I`m in a bind. I`ve looked over the various forums and have not found the request. I know the specs on each cam but I`m not sure which way to go! hvr-z1u or gy-hd100u. I video ballet dance recitals, some weddings and other events. Would the z1u be better for this situation? or the JVC? Is the image quality that much greater in one or the other to be noticeable? I just need a little insight from those with the hd100u as too the advantages of quality. I`m right down to the point of purchace. Money in hand...what can be said to sway me toward the HD100 and away from the Z1u?

I`m in a bind. I`ve looked over the various forums and have not found the request. I know the specs on each cam but I`m not sure which way to go! hvr-z1u or gy-hd100u. I video ballet dance recitals, some weddings and other events. Would the z1u be better for this situation? or the JVC? Is the image quality that much greater in one or the other to be noticeable? I just need a little insight from those with the hd100u as too the advantages of quality. I`m right down to the point of purchace. Money in hand...what can be said to sway me toward the HD100 and away from the Z1u?

The DV test, 24 Show Test, and others all say that the JVC has higher resolution than the Z1. It is the only Low Cost HDV camera that has a 1280X720 chip which is the Native resolution of 720P HDV.

I was thinking about switching to the HVX because I like the P2 cards, but after doing something more "Real" than tests shoots, I wouldn't trade it at all. The biggest thing is how AWESOME the JVC FOCUS ASSIST is! HD requires much more attention to focus, and the JVC's is by far the best. (One of the only things people agree on about the low-cost HD cameras). I also am starting to hate interlaced formats.

I also am starting to hate interlaced formats.

Give it a little more time--soon it'll grow into a full-fledged hatred of interlaced formats.

Give it a little more time--soon it'll grow into a full-fledged hatred of interlaced formats.

I only shoot Progressive Now! I have a feeling that JVC will likely skip over the 1080/60i and release a 1080P. Maybe that JVC PRO XE line. That likely won't happen for a while, but still.

I think the Z1 and the JVC 100 can be made to look pretty similar, the JVC can be made to look much more "film like" though. The two big advantages with the JVC are focus assist - it rocks compared to the Sony. Longer lens, if you are shooting events I bet that would come in real handy. I'm a huge fan of Progressive as well, in fact I don't really understand why the HD standard includes interlaced formats. It's almost impossible to buy an interlaced display now - I imagine in 5 years it WILL be impossible.

I do alot of video in low light situations. Is the HD-100 as good in low light. I`ve read where it really is not that good in low light.
Also can it be captured and edited in Sony Vegas with cineform connect

I do alot of video in low light situations. Is the HD-100 as good in low light. I`ve read where it really is not that good in low light.
Also can it be captured and edited in Sony Vegas with cineform connect

I haven't used it personally, but I know that Cineform works with the HD100. On the other side, I heard only good things about the HD100 and lowlight. I really haven't shot anything in Low Light yet, so someone else will have to answer this.

Z1U is very good with plus gain in low light with very little grain. The JVC is okay too, up to +6dB, maybe +9dB. If you are shooting weddings and dance recitals your decisions should take into consideration price, ergonomics and post options. It doesn't seem to me that you really need progressive or 24fps. The smaller size of Z1U and its pretty good auto focus might be an asset for you, so is the battery costs and life. Remember, the HD100's batteries are useless and the only way to go is Anton Bauer or IDX, which are not cheap.

This question is more like, "Shall I have an Apple or an Orange today?" These two camera you're debating are exact opposites in almost every catagory of comparison.

It may be wise for you to sit down and write out your needs as well as your current resources, independent of a camera choice. That alone should tip the balance toward a camera choice between your two contenders.

Thanks for your suggestions. It reinforced my leaning towards the Sony. The JVC looks great but I`ve been using a Sony VX2100 and PD170 all along and wanting now to epand to the future. I bought a little Sony HC3 ( I hate to admit this ) at Best Buy. I was going to use it for a Ballet recital second camera to later down convert for extra footage and to mainly see how it was to capture Sony 1080i. My intentions were to return it the following Monday,as you have a couple of weeks for return. Anyway I like the quality of the video so much I kept it as it would make a good emergency backup cam and good to take on vacations. Alot less cumbersome than the vx2100.
I have 6 batteries for my Sony cams each giving almost 5hrs (30hrs of battery time). I`ve read about the battery issue with the JVC. It may be this alone that leans me towards just keeping within the Sony family.
Thanks again I wish I had the cash to get both the Sony and JVC.

Thanks for your suggestions. It reinforced my leaning towards the Sony. The JVC looks great but I`ve been using a Sony VX2100 and PD170 all along and wanting now to epand to the future. I bought a little Sony HC3 ( I hate to admit this ) at Best Buy. I was going to use it for a Ballet recital second camera to later down convert for extra footage and to mainly see how it was to capture Sony 1080i. My intentions were to return it the following Monday,as you have a couple of weeks for return. Anyway I like the quality of the video so much I kept it as it would make a good emergency backup cam and good to take on vacations. Alot less cumbersome than the vx2100.
I have 6 batteries for my Sony cams each giving almost 5hrs (30hrs of battery time). I`ve read about the battery issue with the JVC. It may be this alone that leans me towards just keeping within the Sony family.
Thanks again I wish I had the cash to get both the Sony and JVC.
Makes perfect sense to me...

Scott,

If you're used to the VX and PD series then the Z1 will seem like the logical next step. Sony has refined a bunch of things and addressed a number of shortcomings of the earlier cameras. The NPF-970 batteries will run the Z1 4 hours, maybe more depending on how you shoot. I also have an old NPF-960 from my VX-2000 which works fine on the Z1 but doesn't last nearly as long (probably more like 3 hours?).

However at the Texas Shootout I saw the JVC and played briefly with it. I have to admit it's a very cool camera. For me the form factor wouldn't really be right though - it's very large when you include the lens. Look impressive though!

I use my Z1 to shoot our performances here at the Opera Company and have been really happy with the results. One thing to keep in mind however is that the lens favors the wide end of the zoom. If you're using your PD and VX at full zoom when shooting events then you may not be so happy with the "reach" of the builtin Z1 lens. At full zoom it's equivalent to a 390mm lens in 35mm terms. OTOH, my VX-2000 is equivalent to a 518mm telephoto lens. But the flip side of this is the wide end of the zoom. If you wish your PD lens were wider then you will like the Z1 at 32.5mm vs. the PD at 43mm. But for shooting performances I ended up getting the Century 1.6x telephoto for my Z1. It's pretty expensive (~$1,000) but there really aren't many other options out there - search for "telephoto" in the Z1 forum for more info.

My other gripe on the Z1 is the LANC implementation. Using the rocker switch you can get really slow, smooth zooms - half the speed of the VX/PD series. But the LANC cannot access the low speed range. Even so, using the LANC you get about the same speed as the VX/PD.

One thing which really stands out on the Z1 is the LCD screen - it's certainly much better than the JVC. Higher resolution, 16:9 native, and transreflective, which means you can see it in bright sunlight and turn off the backlight. Of course, none of these smaller camcorders have screens with enough pixels to really focus in HD, but looking at them side by side at the Texas Shootout, the Sony screen is far better than the JVC, Panasonic or Canon.

Good luck! Let us know what you decide to get, and how it works out for you.

Thanks for your suggestions. It reinforced my leaning towards the Sony. The JVC looks great but I`ve been using a Sony VX2100 and PD170 all along and wanting now to epand to the future. I bought a little Sony HC3 ( I hate to admit this ) at Best Buy. I was going to use it for a Ballet recital second camera to later down convert for extra footage and to mainly see how it was to capture Sony 1080i. My intentions were to return it the following Monday,as you have a couple of weeks for return. Anyway I like the quality of the video so much I kept it as it would make a good emergency backup cam and good to take on vacations. Alot less cumbersome than the vx2100.
I have 6 batteries for my Sony cams each giving almost 5hrs (30hrs of battery time). I`ve read about the battery issue with the JVC. It may be this alone that leans me towards just keeping within the Sony family.
Thanks again I wish I had the cash to get both the Sony and JVC.

Scott,

Battery:
I use Sony Batteries on my HD100 through my own modification of an IDX kit (without IDX batteries). I use 3 x NP960 batteries in a Sony NPA10000 battery holder mode (for my previous VX9000 Sony sholdercamera I had).
I can film 4-5 hours without problems with the HD-100. (6-7 hours with the VX9000).

Image:
I compared the two images of the Z1 and HD100, very happy I own the HD100 now. The HD-100 leans sooo much more towards the film-look with all the settings you can do.

Marc Colemont

I use 3 x NP960 batteries in a Sony NPA10000 battery holder mode (for my previous VX9000 Sony sholdercamera I had).
I can film 4-5 hours without problems with the HD-100.

Wow, that's a hungry little camera! One NP-F960 battery will run my VX-2000 for eight hours :-)

But from the little I've seen and read about the HD-100, I'm sure you're right about the film look issue. If that's important and if you like the size of the JVC then it would no doubt be a better choice.

"if you like the size of the JVC"

When I saw the HD100 next to a Z1 one thing I noticed is how little difference in size there is. The Z1 in real life is quite large itself.

I know Scott has already decided, but I thought I'd throw in my $.02 since I own the HD100 and an FX1 and I do weddings.

The following applies only to event video:
When shooting with the HD100, what I miss most about shooting with the FX1 is the STEADYSHOT. I know some people are purists and want their lenses straight, but the steadiness of the shots I could get with the FX1 at 55mm (full tele) are far superior than with the HD100 on my shoulder as steady as I can hold it (also at 55mm). I don't own a shoulder rest for the FX1, but can easily brace it against my arm/shoulder/jaw to get a very steady shot. My clients sometimes ask how I can hold it so still. It wasn't totally me, it was partly the camera. This goes for wide shots too. I can much more easily perform short pseudo dolly shots with the FX1 as the steadyshot assists.

I don’t miss the auto focus as much as I thought I did. Turns out I miss less shots due to waiting for it to “get it right” just by automatically doing myself in < 2seconds.

The wide angle of the FX1 is sooo much better than the HD100 stock lens. Very helpful for roaming around the dance floor at the reception.

Finally, the FX1 does seem better in low light. The Sony at 15db gain is about equal to the JVC at 9db in sensitivity, but the Sony is far cleaner of an image at that level. The JVC is noisier overall (about equal at 0db to the Sony at 6 or 9db).

For any other application –Narrative film, promotional video, training video, etc. I much prefer the JVC on all accounts (picture, ergonomics, progressive feel). There is something to be said for looks as well. No one ever came up to me on the street with my FX1 and asked what channel I was with!

Basically, they’re both really great cameras for different applications. I’m happy to have both in my toolkit and often switch off at weddings since I can calibrate them to look similar and shoot at SD60i anyway. When I make the jump to HD weddings, I’ll probably downconvert the 1080i signal to 720p in order to keep the benefits of the Sony.

JVC Battery Concern: I really don't get this now especially. First, the stock battery is bad, but who doesn't buy extra batteries anyway?

Second, right now if you buy a HD100, you get a free 5 Hour Anton Bauer setup.

Third, Batteries for Broadcast has cheep versions that fit on either the IDX or Anton Bauer mounts.


Once again, if you want a strict video look, get the SONY. Even for weddings, don't you want more than professional looking video? I love the look of 30P much better than 60i. Something to think about.