HD10 Semi-Review

[Steve Mullen]

MC 101 is on our site.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10892

I wrote it so those testing could try it out right. Hopefully, I'm right.

But it won't affect me because there is no reason to set speed and iris at the same time. It's a leftover from our analog past.

One must be able set speed. From then on one increases and decreases exposure (bias).

[Allan Rejoso]

Heath, in order to activate DV or memory mode, from the top or bottom position of the switch, just slide sideways.

Buying this cam without seeing it first on an HDTV is not wise IMO. If you want to see raw video at its best, you must connect to the firewire port (not the video port). However, the delay is very prominent.

Two lingering issues on the HD1 in Japanese message boards.

1. Para-para video = (Too) jerky motion when panning. Victor Japan is too clever to produce demos that show very very very minimal and slow panning, but mostly no panning at all (subject may or may be moving though).

2. Time lag (approx. 1 sec.) between the moment you take the shot and when it appears on the monitor. HD mode only.

Please check this out and comment. Many thanks.

[Heath McKnight]

Good points, which is why I'm happy someone else is doing an even BIGGER review!

The one second delay reminds me of editing DVCPro deck to deck, and the delay on the two monitors is one second.

I will probably go back down there tomorrow with an HDTV and re-check it.

heath

<<<-- Originally posted by Allan Rejoso : Heath, in order to activate DV or memory mode, from the top or bottom position of the switch, just slide sideways.

Buying this cam without seeing it first on an HDTV is not wise IMO. If you want to see raw video at its best, you must connect to the firewire port (not the video port). However, the delay is very prominent.

Two lingering issues on the HD1 in Japanese message boards.

1. Para-para video = (Too) jerky motion when panning. Victor Japan is too clever to produce demos that show very very very minimal and slow panning, but mostly no panning at all (subject may or may be moving though).

2. Time lag (approx. 1 sec.) between the moment you take the shot and when it appears on the monitor. HD mode only.

Please check this out and comment. Many thanks. -->>>

[Obin Olson]

can you guys tell me if this thing looks as good as film, res-wise when you downconvert to SD progressive scan for DVD etc? how good does it look? can someone post a DV clip of downconverted HD? when are you guys going to do some QUALITY LIT tests for us all to see? I wana know! I got cash and am going to get a new camera should it be the dvx100(really like it) or the HD? I do alot of 30sec spots some docs and other stuff when needed

-Obin Olson
www.dv3productions.com

[Obin Olson]

why? what about doing work and POST on a 1280x720 image? is that not a DREAM for a lowbudget guy like myself? i dont really get ads and gigs that have HUGE budgets much at all and I HATE DV looks like HELL even when you light it and all, still low res DV I would even LOVE dvcpro50 but that cost way more then this HD cam....ideas?

[Peter Moore]

You can't make up for poor color range and exposure with color correction. You can help it, but not cure it.

And some DV cameras are amazing. I used a Sony PD-150 once to videotape a stage play and the colors are so amazingly good - I think the video looks better than the live performance!

[Alex Knappenberger]

I don't know, to me, the DVX100 is just a better all around camera. It would be nice to work with a higher resolution image though, ecspecially reducing it.

Heck, I'm pretty pleased with what I can do with my $400 Panasonic and Vegas 4. Here's a couple sample frames, since i'm bored.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-...04/stoned3.jpg
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-.../brickwall.jpg
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-...4/sidewalk.jpg
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-6/212104/hairy.jpg

Peter - Exactly, and the DVX100 has a very good dynamic range, unlike what i've possibly seen in the samples from this JVC, and plus like I already mentioned, all 1CCD JVC cameras just don't have the dynamic range.

[Mitch Gould]

<<<-- Originally posted by Heath McKnight : The HD10 is different, but can be color corrected in FCP, After Effects, etc. Thanks to my friend for pointing this out to me.

Bingo. Can you color correct this footage... or can't you?

For some months now, this has been my most serious concern about this camera. From the few samples I've seem, one risks, on the one hand, getting low color saturation, while on the other, getting as much chroma noise as VHS. And who invented VHS but none other than JVC? Do I detect a pattern here?

We'd better be prepared for the chance that from a product management perspective, the HD10 will turn out to have been deliberately crippled enough to make it a VHS camcorder for the HD generation.

If that's the case, how will you filter the chroma noise enough to make it feasible to globally increase saturation? Will you be able to get the quality you need by using VDub and MarcFD's Chroma Noise Reducer v2....?

I'll be as interested as anyone to see the first reports about picture quality from folks here on the board...

[Glenn Gipson]

>>I got cash and am going to get a new camera should it be the dvx100(really like it) or the HD?<<

Unless you are in with the "I must be the first one to test thing" crowd, the DVX 100 is your safest bet. And keep in mind that the "I must be the first one to test thing" crowd already own a camera like the DVX 100 anyway.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I keep following this discussion and I still haven't made up my mind as to whether I should purchase this camera.... Anyway, I'm very interested, even with its apparent shortcomings that I have seen so far (poor color range, artifacting and noise from the MPEG2 over-compression, sharp edges, etc..). But for the type of work I do, this camera my just be the ticket.

The majority of my work is animation and 3D, I only work with video part of the time -- the video always gets combined with computer generated imagery. To be able to work with a camera that has native 16:9 support as well 1280x720p output would be a joy to say the least.

Most of my work is delivered on DVD. Being able to create and work in 720p and then down-res for DVD delivery should give much better results than what I'm getting now.

I do currently use a Canon XL1s and I love the camera, but I'm curious to see what kind of final output I can get when using the HD1/HD10U

Now this leaves me with the main dilemma I face now. First of all, I can't seem to get any complete answer as to exactly what the HD10U offers over the HD1. I do know that the HD10U has the microphone mount and XLR jacks. I do know that the HD10U also generates color bars. Does the HD1 do color bars? This ability isn't much of a concern to me, but I'm curious. What else is different between the two models (if anything)? I've poured over both product manual PDFs and it seems that other than what I have listed, there is no difference. Mostly, I just want to confirm that the picture quality between the two is the same. I'm willing to bet it is... In fact, I'm willing to bet both cameras use the same firmware and operate the same other than the audio setup on the HD10U.

Of the dealsers here that have the camera, two have it set up, but one had it bolted down and wouldn't let me do anything with it other than rotate the cam and watch through the viewfinder as I scanned the rest of the cameras on sale. The other would let me play with it a bit in the store, but didn't have any HDTV sets to connect it to. I can't find any dealer in my area that will let me demo one of these units... Two places will rent, but since they'd have to pull a brand new unit for rental, they would have to charge me some insane rates - I could rent it for a few days or buy it for $700 more. :-/ Too bad, I would love to connect this thing to a native 1280x720p Samsung DLP set and see what it looks like.

There's a few sites I've been able to dig up online that have footage from the HD1. But it has either been sized down or recompressed, none of it is actual MPEG2 right frome the camera. I would love to get my hands on a clip or two pulled straight from the camera and see what I would be getting. If Heath or anyone else who could upload something like this could do so, that would really help a lot of us. I'd host it on my web server if a place to upload is needed.

...Anyway, just sitting here in my own confusion, trying to decide what I want to do.

[Heath McKnight]

<<<-- Originally posted by Glenn Gipson : >>I got cash and am going to get a new camera should it be the dvx100(really like it) or the HD?<<

Unless you are in with the "I must be the first one to test thing" crowd, the DVX 100 is your safest bet. And keep in mind that the "I must be the first one to test thing" crowd already own a camera like the DVX 100 anyway. -->>>

My buddy says the 24p in the DVX100 is junk, loses so much quality it's not worth using. He owns four of them because they make so much money in NYC, but he tries to shoot in 30 fps for clients.

heath

[Heath McKnight]

I would just go to a seller and demo the camera, like I did. That's really your best bet! The HD10 has better picture quality, from what I've heard. Plus, the HD10 is listing $300 LESS than the HD1, for some reason.

As soon as I get the camera, I'll post clips up.

heath

ps-Golden, Colorado, eh? I have family in Denver and the mountains (I'm from Denver originally). Hope the weather is cooler and less humid than Florida!

<<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Kilgroe : I keep following this discussion and I still haven't made up my mind as to whether I should purchase this camera.... Anyway, I'm very interested, even with its apparent shortcomings that I have seen so far (poor color range, artifacting and noise from the MPEG2 over-compression, sharp edges, etc..). But for the type of work I do, this camera my just be the ticket.

[Glenn Gipson]

>> My buddy says the 24p in the DVX100 is junk, loses so much quality it's not worth using. He owns four of them because they make so much money in NYC, but he tries to shoot in 30 fps for clients.<<

How can 24p be junk??? And how does 24p loose quality??? What people forget is that 24p is meant for film transfer, and that is when it shines. 24p isn't anymore Junky then it is on a Cine Alta or a Vari-Cam. If you shoot in 30p kiss a theatrical release good bye, as well as any PAL markets.

[Michael Pappas]

Heath wrote:
<<<<The HD10 is different>>>

Is this something you noticed Heath or is this from JVC that the HD10 is different then the consumer version as to picture quality is concerned?

Michael Pappas

[Heath McKnight]

<<<-- Originally posted by Michael Pappas : Heath wrote:
<<<<The HD10 is different>>>

Is this something you noticed Heath or is this from JVC that the HD10 is different then the consumer version as to picture quality is concerned?

Michael Pappas -->>>

I read it here, from someone who saw both cameras.

heath