JVC finally announces HD Everio!!!

Guy Barwood · February 15th, 2007, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

Where, link?

I am pretty sure this had already been referenced in this thread

http://www.jvc.com/press/index.jsp?item=549&pageID=1

Specifically:
"It uses three 1/5-inch 16:9 progressive scan CCDs designed for HD use in a diagonally offset pixel configuration to generate the high resolution image for recording in full HD"

& in detail
__________________________________________

Image size: 1/5” Diagonal
Aspect ratio: 16:9
Pixel size: 3.28 microns x 3.28 microns
Total number of pixels per CCD: 1016 x 558, approximately 570,000 pixels
Number of effective pixels per CCD: 976 x 548, approximately 530,000 pixels

JVC Uses Pixel Shift Technique

The Red and Blue imaging CCDs are shifted a half-pixel both horizontally and vertically relative to the Green imaging CCD. Because the pixel-shift system uses progressive scan CCDs, signals are processed first as 1920 x 1080p progressive signals, then converted to 1920 x 1080i interlace signals for recording.
__________________________________________

No way does 1920x1080 go native into 976x548.
This camera does exactly what the HVX200 does but with smaller sensors. They are essentially native 16:9 STANDARD definition sensors and use pixel offset for interpolation.

What this does mean however is the sensetivity shouldn't be much worse than a 1/5" SD camera (other than the 1/5" is across a 16:9 sensor not 4:3).

Does that clear that up for you?

Leonard Richardson · February 15th, 2007, 09:11 PM

Hi

I don't think it is going to be better than the HD1 or HD10 (footage). I like the 720p . I think it is going to shoot video better than the new sony HDR-UX1/SR1 and compete with the Canon HV-10 in video Qt. With alot better controls than the HD1 or HD10. Let's all face it If the GR/JY-HD's had better controls and worked the way they should ( are the way we think they should ) they would be hard to get ,because everyone would want one.
when the HD1/10 is setup right the footage will blow you away. isn't that right Tom !

LHR

Peter Frollo · February 15th, 2007, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira

I’m sure in 4 years JVC have learned a lot since they made the HD1, so I expect this camcorder to be a whole lot better than the HD1.

But HD1 is progressive. That is like comparing apples with organs, isn't it? Or am I missing something?

Paulo Teixeira · February 15th, 2007, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Frollo

But HD1 is progressive. That is like comparing apples with organs, isn't it? Or am I missing something?

Maybe, but we have had camera shootouts with 720p and 1080i camcorders together.

JVC said there are features in this camcorder that they won’t mention until it’s almost released so you never know, their may actually be 720p modes including 24p.

Leonard Richardson · February 15th, 2007, 09:30 PM

Hi

True , I read all these post and sometimes I think we try to make it more than what it is . It is Not a Pro Model just a consumer model. I hope it turns out to be the best consumer model money can buy ! we all want it to be, I know JVC does. Just hope they did there home work and read some video forums like DVi and Camcorderinfo. to get some input .

LHR

Paulo Teixeira · February 15th, 2007, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonard Richardson

Hi

True , I read all these post and sometimes I think we try to make it more than what it is . It is Not a Pro Model just a consumer model. I hope it turns out to be the best consumer model money can buy ! we all want it to be, I know JVC does. Just hope they did there home work and read some video forums like DVi and Camcorderinfo. to get some input .
LHR

If Canon can put a 24p mode on the HV20, than I can surely expect JVC to do the same thing on the HD7 that has a whole lot more manual features. Either that or they’ll show us another version with 24p and XLR inputs.
Personally, I could care less about 24p but 720 30p or 60p will be my cup of tea.
I’m leaving out 1080p because JVC said it weren’t going to be used.

Just like everybody else, I’m tired of JVC keeping everything secret.

Tom Roper · February 15th, 2007, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

Does that clear that up for you?

Yes, thank you. I have no more interest in this cam.

Tom Roper · February 15th, 2007, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonard Richardson

when the HD1/10 is setup right the footage will blow you away. isn't that right Tom !

LHR

It used to. Today's cams are better. It's just progress.

Ken Hodson · February 16th, 2007, 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Frollo

But HD1 is progressive. That is like comparing apples with organs, isn't it? Or am I missing something?

LOL. Organs? Was that intentional? He he.

"Pixel size: 3.28 microns x 3.28 microns" this should indeed give very good sensitivity. Something I believe is more important than raw detail from a cam of this category. And from all reports the lens is something special. Yes the chips are on the smaller size at 1/5" but just realize the V1 uses 1/4" and costs 3X as much. The kicker for me is 30Mbps VBR for 5hrs, Wow! That is a big advancement over CBR HDV.
I believe they will introduce a Pro model at a slightly higher price point.

Thomas Smet · February 16th, 2007, 10:23 AM

30mb/s is not that big of a deal compared to HDV. The 30mb/s also has to deal with 1.33x more pixels because it is encoding 1920x1080. 25mb/s times 1.333 = 33.33mb/s. Also VBR doesn't instantly equal better quality. It just means it adjusts the bitrate based on how complex the scene is. Given that 1920x1080 should in theory be around 33.333 mb/s, I think the max of 30mb/s is a little low. Remember the average is 26.6mb/s so most of the time that is the bitrate that will get used. This is why the specs say up to 5 hours in the 1920x1080 modes and 5 hours in the CBR mode. Up to 5 hours because the average is the same bitrate as the CBR mode and if you happen to be shooting scenes that are easy to compress then the bitrate will stay around 26.6 mb/s giving you 5 hours of recording time. If the scenes are complex you will not get 5 hours of record time. I personally think 26.6 mb/s average is a little low for 1920x1080 encoding.

This range of bitrates is kind of low as well. 30mb/s and 26.6 mb/s is like encoding a DVD with an average of 4.43mb/s and a max of 5mb/s. There isn't a huge difference there in terms of quality. With a DVD the max is usually much higher to be able to cover the complex GOP.

So I would hardly consider these bitrates better then HDV considering the extra amount of data that needs to be encoded. Yes mpeg-2 is good at encoding redundant information but 1920x1080 still has more blocks of data to check and encode. Clearly JVC must think 1920x1080 offers more detail or else we could have just used 1440x1080. If it offers more detail then it will be harder to encode. If there is very little change in detail between 1920 and 1440 then why encode at 1920?

With the seven hour mode the max is 22mb/s which is lower then HDV's 25mb/s. Even then chances are the max rate will not always get used so the bitrate of 19mb/s is what is going to get used most of the time. Yes 19mb/s is a great bitrate for HD broadcasts at 1920x1080 but I think we are all dreaming to think a consumer camera is going to have an encoder chip that is equal in quality to a $10,000.00 Broadcast encoder. I would think a encoder in a pro camera recording at 25mb/s would be better then one in a consumer camera.

With that said I think this camera will be a great consumer camera but we shouldn't expect miracles from it. It is what it is.

Ken Hodson · February 16th, 2007, 03:03 PM

We don't know what it "is" yet. We have to wait and see. VBR is a step in the right direction, being that encoder tech has reached that level and it doesn't have to conform to HDV spec.

Paulo Teixeira · February 18th, 2007, 07:50 PM

Here is a GearLive CES video of the HD7
http://www.gearlive.com/index.php/ne...everio-gz-hd7/

Sergey Bessarab · February 19th, 2007, 06:38 AM

here is a first review/test.

http://www.videoaktiv.de/content/view/890/2/

http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools

Image quality section translated:

First of all: The sharpness of the 1440 x 1080-Signales and the sharpness of the 1920 x 1080-Bildes are almost accurately alike. After direct switching we did not see a difference. With the SD-signal the basic sharpness is likewise very high, it is with Schwenks however somewhat more Unschärfen and artifacts to be seen than with with the other modes.

The sharpness and dissolution of detail is with daylight conditions immensely, so long the picture stands. With Schwenks the MPEG-2 codec used by JVCseems to draw moved objects still more softly than with HDV Camcordern. The sharpness automatic controller may be adjusted max times to middle values, otherwise silberfischchenartige artifacts and strongly oversubscribed object edges, which remain invisible in the display, develop but at the television unpleasantly to be noticeable later in the picture. Of artifacts the scenes are not completely free, with daylight show you as a kind easy noise around colorstrong objects, with daylight however hardly impair themselves this the good result.

The tuning of the Weissabgleichesof the NTSC model did not convince yet. With day light the picture appeared somewhat greenish, with interior and weak light disappeared the blue tones in favor of of red. With manual white alignment then the blue came, griesselte however strongly. The weak light impression with 30 lux corresponds approximately to that Sony FX 7 in punkto noise, altogether works weak light scenes however quite softly. Also with interior photographs the camera did not show still long the sharpness achievement of daylight. Evenly this circumstance caused us to place behind the sharpness manually - with that somewhat doubtful result of increasing artifacts.

Also the screen function is not by hundred percent balanced yet. The camera over-radiated bright picture portions. A manual dipping the headlights of mindesterns a stage is recommended.

Paulo Teixeira · February 24th, 2007, 09:47 PM

They did say that it’s an unfinished test unit so the production model should be a lot better. Also, unless they had a TV that is 1920x1080, you aren’t going to notice a difference. Another thing to consider is that they were probably comparing the 1920 resolution to the 1440 that has a constant bit rate of 27MBPS. The 1920 mode has a variable bit rate of 26.6. If they were shooting at something that was stationary with no movement then the bit rate probably goes down to 23.2MBPS and for fast action it goes up to 30MBPS.

As I said before, their will be features that JVC is keeping secret until March so who knows what that will be. The HD7 better prove itself or else JVC may have to give this thing a big price drop and its already 100 dollars less.

Steve Nunez · February 25th, 2007, 09:16 AM

Looks like the dreaded JVC "highlight clipping" is present~~
"The camera over-radiated bright picture portions."

I know it's an unfinished test, but burnt out highlights and clipping really are annoying, I don't know why JVC can't get a handle on this. Every JVC I've ever owned always did this as where my Panasonics, Canon's and Sony's controlled this well.

I'm hoping for the best!

February 16th, 2007, 03:03 PM	#131
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	We don't know what it "is" yet. We have to wait and see. VBR is a step in the right direction, being that encoder tech has reached that level and it doesn't have to conform to HDV spec. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

February 18th, 2007, 07:50 PM	#132
Paulo Teixeira Trustee Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 1,773	Here is a GearLive CES video of the HD7 http://www.gearlive.com/index.php/ne...everio-gz-hd7/ __________________ https://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoVi...esEtc/featured https://www.pond5.com/artist/paulot

February 24th, 2007, 09:47 PM	#134
Paulo Teixeira Trustee Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 1,773	They did say that it’s an unfinished test unit so the production model should be a lot better. Also, unless they had a TV that is 1920x1080, you aren’t going to notice a difference. Another thing to consider is that they were probably comparing the 1920 resolution to the 1440 that has a constant bit rate of 27MBPS. The 1920 mode has a variable bit rate of 26.6. If they were shooting at something that was stationary with no movement then the bit rate probably goes down to 23.2MBPS and for fast action it goes up to 30MBPS. As I said before, their will be features that JVC is keeping secret until March so who knows what that will be. The HD7 better prove itself or else JVC may have to give this thing a big price drop and its already 100 dollars less. __________________ https://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoVi...esEtc/featured https://www.pond5.com/artist/paulot

February 25th, 2007, 09:16 AM	#135
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Looks like the dreaded JVC "highlight clipping" is present~~ "The camera over-radiated bright picture portions." I know it's an unfinished test, but burnt out highlights and clipping really are annoying, I don't know why JVC can't get a handle on this. Every JVC I've ever owned always did this as where my Panasonics, Canon's and Sony's controlled this well. I'm hoping for the best! __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

February 15th, 2007, 09:11 PM	#122
Leonard Richardson Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Charleston SC Posts: 37	Hi I don't think it is going to be better than the HD1 or HD10 (footage). I like the 720p . I think it is going to shoot video better than the new sony HDR-UX1/SR1 and compete with the Canon HV-10 in video Qt. With alot better controls than the HD1 or HD10. Let's all face it If the GR/JY-HD's had better controls and worked the way they should ( are the way we think they should ) they would be hard to get ,because everyone would want one. when the HD1/10 is setup right the footage will blow you away. isn't that right Tom ! LHR

February 15th, 2007, 09:30 PM	#125
Leonard Richardson Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Charleston SC Posts: 37	Hi True , I read all these post and sometimes I think we try to make it more than what it is . It is Not a Pro Model just a consumer model. I hope it turns out to be the best consumer model money can buy ! we all want it to be, I know JVC does. Just hope they did there home work and read some video forums like DVi and Camcorderinfo. to get some input . LHR

February 16th, 2007, 10:23 AM	#130
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	30mb/s is not that big of a deal compared to HDV. The 30mb/s also has to deal with 1.33x more pixels because it is encoding 1920x1080. 25mb/s times 1.333 = 33.33mb/s. Also VBR doesn't instantly equal better quality. It just means it adjusts the bitrate based on how complex the scene is. Given that 1920x1080 should in theory be around 33.333 mb/s, I think the max of 30mb/s is a little low. Remember the average is 26.6mb/s so most of the time that is the bitrate that will get used. This is why the specs say up to 5 hours in the 1920x1080 modes and 5 hours in the CBR mode. Up to 5 hours because the average is the same bitrate as the CBR mode and if you happen to be shooting scenes that are easy to compress then the bitrate will stay around 26.6 mb/s giving you 5 hours of recording time. If the scenes are complex you will not get 5 hours of record time. I personally think 26.6 mb/s average is a little low for 1920x1080 encoding. This range of bitrates is kind of low as well. 30mb/s and 26.6 mb/s is like encoding a DVD with an average of 4.43mb/s and a max of 5mb/s. There isn't a huge difference there in terms of quality. With a DVD the max is usually much higher to be able to cover the complex GOP. So I would hardly consider these bitrates better then HDV considering the extra amount of data that needs to be encoded. Yes mpeg-2 is good at encoding redundant information but 1920x1080 still has more blocks of data to check and encode. Clearly JVC must think 1920x1080 offers more detail or else we could have just used 1440x1080. If it offers more detail then it will be harder to encode. If there is very little change in detail between 1920 and 1440 then why encode at 1920? With the seven hour mode the max is 22mb/s which is lower then HDV's 25mb/s. Even then chances are the max rate will not always get used so the bitrate of 19mb/s is what is going to get used most of the time. Yes 19mb/s is a great bitrate for HD broadcasts at 1920x1080 but I think we are all dreaming to think a consumer camera is going to have an encoder chip that is equal in quality to a $10,000.00 Broadcast encoder. I would think a encoder in a pro camera recording at 25mb/s would be better then one in a consumer camera. With that said I think this camera will be a great consumer camera but we shouldn't expect miracles from it. It is what it is.

February 19th, 2007, 06:38 AM	#133
Sergey Bessarab Tourist Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: New York, NY Posts: 2	here is a first review/test. http://www.videoaktiv.de/content/view/890/2/ http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools Image quality section translated: First of all: The sharpness of the 1440 x 1080-Signales and the sharpness of the 1920 x 1080-Bildes are almost accurately alike. After direct switching we did not see a difference. With the SD-signal the basic sharpness is likewise very high, it is with Schwenks however somewhat more Unschärfen and artifacts to be seen than with with the other modes. The sharpness and dissolution of detail is with daylight conditions immensely, so long the picture stands. With Schwenks the MPEG-2 codec used by JVCseems to draw moved objects still more softly than with HDV Camcordern. The sharpness automatic controller may be adjusted max times to middle values, otherwise silberfischchenartige artifacts and strongly oversubscribed object edges, which remain invisible in the display, develop but at the television unpleasantly to be noticeable later in the picture. Of artifacts the scenes are not completely free, with daylight show you as a kind easy noise around colorstrong objects, with daylight however hardly impair themselves this the good result. The tuning of the Weissabgleichesof the NTSC model did not convince yet. With day light the picture appeared somewhat greenish, with interior and weak light disappeared the blue tones in favor of of red. With manual white alignment then the blue came, griesselte however strongly. The weak light impression with 30 lux corresponds approximately to that Sony FX 7 in punkto noise, altogether works weak light scenes however quite softly. Also with interior photographs the camera did not show still long the sharpness achievement of daylight. Evenly this circumstance caused us to place behind the sharpness manually - with that somewhat doubtful result of increasing artifacts. Also the screen function is not by hundred percent balanced yet. The camera over-radiated bright picture portions. A manual dipping the headlights of mindesterns a stage is recommended.