As for sound, that’s disappointing to hear that included mic is so poor. I guess we’d lose it and just use the Audio Technica AT-875R or dual Sennheiser wireless lavs we own. (I was just wishing for something with better off-axis rejection…) I just hope the internal preamps are as clean as the XF100 have been…

Thoughts? All ears here as the clock ticks down on the instant rebate promotion. So many thanks!

Here's an update on the EF-S 17-55 lens with the non-SpeedBooster Metabones adapter. With that lens the IS works quite well, good enough for me anyway.

BUT, it's very difficult to hit focus regularly at mid-range or wider. I shot all day Friday with it, in agricultural fields (on tripod, IS off), and had a hard time - using the Gratical with it's peaking on - I missed infinity a couple of times and couldn't track focus from about 50 feet to 5 feet accurately without several practice tries. I've been doing this kind of shooting for 40 years, so believe me it's not lack of experience.

I switched to the Lumix 35-100 and Rokinon 35 and 85 and had no problems shooting at the same stop (4 - 5.6 split). Consequently I'm not as enthusiastic about that Canon lens as I thought I might be. If it were parfocal it would be okay, but without the ability to zoom in to focus it's pretty useless for fast shooting.

NOTE: I use the 24-105 all the time with a SpeedBooster on the Pocket Cameras and don't have the problem.

Interesting, Steve. What are you referring to per the "Pocket Cameras"?

Also, what's the story per Auto Focus on the Metabones?

Seth... I own two Black Magic Pocket Cameras, one with the EF SpeedBooster permanently attached - the support is screwed to the baseplate - the other I use with the native MFT mount, most often with the Olympus and Lumix zooms.

The auto focus function does not work well on either the SpeedBooster or the standard Metabones. When in use it sounds like a manual transmission grinding gears... Pretty bad.

Generally I don't depend on auto focus, so it hasn't been a problem. With the Pockets the internal peaking is output to the EVF, and it works well in Log (which is good, because AF is pretty unusable on those little cameras).

However, the LS300 doesn't output peaking via HDMi or SDI (I use the latter with the Gratical). With J-Log the Gratical can't seem to lock into the less contrasty image as well as the camera's internal peaking, thus the issue. For some reason the Lumix is better, although the resulting video from the 17-55 doesn't appear softer, in fact it seems sharper, so I'm not sure what the difference is, there may be someone with more knowledge of optics that could elaborate.

I should add that the sky was very misty in the Salinas Valley the day I was shooting.. I wanted the misty mountains in the distance to set off the clear plowed rows In the immediate foreground. That mist exacerbated the focusing issue - but I didn't have near the problem with the other lenses - again, I'm not sure why.

I forgot to mention that AF works very well with the native MFT Lumix and Olympus lenses, and sometimes I do actually use it because every time you change focal length you need to refocus - I wish they acted par focal on this camera - so what I tend to do, as I said above, is set the lens at a focal length and use the Prime Zoom feature, combined with the Gratical's 1:1, to focus. Unfortunately that technique wasn't working well with the 17-55.

However, the LS300 doesn't output peaking via HDMi or SDI

I get peaking on my external monitor that's connected with hdmi, is there a difference between what the camera outputs or what the monitor sees? From I can see the peaking on that ext monitor is accurate.

I tried it with my camera when I first got it and it didn't work, pre firmware upgrades. I've been using the SDI since and it doesn't, I'll try the HDMI again when I get a chance...

Thanks, guys!

Well...The good news is that I've finally been able to schedule an appointment with my local JVC dealer for a demo tomorrow, which will be great. I'll bring in my Canon lenses tomorrow...

Two key things that I'm still wondering about:

1) Manual focus is a given, but I'm not clear about how (if at all) the auto focus would work as per Metabones - it's not continual auto-focus (face tracking...).

* When I half-press the shutter down on a DSLR stills camera, it focuses.
* When I leave the XF100 in fully automatic mode, it tracks and focuses completely.
* So with the AF on per the LS300 with a Metabones, it just like a 5D Mark II in AF mode? (which is unusable?)


2) Metabones SpeedBooster or not? What I gather is that the 0.71x would defeat the 1.4x crop, so the multiplication of our FF lenses (that's all we own) would remain pretty much the same. Plus, we'd get one more stop in the process. Am I missing anything here?

Can't help you in regard to the metabones because I don't use that but I can tell that with my native m4/3 lenses I can have the camera in manual, press a button and the camera refocuses. Autofocus is quite good, nor exceptional, but more then usable.

Thanks, Noa!

So let me get this straight. Let's say you're filming a talking head for an interview, with one of your M43 lenses that already has AF capability.

To get set up, you press an AF button, which nails the focus on the subject, leaving the background blurred (which is ideal). Then, you hit record and you're off to the races. If they go out of focus, you just hit the AF button again and the subject is back in focus. Is that correct?

Obviously, it's different than a camera that continually auto focuses on the subject or even has something like face tracking...but even basic auto focus ability seems like it would be a help.

To get set up, you press an AF button, which nails the focus on the subject, leaving the background blurred (which is ideal). Then, you hit record and you're off to the races. If they go out of focus, you just hit the AF button again and the subject is back in focus. Is that correct?

Yes, that's correct + you have very good peaking and screen magnification to make sure your focus is dead on.

Obviously, it's different than a camera that continually auto focuses on the subject or even has something like face tracking

The ls300 can do that to but it's not the same quality as the dual pixel autofocus capability of a c300.

"The ls300 can do that to but it's not the same quality as the dual pixel autofocus capability of a c300."

You're kidding! That's fantastic. However, I'm guessing that would only work with M43 glass, correct?

The LS300 has Face detection, and I've tried it several times. It usually works, but my fear is that it wouldn't when I need it to, Using the camera's EVF or LCD you can see the box around the area it's chosen to focus, so you're sure it's working (or not working). Unfortunately for me I use an external EVF and that overlay isn't output vis SDI.

BTW, I tried the HDMI with the Gratical and I still don't get camera peaking (or the above overlay). Must be something with my camera...

Very cool!

1) I guess the key thing is that in an ideal situation, we'd have someone manning the LS300, who will be properly focusing manually. That's always the safest option. My hunch is that the IS in the 24-105L with IS will be just fine for that handheld, as that's what I gather has worked for you, Steven.

But there are rarer occasions where I'd like to just put it on a tripod and let it run in automatic mode...such as a self-filming situation....hence some sort of continual autofocusing/face detection kind of thing...and just have it run like it's like it's fixed lens and JVC brother...GY-HM200U. So if that's the case, that's perfect! However, I'd just need to know what lens to throw on for those situations to make that work... as clearly EF glass and an adapter won't work.

2) I emailed Metabones; Hopefully I'll hear back from them about the Speed Booster...surely someone has tried it out.

Thanks, guys!

Seth: If you don't have any MFT lenses, there are several very inexpensive Lumix zooms that would probably work well for the situations you describe...Of course there are used options as well. I know that the Lumix 12-35 and 35-100 f2.8 work very well with auto everything.. but they ain't cheap. Check B&H for the Lumix Lenses page. There's a 14 - 175 and 14-45 that have a zoom/variable iris that's not my cup of tea - but they're like 300- 400 bucks and many seem to like them.

BTW - I forgot to add that in my not so humble opinion the XF100 isn't the great small camera I'd hoped for. I had been extremely impressed with the HV40, and used it to make several covert documentaries (one about film festivals, another about a homeless shelter, another about an after school program for disadvantaged kids). But it was HDV and tape became an issue. I bought the XF to replace it (4.2.2 was attractive) but it's never really filled the void. Sadly the newer high-end consumer Canons don't have the manual functionality of the HV40 (I detest touch screens). Believe me when I say that the LS300 is miles above the XF. It's comparable to cameras 2-3 times it's price.

BTW, I tried the HDMI with the Gratical and I still don't get camera peaking (or the above overlay). Must be something with my camera...

I have a Avtec XHD070Pro 7" Field Monitor

Steve - If you're seriously saying that if I simply throw on a newer M43 lens... something like an image stabilized Panasonic ...like:

******** Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asph. Lens for Micro 4/3 (Black)

...and the LS300 would then behave like an XF100 in fully automatic mode...I'd really be all set! Am I getting it right here?

This way, I'd have something for simple run-n-gun shoots...and then use all my EF glass for dedicated and cinematic shoots like one would with a C100/C300.

Plus, with something like the 12-35 f2.8, I'm guessing with the VSM I'd really have something more like a 12-80...and a 35-100 would then be a 35-233, right? That's incredible!

Thanks for helping me confirm all this so quickly.

Still haven't tossed my hat into the LS300 ring as work took an uncertain turn the past month. With two Panasonic GH cameras and two HM600 cameras, I am covered although not as happily as if I had the LS300 to replace one of the GH cameras.

After shooting a two camera, single subject interview with the GH cameras a couple of days ago I have a question for the 300 experts here: how reliable is the viewfinder or the LCD screen for manual focus? For sit down interviews I prefer manual focus over face detection auto focus as my experience is that the GH cameras gets wonky after an hour and start wandering the focus even though the subject hasn't moved much. The problem is that I don't have an external monitor and even with a LCD loupe while filming it's hard to tell how sharp the focus is especially if the subject starts moving around.

how reliable is the viewfinder or the LCD screen for manual focus?

As long as you use the focusing aids like peaking, setting the screen in black and white and using the magnifying option that lets you zoom in on any part of the screen focusing is very reliable, if you don't use those aids your OK during well lit scenes but as soon as the lights go out you absolutely need to use teh focusing aids again to be sure.

...and the LS300 would then behave like an XF100 in fully automatic mode...I'd really be all set! Am I getting it right here?

The ls300 can function in a fully automatic mode but the difference between the ls300 and the xf100 is the sensor size and that can make automatic focusing unreliable depending on your f-stop, distance from your subject and focal length. I have been shooting at 12mm in auto mode with my 12-35mm f2.8 without much problems but when I was shooting at f2.8 and came up close to a subject you can see that the camera can start to hunt a bit, same would occur if you zoom in to 100mm with a 35-100 lens you have the same risk.


Plus, with something like the 12-35 f2.8, I'm guessing with the VSM I'd really have something more like a 12-80...and a 35-100 would then be a 35-233, right?

I don't know the exact magnification but it's considerable making zoomlenses or especially primes much more useful, in 4K it's a much less zoomrange, only in 1080p you get the most reach.

Steve - If you're seriously saying that if I simply throw on a newer M43 lens... something like an image stabilized Panasonic ...like:

******** Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asph. Lens for Micro 4/3 (Black)

...and the LS300 would then behave like an XF100 in fully automatic mode...I'd really be all set! Am I getting it right here?

When you review the LS300 functions you see the LUMIX lenses are perfect. Every lens function is supported. But JVC will not mention Panasonic -- which leaves many buyers from buying THE lenses the engineers clearly had in mind.

POWER ZOOM from the LS300 controls
POWER FOCUS when camera is in AF mode.
POWER APERTURE when camera is in AE mode
POWER OIS when you assign OIS to a physical button

The first lens I would buy is the Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asph. It's fast and very light. But it is only a 3X. The Panasonic’s small and lightweight (210 grams) LUMIX G X VARIO PZ 45-175mm/F4.0-5.6 is another zoom lens that provides these power functions.

POWER FOCUS when camera is in AF mode. But once focus has been achieved simply switch to Manual.

POWER APERTURE when camera is in AE mode. But once exposure has been achieved simply switch to Manual.

And in J-log you must dial aperture so you are in Manual, but there are many ways to set aperture.

By the way, I have the 1:1 mode set to TOGGLE. So I press button and get focus and press again. So there is no excuse for not getting focus either by AF or Manual.

Quote:
When you review the LS300 functions you see the LUMIX lenses are perfect. Every lens function is supported. But JVC will not mention Panasonic -- which leaves many buyers from buying THE lenses the engineers clearly had in mind.

Seems like it wasn’t the most pleasant of, uh …. divorces.

Back when Panasonic took over JVC and JVC came out with the HD7 ~2006 with full HD, from the things I read about it, I got the impression that Panasonic really didn’t care for it apparently because JVC upstaged them.

Okay, ‘nother subject.

I’ve posted this once before but given all the LS300 activity centering around lenses, and since this table has been updated migh to March 2016, it might be of use for last minute decision making.
The Complete Micro 4/3 Lens List (http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html)

The list of caveats makes for interesting reading.

I and others forgot to mention one little wrinkle. Auto exposure is disabled in J-Log. I forgot because I never use auto exposure (even on the HV40). If you want to maintain auto exposure, try the Cinema Gamma.

When you review the LS300 functions you see the LUMIX lenses are perfect.

unfortunately though, according to JVC's guidelines in correctly using the VSM feature, you apparently can't shoot 4K while using a native micro 4/3 lens. At least not "proper 4K"- the way the sensor & VSM feature was designed. The "proper" way would be to set VSM at 80% MFT, which is below 4K (according to the way the sensor is scanned).

Can you not shoot C4K 4096 x 2160 with Lumix or Olympus 4/3 glass on the LS300, like you can on the GH4? At 80% VSM is the camera upscaling the image?

EDIT: I just found this thread, which confirms my concern:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-4k-pro-handheld-camcorders/531092-mft-lenses-3840x2160-upscale-3840x2160.html

Still haven't tossed my hat into the LS300 ring as work took an uncertain turn the past month.

Why not order ls300 + LUMIX G X VARIO PZ 45-175mm/F4.0-5.6 zoom lens from B&H. As I remember they give you 7 days to try it out.

EDIT: I just found this thread, which confirms my concern:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-4k-pro-handheld-camcorders/531092-mft-lenses-3840x2160-upscale-3840x2160.html

Yes BUT

There is no reason to set VSM to 80%!

The LS300 has an alternate way of setting VSM. Attach lens and go to the VSM tool. Click to choose VSM = 92%. Zoom wide and look for Vignetting. If none, you are good to go for C4K -- which you should NOT shoot unless you a making a print for a digital cinema projector. The idea that a few more pixels in width is better is counter-balanced by the fact 4K does NOT have a 16:9 aspect-ratio.

So you should click to choose VSM = 86%. Zoom wide and look for Vignetting. If none, you are good to go for UHD. Yes, others are working at 90% but you should choose a VSM that matches exactly the recording format. So anything other than 86% involves scaling -- which is NOT ever what you want to do. (Unless the scale is a factor of 2.)

Bottom line, follow to the letter the instructions in:

https://www.thebroadcastbridge.com/content/entry/5040/field-report-jvc-gy-ls300-4k-super-35-camcorder

That sounds harsh, but JVC has provided so little information that it took me months to try and figure-out what's going on inside. That means going to Japanese and German sites. Japanese reviews have the advantage they can get info inside JVC. The German sites measure everything! (I also find JVC in the UK seems to get more from Japan.)

BTW, I tried the HDMI with the Gratical and I still don't get camera peaking (or the above overlay). Must be something with my camera...

I think SDI and HDMI output the exact same image.

I emailed Metabones; Hopefully I'll hear back from them about the Speed Booster...surely someone has tried it out. Thanks, guys!

i used the 0.7 Metabones with a Nikon F 1.8 50mm lens and it worked perfectly. Actually it worked too well because the LS300 recorded dark scenes brighter than the human eye can see. So to get "reality" I had to stop down a bit.

I'm not sure where the idea that the LS300 is not so good in low light came from. The Pana 3X f2.8 zoom will do a great job. And, of course, there are Primes. With Prime Zoom you still get a zoom lens.

See image in:
https://www.thebroadcastbridge.com/content/entry/5040/field-report-jvc-gy-ls300-4k-super-35-camcorder

Part 2 of my LS300 review should be posted in the next 2 weeks.

Here is a nice short article on Canon log.

Canon DLC: Article: Understanding the EOS C300's Canon Log Gamma (http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/understand_log_gamma.shtml)

And, for more on log:

https://www.thebroadcastbridge.com/content/entry/4586/creating-video-looks-using-camcorder-image-adjustments

There will be a Part 3 -- using Davinci Resolve 12 to edit LS300 J-log footage. JVC has note communicated that J-log moves the humble LS300 into the very expensive class of S-log cameras. By using Resolve, I want to show the LS300 is not your father's JVC camcorder. (And, yet is, if you don't need J-log.) As some have suggested, Cinema mode -- which is never discussed -- might be perfect for those who want more DR than 709 and still want to use AE.

i pulled the trigger and got an LS300- the discount, the free lens, the cams specs and upcoming firmware: seemed like allot of bang for your buck. Thanks to Steve and the others here for all the great research and info :

Congratulations!

Now if someone will buy a fully powered LUMIX lens and give us a report.

I almost did because I can use it on a Pocket camera. But, who knows what BM will announce -- and not ship -- at NAB.

Please keep us up to date on your experiences.

Now if someone will buy a fully powered LUMIX lens and give us a report.


What do you want to know? I mainly have lumix lenses.

Not on the fence anymore...

Just a quick thank you to the small, dedicated group of you here. After being an AF100 pre-order customer, and enjoying many things about the camera with the exception of the very limited operating window of the imager, we ordered a GY-LS300.

AF100 will become our B-cam (mostly "B"ackup).

The usability features continue to put it head and shoulders above anything else in its price range and it's the logical step for us; allowing us to use the glass/adapters we already accumulated.

It was nice to see, the day we ordered, that JVC will be releasing yet-another feature firmware update., which is unlike Panasonic's penny-pinching with their paid firmware update.

We already have a green-screen re-shoot scheduled for this weekend which a great way to punish an 8-bit camera (and myself) from the get-go. It will be nice to see how it stacks up against the AF100 which was used for the original shoot (and recorded HD-SDI out directly into a video workstation.)

Thanks again.

I have pre-ordered the Ninja Flame | Atomos external recorder / monitor, and try to record a better codec and higher bit rate master file from LS300 camera body.

Is there a 8 bit or 10 bit HDMI uncompressed 4K from the LS300 ? Any firmware upgrade to 4KP60 at NAB ?

Best regards,
Stewart - Hong Kong
WOW Holdings Limied (http://www.wowdigitainment.com)

Petros: I'll be interested in your impressions... I never use green screen, but it's a good test of how well the 8bit image holds up downstream.

Congratulations!

Now if someone will buy a fully powered LUMIX lens and give us a report.

I purchased the GY-LS300 camera a couple of weeks ago, and I am very happy with it so far. I have a Panny GH4 and Sony PMW-300 as well.

I bought a Lumix G Vario 14-140 3.5 HD lens that works very well on the LS300. Obviously not the fasted lens, but not too shabby either using it on this camera. The zoom range is great, especially combined with the VSM. All functions seem to work, although I am not sure about the OIS as it is greyed out on the JVC's menu screen. Picked up the lens for $400 on ebay.

I have only used the camera on one job so far, a two camera shoot with the PMW-300, shooting in HD. I was very happy with how the footage turned out, and was really surprised to see that the PMW-300's footage actually looked a touch soft in comparison to the JVC. I had the detail on the LS300 set to minus 2, shooting in ITU709. I'm looking forward to trying out the J-Log1 next.

One feature that I miss from the Sony XDCAM menu is "Last Clip Delete". I use this frequently and would love to see this added to the LS300 in a firmware update. Another small gripe is that when turning on the Histogram, it covers up the audio meter display on the LCD. I know there's only so much real estate on the screen, but I would like to be able to see both at the same time.

Again, very happy with the camera. Being a Sony user for many years, I started out looking at the FS5, but the kit lens problems scared me off, especially at $6K. Looked at the Panny DVC200 as well - a fine camera, but I wanted a removeable lens. Which led me to the JVC. Back in the day, I owned JVC S-VHS cameras, then a DV500 mini-DV shoulder mount. Those cameras had their quirks, but worked well for me. So I am back to this JVC, and glad to have made the move!



.

Hey everyone,

Apologies for not following up sooner. I can't thank you guys enough for your input and feedback.

The short version is that I'm still on hold per the LS300 - but I may be able to work something out with my local dealer, per the unit they have on hand. Plus, given that $3K is a lot of money on our really tight budget...I'd rather not be rushed by the instant rebate deadline/promo...but luckily the deal seems to still be holding for the moment.

The short version is that last week, I was able to check out the LS300 for the first time in person...and it was pretty incredible. Here's the short version of my impressions:

* Plastic-y as everyone said, but the cam was pretty lightweight
* Larger than my XF100 (I thought it would be smaller), but not too big
* Gorgeous DoF with the Rokinon T 1.5 - but a tripod/monopod would be a must
* A genuine, built-in ND filter was a godsend and how I have lived without it. Wished I had more than three options there, though
* Coming from EF lenses, the declicked aperture was nice on the T 1.5 and I could really used to that
* There's no way for me to handle a prime cleanly without IS - the footage seemed far shakier when I viewed it in the editing bay than on the monitor
* I couldn't test our stable of EF lenses w/ IS, as they didn't have a Metabones adapter available
* The Panasonic 12-35 and the 70-300 were great. The real-time AF worked, but it struggled to determine what to focus on if it was close up - I'd probably grab a 12-35 for all our run-n-gun footage and use EF for everything else
* The internal mics were surprisingly clean
* I didn't test 4K footage (I didn't have capable SD cards on-hand) but the 1080p was great
* I'd totally go for an EF Metabones 0.71x Speedbooster (I heard back from Metabones per definitive compatibility)
* Unlike the XF100, very concerned about hitting focus as the EVF/LCD weren't good enough...next time I'll learn how to set up the focus peaking
* The fact that it can turn every lens into a zoom? That blew my mind. Totally a game changer. I'm trying hard not to just buy the camera for that function alone.

I'll keep you guys posted; hopefully I may even have a chance to borrow the camera for next weekend to test out more comprehensively and in the store.

Regardless, I'm glad that this discussion is provoking some thought and is helping others here who are bravely jumping over to JVC! I'm all about a good underdog - and this camera may be the best kept secret out there right now.

Cheers and thanks!

- Seth

There's no way for me to handle a prime cleanly without IS - the footage seemed far shakier when I viewed it in the editing bay than on the monitor

Any camera that has no inbody stabilization has this problem, it's not jvc specific.

The Panasonic 12-35 and the 70-300 were great. The real-time AF worked, but it struggled to determine what to focus on if it was close up - I'd probably grab a 12-35 for all our run-n-gun footage and use EF for everything else

I use the 12-35mm for all run and gun work at weddings and it's the best lens you can get right now for that purpose, I use a mixture of auto and manual focus depending on the situation, if I shoot at 12mm the autofocus works fine but like you said you need to be careful if you shoot at f2.8 and shoot a subject up close or when you zoom up to 35mm, the autofocus will do it's job but not always reliably.

The internal mics were surprisingly clean
I have the opposite experience, I find them very noisy and don't use them, the supplied shotgun mike is also not good, instead I use my own audio technica shotgun which is a lot better.

Unlike the XF100, very concerned about hitting focus as the EVF/LCD weren't good enough...next time I'll learn how to set up the focus peaking

If you don't use peaking, which btw is very good and reliable, you cannot use the screen to determine if you are spot on. For critical focus in darker venues I use peaking, black/white screen and magnification which works very well.

Hey Noa - Thanks for your responses!

1) You're absolutely right about that per primes. We first tried on our 24-70L on our 5D MkII...only the 24-105L with IS made it useable. For whatever reason, I guess I had been hoping that my handheld technique had improved over time!

2) Per the Lumix 12-35, I think those results I achieved matches what you're saying here. But it was pretty stellar, and I think we'll grab one if we do go the LS300 route as it was just so useful!

3) I'll have to listen super-carefully per the internal mics next time with my monitor headphones. I read that the JVC external mic is junk; which AT mic do you use? I'm would save my AT875R from the XF100 and throw it on there.

4) Good to know per peaking on the LS300. Critical focus is key...never had that problem with the XF100...but we're talking a much more shallow DoF here with a larger sensor...which means a smaller window of getting focus right.

I have a at897 and eventhough it sounds great I find it too long.

Just out of curiosity, Noa - How's your off-axis rejection with your AT-897? I wouldn't mind more length if my short shotgun was more directional.

Again - So many thanks for all your input and feedback...All your posts online on dvinfo.net per the LS300 have been incredibly, incredibly helpful!

All natural sound I recorded at my last wedding, except for the ceremony which where external recorders, was recorded with my at897, that trailer I posted in this thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-4k-pro-handheld-camcorders/531288-jvc-ls-300-footage.html#post1910061

The mike takes just enough sound from the sides as well to make it useful as a general purpose mike but still I'd like it to be the same length as the stock mike. I almost poked out someones eye at the last wedding. :)

That wedding was also for a large part shot with the 12-35mm, eventhough it's pricey it is worth every cent. Yesterday I also used the lens on a day out and that trailer can be seen in the same thread here: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-4k-pro-handheld-camcorders/531288-jvc-ls-300-footage.html#post1911983

The wedding footage was outstanding, Noa! Very cool that you used that AT mic...The sound was fantastic.

Looking forward to checking out your other video as well!

What do you want to know? I mainly have lumix lenses.

When I saw an image of the PZ 45-175mm/F4.0-5.6 I wrongly assumed the switch as the Power OIS switch! I was totally wrong!


When I looked for LUMIX lenses for the Pocket Cinema there was one thing to look for. It needed an EXTERNAL Power OIS switch -- otherwise the camera couldn't turn On/Off OIS. The 12-35mm f/2.8 zoom has a switch. I'm not sure why the switch made a difference nor in which setting the camera could turn On/Off OIS. Noa?

So the LS300 OIS switch should work.

It has a zoom ring and a focus ring. Even though Panasonic talk about it being for shooting video, I'm pretty sure only the ring controls Zoom. No power zoom on a video camera !?!

Despite no servo for zoom, there is servo for focus. When on the LS300, if it is in AF, can one still use the ring to focus? In non-AF, I assume one must use the Focus ring.

There is also a servo for aperture, but no ring! So the LS300 is used for both AE and non-AE.

The LUMIX G VARIO 14-140mm / F3.5-5.6 ASPH. and LUMIX G X VARIO 35-100mm / F2.8 ASPH. lenes have OIS switches.

================

The LUMIX G X VARIO PZ 45-175mm/F4.0-5.6 seems to be a reverse design. A review states, "you CANNOT turn off the Power O.I.S. on the zoom lens!" So I assume the LS300's OIS switch is blanked-out. Correct? Which means don't put the camera on a tripod !?!

It has ring for zoom and a servo for Power Zoom by means of the tiny switch on the lens. But can the LS300 control Power Zoom? I assume yes.

There is a ring for Focus. When on the LS300, if it is in AF, can one still use the ring to focus? In non-AF, I assume one must use the Focus ring.

There is also a servo for aperture, but no ring! So the LS300 is used for both AE and non-AE.

Are there any lenses that have Power Zoom controlled by camera and by ring/switch, Power OIS (with ON/OFF switch), Power Focus controlled by camera and by ring, and Power Aperture controlled by camera?

Might belong elsewhere by my Green Screen / Chroma Key results and initial testing of the camera is here:

https://medium.com/@krispii_p/jvc-gy-ls300-part-1-the-green-elephant-in-the-room-79ea5f1e5f61#.9h7diaxat

It was too long to format for a forum post. Also, it's flowery, fair warning.