Is the JVC LS300 still a competitive camera today?

[Nick Haman]

Originally Posted by W. Bill Magac

Thanks, for the response Nick. I ran a quick test. With 422 enabled in the record format, 4K/24p/30p outputs do not seem possible. The A/V Set, Video Set HDMI output is set to 1080p and grayed out. I prefer shooting with 4K 150M 422 enabled. With 422 disabled, the HDMI output can be configured for 2160p or 1080p. For me, not being able to output 4K/24p 150M 422 would be a problem.

Yes that's right.

May I ask though, if you're wanting to record externally, then why does it matter what the internal recording is set to? For example, if you're recording 4k24p at ProRes 422/HQ on an Atomos, then that's the file you're going to edit etc. So why does it matter that the internal recording is 4k 4:2:0?

The output file, recorded to ProRes is has a much higher bitrate than 150mb/s and they are all in a 4:2:2 colourspace. The end bitrate depends on if you're recording to ProRes HQ, 422 or LT, but they're all higher than the camera's internal recording.

Here's a list of frame rates and data rates when recorded in the various ProRes options at 4K, as you can see, even LT is over double that of the 150 available in camera at 24p.

24p
LT 328mb/s - 422 471mb/s - HQ 707mb/s

25p
LT 342mb/s - 422 492mb/s - HQ 737mb/s

30p
LT 410mb/s - 422 589mb/s - HQ 884mb/s

50p
LT 684mb/s - 422 983mb/s - HQ 1475mb/s

60p
LT 821mb/s - 422 1178mb/s - HQ 1768mb/s

I hope that helps.

[William Hohauser]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

They already have, but JVC has no raw out of the LS300.

If the signal stream in the LS300 can be diverted prior to demosaicing to the HDMI or SDI outputs by firmware programming then we should see it soon. Unfortunately the LS300 was developed years before video RAW was considered a viable option for budget cameras or that RAW playback capable computers were reasonably priced. How many cameras had RAW output when the LS300 was introduced? 4K and the large sensor was the big deal not RAW. It's very possible that the proprietary hardware can't do that.

[W. Bill Magac]

I was at a pro video expo in the Boston area today. JVC had a LS300 on display. Spoke with Ken Freed, an Account Sales Manager in the JVC's Professional Video Division. Ken confirmed my suspicion. If the LS300 is set to record 4K 422 internally, it is not able to output a HDMI 4K signal at the same time. Ken said the camera does not have the processing power to do both. SDI output is HD only. Also, Ken said he does not think there will be any further firmware updates to the camera.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by W. Bill Magac

Ken Freed

I've known him for close to twenty years -- he is a heck of a good guy.

Originally Posted by W. Bill Magac

said he does not think there will be any further firmware updates to the camera.

Actually that's a *good* thing. Think about it!

:-)

[W. Bill Magac]

Originally Posted by Nick Haman

May I ask though, if you're wanting to record externally, then why does it matter what the internal recording is set to? For example, if you're recording 4k24p at ProRes 422/HQ on an Atomos, then that's the file you're going to edit etc. So why does it matter that the internal recording is 4k 4:2:0?

The internal recording is a backup to the Atomos recording. I had a situation a couple of years ago when in the middle of recording an event, I suddenly got a "No Signal" error message on my Atomos Blade. Fortunately, the camera kept on recording internally.

As a side note, when I import the ProRes video clips from the Atomos Blade into FCPX, there is no transcoding involved. However, when I import the same Quicktime clips from the camera's internal recording, FCPX transcodes the clips and the resulting transcoded clip files are 2-1/2 times larger than the Atomos ProRes clips files. Also, transcoding takes time.

[Noa Put]

I have done a few projects involving speeches the past weeks in well lit environments where I combined the ls300 with my gh5, allthough I love shooting handheld with my GH5 and don't like the more "bulky" size of the ls300 I am each time impressed at how good the images right out of the camera are on the ls300, I am using a itu709 gamma with a natural colormatrix and some minor tweaks to make the camera match better with my gh5, mainly to make the color pop a bit more and add some contrast and the image each time looks more appealing to me compared to my gh5. The colors are better and the skintones look a lot more natural. The image is also not oversharp like the gh5 tends to be at standard levels. Too bad JVC doesn't step into the dslr market, just for their colorscience I would switch.
For any work involving longer recordings, like interviews or speeches on a tripod the ls300 is still much prefered over my gh5.

[William Hohauser]

That's interesting. In these situations, I do the opposite. I am much more comfortable with the LS300 handheld (with the right lenses) than the GH series. For longer jobs I'll put the LS300 on a shoulder mount and then the choice of lenses gets wider (heavy prime Rokinons).

[Noa Put]

I find the stabilization on the gh5 a lot better when shooting handheld + it wheighs next to nothing so I can hold it stable foe a longer period, the biggest advantage when I shoot weddings is to get close ups from talking heads while mingling between the guests, you hardly get noticed and for short shots I can get tripod like shots using the sensor stabilization and i.s. lock, I can't get the same result with my ls300

[William Hohauser]

Good reason, the image stabilization with the same Lumix lenses seems better on the GH cameras than the LS300. However I rather have the controls in a useful place when running around handheld.

[Noa Put]

Stabilized lenses on the ls300 are good enough for handheld shots but no contest against a gh5 sensor stabilization, the difference can be quite big with longer focal lengths, I have never been a fan of dslr formfactor but the Panasonic has added some usefull fucntions to the gh5 which make changing shutter, f-stop, iso and whitebalance something I could do within seconds, something that would take a lot longer on the ls300 as some functions require you to go into the menusystem.

[William Hohauser]

I lost interest in the GH series with the GH4, nice image but still too clunky. The GH5 I ignored for the most part so your take on the model is enlightening.

Shutter I almost never change on the fly, I like a consistent shutter on a project (yes, that's sort of an old-fashioned trait these days). The other controls you mention, f-stop, ISO and white balance are right there on the LS300, very easy to access. Have they introduced dedicated controls for these functions on the GH5?

[Noa Put]

I also like to keep the shutter at a constant value but the ls300 doesn't have easy access to iso and f-stop simultaniously which both are important enough that there is a need to have quick access to. You do have a switch on the side that lets you toggle between 3 iso values but that doesn't work for me, my first priority when shooting video is choosing a f-stop and I don't want this to change during a shot because it will change your depth of field, the iso I have linked to the front dial because that I use to finetune my exposure once I have choosen the f-stop. I might use the switch on the side of the camera to quickly toggle between a larger range of iso values but then I use the front dial to set it exactly or use it to change when necessary.The problem is when I want to change the f-stop I can't, I need to go into the menu to do that.

The gh5 has the possibility now to change the iso by turning the back dial on the camera, the change is instant, it's how sony camera's do this as well and it's crucial for fast exposurechanges without having to touch your f-stop. In the past you had to press the iso button first and then use the small wheels on top, those are now reserved for f-stop and shutter.

On thing I miss on my gh5 is the excellent peaking of the ls300 and ofcourse build in nd's but I guess we can't have it all.

[William Hohauser]

On the topic of the built-in ND filter.... complaints, complaints,,,

I would like it to go 1/4, 1/8, 1/16 instead of jumping from 1/4 to 1/16. Just Tuesday 1/8 would have helped my DOF and ISO with an interview I filmed. It came out fine regardless. I'm sure people use the 1/64 ND filter but I can't remember using it. The great thing about the LS300's built-in ND filters is that lenses come in so many different sizes, it's impossible to have all the ND filters you may want in a compact travel kit.

[Noa Put]

One thing I also find annoying on the ls300, making a manual whitebalance is super easy, just a buttonpress away but if you want to dial in the kelvin...

I use 1/64 ND always outside but that's because I shoot with fast primes wide open, I don't miss 1/8 ND as the other ND's are ok for my use, but at least they are build in so it saves me from using ND filters.

[Steve Rosen]

I haven't responded to this, but decided I need to chime in...

Yes, the LS300 is still a viable tool. It's affordable, very light, and even though it's only 8 bit still delivers an excellent picture.

I bought an EVA1 four months ago because I needed 10 bit and have always preferred Panasonic's color (and I like V-Log), and it's excellent. At first I debated selling the LS300, but realized I couldn't get much for it, so decided to keep it as a B camera, and as a back-up "glove compartment" camera.

I pulled off the clunky handle and mounted an inexpensive SmallRig universal SLR cage (which I'd previously used on a Pocket) with the SmallRig handle on top. The support rod that runs from the base plate to the cheese plate on top is on the LCD side. When I open the LCD the rod acts as a support brace so I don't worry about the flimsiness of the construction (one of the worst things about the LS). Admittedly I can't rotate the screen, but I only use it for the menu, so it doesn't bother me.

I screwed a SmallRig rod block to the front LCD side of the handle so it rotates. I put another rod block on the side of a Zacuto Z-Finder Pro so I can tilt and adjust the EVF for handheld work, which is most of what I do with this rig.

For audio I use a Shure LensHopper (stupid name, but excellent mic) mounted off the cheese plate on a bracket I made, plugged in to the auxiliary port. I also use a Lectrosonic wireless receiver for boom work, with a 416 on the pole.

Another of the annoying things about the LS is the iris adjustment, it's way too fiddly. Consequently I keep a selection of small manual primes in the case. The choice is nearly infinite because of the MFT mount (one of the best things about the LS). I generally use the Nokton 17.5 (at 92% VSM) because it's fast and sharp enough to allow me to zoom in to 200-300% in post (or use the VSM when shooting 1080).

All in all it has become my favorite "cruiser". Even though the EVA is pretty light, it's clunky and somewhat labor intensive. The LS300, set up this way is a delight to work with...

And yes, I HAVE intercut them. They're a little difficult to match in post color-wise, but it can be done. BTW, I'm using the LS with Cinema gamma and Cine matrix now ( mainly because it simplifies exposure and focusing with the EVF), and dial the EVA log back slightly toward the LS footage if I need a perfect match...