JVC GY-HM200 - alternative to Sony PXW-X70

[Kevin Balling]

Yes John, I have been lurking on the internet to find footage and anything of substance about the HM200. I am ready to retire my JVC GY HM150 and the Sony X70 and the HM200 both look interesting. There is not much out there on the HM200.
I would have liked for the review to be more comprehensive about some of the details, but it did offer a good glimpse into what the camera images look like. I am glad that this review was shot in 1080p because right now, that is what I am shooting. I thought that the images looked good. Comparable to the Sony X70 for sure and in 4K, comparable to JVC's much publicized LS300, which from what I have seen, has come up very short.
As HM150 user, the 200 looks very similar. Size, layout, etc. The reviewer said in both reviews, that the camera feels good in the hands and this is just how I feel about the HM150. Very well made and ergonomically right on. I can say for sure that the 150 and the 200 files (.MOV) are a real delight to work with. This is very important to me. Shoot, put the card in the computer and watch. Easy import into any edit program. I don't want to wrangle with files as the Sony X70 users seem to be doing.
I would like to know if both the LCD and viewfinder can be used simultaneously. They can on the HM150 (I really love this feature), but not on the Sony X70. Also, how is the LCD and viewfinder? The viewfinder on the HM150 is not very good. I notice that the 200 has not improved on the size of it and I am hoping that the quality of it is better. The LCD has been made larger from the 150. From 2.7 to 3.5, which is the same size as the Sony X70 if I am not mistaken. Lastly, for now, I am very disappointed to see that the built in lens cap of the HM150 is not on the 200. Why, why?? Get ready to lose some lens caps.
Anyway, if anyone out there has any additional insight and can answer some of my questions I would love to know. There is not one user review on B&H about this camera and it has been on sale for at least a couple of months. This is very intriguing to me and an indication that the Sony X70 is really outselling the HM200.

[Anthony McErlean]

Originally Posted by Kevin Balling

..and the Sony X70 and the HM200 both look interesting.

My concern at the moment is about the "Re: X70 issue - recording froze up"

[Anthony Lelli]

Originally Posted by Kevin Balling

I would like to know if both the LCD and viewfinder can be used simultaneously. Also, how is the LCD and viewfinder? The viewfinder on the HM150 is not very good.

yes LCD panel and VF can be on at the same time. They are both "OK" but not spectacular, BUT they give a pretty close representation of what you'll get in the files. Sony makes the LCD panel look good but then the colors in the timeline are different, so thanks but no thanks. On JVC you can really calibrate colors, WB and blacks looking at the LCD knowing that's exactly what you'll get. The VF is small and lesser quality compared to theX70, but then again I can see everything corner to corner on the JVC , while on X70 the rubber gets in the way on the sides and you have to adjust the position of your eye. On JVC the diopter lever is cheap and needs to be calibrated all the time because loses the position. I had to put a gaffer's tape on it to keep it from sliding. The small oval eye cushion fit perfectly and makes things a little better.
about the pictures here's what I think: the X70 is a 28Mbps 1080 avchd camera (I don't buy that xavc-l excuse for a codec that simply doesn't work). the JVC is a 150Mbps 4K mov or avchd camera. big difference , in the pictures not on paper.

[Jase Tanner]

Originally Posted by John Nantz

Kevin - That was some fine Internet sleuthing to come up with that link by Rick Young that you have in post #57. This gives us another good look at what this cam can do and the low-light portion with the different settings was very helpful.

There are still some areas of interest, like how well the 1/16 ND filter will work in sunlight on the water. The shot on the sailboat with the chrome winch was helpful.

Something on the optical stabilization would be of interest. Weight-wise, at 3.4 lbs with battery but without mic, this will fit nicely on my Glidecam 2000 because it is rated for up to 6 lbs, but the Glidecam takes time to set up and it isn’t always available.

I looked at some of Rick Young’s other videos and the Dedolight one at one of the shows was a good watch. Haven’t seen much on the Dedolight in the US and I really like my Ledzilla (with Sony battery). After watching the video, though, I’m ready to add a larger Dedolight or two to my kit.

Rick did some previous reviews with some pretty good cams but he seemed pretty impressed with the HM200.

“The devil is in the details” and we’re all looking for those details.

Edit: And speaking of details, Anthony, thanks for the info about Jello and panning. That's good to know and the jello thing is one thing I was concerned about since this isn't a 3CCD cam.

I find it odd that JVC hasn't put up any footage. Its good to see this footage and to hear what Anthony has to say but it would be good to both see more footage and to see a more comprehensive review. One thing I'm curious about is how the dynamic zoom looks. Having that reach is important for some of what I do.

[Paul Anderegg]

Anthony, stupid question here, but can you test the f1.2 blur in 720p? I am just curious if the camera would be as sharp as the X70 in 720p, since that is what I shoot to air at.

I am reconsidering the HM200. I bought an X180, but it has some very annoying features, such as weighing almost 10lbs fully outfitted with shotgun, large battery, and LED, and going into some sort of "macro" function when the hard stop focus hits infinity!

I miss shooting on the X70, so light and easy to wield, but I need those damn manual dials and switches! I would be ever so happy to see a wide angle and telephoto (optical and digital zoom) low light comparison at each cameras maximum gain setting. My X70 leaves me wanting at 60p even at 33db many times. My X180 is even worse, damn thing putters out at only 18db!

Paul

[Anthony Lelli]

Originally Posted by Paul Anderegg

Anthony, stupid question here, but can you test the f1.2 blur in 720p? I am just curious if the camera would be as sharp as the X70 in 720p, since that is what I shoot to air at.

Paul 1.2 @720 is like the 1.2 @1080: soft. The blur panning you mean? is fine, but it will be soft. Is it useable? no, not the current standards of the most advanced processing today (the cellphones).

You are re-considering the HM200 while I am re-considering the HM70 with a beachtek LOL for opposite reasons (I want to go back to a shoulder camera, a real one, not a rigged one)

in case anyone will be interested I am running lots of tests with the HM70 for the audio part (which is the big problem with that camera). So far I'm having the best results with a beachtek with phantom and a splitter (hosa) that gives two mono and cuts most of the floor noise (I didn't know that and I wasn't expecting that outcome but the effect is exactly that: put the camera mic level @ -2 and pump the beachtek. So far I'm already competing against the native XLR of both the HM200 and EX1r in terms of presence from the same microphone (shure SM58) and shotgun sony 1-542-296.

The trick was made possible but the (surprise) of the hosa splitter (YMM261). I am using a beachtek with the battery.. a pain I know but it's necessary for both the phantom and the increased overall volume achievable compared to a passive one. The beachtek stays on the right side, vertical, with velcro. not a problem with the HM70. there is room LOL

The idea of the splitter came out originally because I wanted a backup track on my shotgun for interviews with an handheld (be it the G3 or corded). But now I have 1 channel for anything (also with plug-on power) and 2 more XLR plus a 3.5mm AUX on the other channel. Basically I can handle 4 mics at a pretty high quality on HM70.

Once I fix that audio thing then I will be ready to put the HM70 on my shoulder and shoot stable stuff (for a change). And I can assure you that I am not the only one with the "back-to-shoulder" sentiment.

[Andreas Jaeger]

Hello there,

did the firmware update to V2.0.
Worked perfectly.

What is new:
- histogram
- 4K mode with 70mBit (So that can be written on cheap SDXC U1)
- In streaming was added functions ? (I do not use anyway)

more I have not discovered yet, maybe I'll find some ....


Andreas

[Paul Anderegg]

I have arranged an HM200 demo from JVC for the week of December 21st. I ended up retiring my Sony PXW-X180 when my station issued me an HM890 with live streaming built in. My PXW-X70 is still my primary camera, but it has limited usefulness for live streaming because my station is going Zixi, and the XAVC codec takes FOREVER to ingest/transcode into FCPX. The ability to Zixi stream from a 35Mbps plug in Verizon modem, and to be able to export as soon as I ingest, instead of waiting for X70 XAVC transcoding, could make me a convert. If it is incapable of producing a picture in the lighting that the other cameras can, that could be a deal breaker........live streaming and quick exporting black snow is not beneficial.

I will give it a good night ENG workout. I have not only the X70 to direct compare, but an HM890 and HM650 as well as a Sony A7sII. Plan to side by side these cameras in ENG night mode, iris's always wide open, and at 0db, max db, and middle db gain settings. ENG cameras are used wide open at night, and you get three quick toggle selections, so that is how they will be tested, no artificial f4.0 12db only shoots! :)

The 600/650 are known enough to be a good control, as you can find plenty of 600/650 footage on YouTube. My 890 has a f1.4 constant aperture lens, that should be fun. We all know what an X70 does.

Paul

[John Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Anthony Lelli

blur panning (and tilting, but mostly panning) has been a problem since forever. Rolling shutter as well. Now I believe that it has very little to do with the cmos sensors or the (global) shutter. But with the speed of the read-out. basically the chips in charge of processing the sensor.

Anthony - that is what a global "shutter" is. They are referring to reading out every pixel on the entire sensor at the same time. So yes jello or rolling shutter has everything to do with the speed of the readout on the sensors.

Its a characteristic of CMOS sensors. CCD sensors are by design global shutter cameras. So you have to design a much more complicated and expensive CMOS sensor to make it instant readout. Yes processing is important but the sensor has to be designed to feed that information at the same time to the processing chips. Non global CMOS chips simply can't do that they read out row by row, from top to bottom. Wouldn't matter how fast your processors are it's the speed of readout that matters - some non-global CMOS chips are better controlled - ie they have faster readouts from the actual sensor or less pixels to read, so they exhibit less rolling shutter. Global shutter CMOS cameras have an individual pre-amp and feed for every single pixel on the sensor. That's how they achieve simultaneous readout of every single pixel.

[Paul Anderegg]

In a decade, rolling shutter will be as obsolete as vertical smear on CCD's.............sorry, vertical smear on everything except current JVC ProHD cameras. :-P

Paul

[John Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Paul Anderegg

In a decade, rolling shutter will be as obsolete as vertical smear on CCD's.............sorry, vertical smear on everything except current JVC ProHD cameras. :-P

Paul

Hope you're right Paul - I just point out that the tech and manufacturing cost is a lot higher fro global shutter CMOS sensors. Vertical smear should only be an issue on CCD cameras? I'm surprised you're seeing it on CMOS sensor cameras. If a client complains just call it the Star Trek look at 90deg :)

[Paul Anderegg]

Vertical smear was first observed in IT (interline transfer) CCD cameras back in the early 90's. The "fix" was FIT (frame interline transfer) CCD's, which cost an additional $10,000 per camera/camcorder across the board for Sony models!

By 1996, 2/3" "pro" 3 CCD cameras such as the DXC-D30 and KY-D29, were able to eliminate vertical smear with IT chips. Unfortunately, the current crop of JVC ProHD and Panasonic HPX 1/3" CMOS cameras still have a bit of vertical smear.

If processing speed the reason we live with reasonably priced CMOS jello video, then in a decade, with advances in cheap fast processing, those days should be gone.

Paul

[John Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Paul Anderegg

If processing speed the reason we live with reasonably priced CMOS jello video, then in a decade, with advances in cheap fast processing, those days should be gone.

Paul

As I pointed out it isn't processing speed, but the fundamental design of the chips is different. Thus it will only get cheaper if they start to incorporate it in lower end cameras allowing for economies of scale. Manufacturers like BMD are trying to do this so I think you're right - its only a matter of time.