JVC GR-PD1 resolution

[Sam Sharpe]

Hello fellow PD1 owners I thought I would start a thread spicifically dealing with the JVC GR-PD1 Camera.

Is it possible to get 1280 X 659 footage out of the GR-PD1 because I recently purchased the camera and feel very annoyed as I was led to believe this was the case from a number of reviews, but the supplied capture software will only get files at 720 X 576, If this information is not correct I have been disinformmed about the Camera and I need to return it obtain a re-fund and order thje HD1 from the states. The retialer I brought the camera from will only give me a refund if I can prove that the Camera does not shoot footage at 1280 X 659 pixels and record this to the tape in this form without prior downconversion to 720 X 576.

On another note how is the Hi-Res mode any higher resolution than the PS50 mode as both modes have exactly the same pixel dimensions, 720X576, they are the exact same resolution, how can you then define one of these modes as Hi-Res as it has exactly the same resolution as the PS50 mode. Resolution is defined by pixel dimensions at actual size not effective pixel resolution prior to downsample, if I print an A4 page from an A3 original I cant say that this page will have any higher resolution than another A4 document, both consist of the exact same number of pixels.

One very annoyed JVC customer.

PS why do we need this camera to be PAL? HD is HD there's no such thing as NTSC HD and PAL HD. JVC UK remind me of the IT manufacturers with this darkside marketing strategy. PSS no customer is going to buy this camera to shoot DV, whats the point go and get a DVX-100 or an XL1s, their gonna want it to shoot HD.

[Heath McKnight]

Sam,

Is this the SD/DV only camera, right? I was a little confused earlier!

heath

[Phil Wright]

It is not a Hi-def camera. The GR-PD1 has the following shooting modes.

720x576 PAL-DV 25 FPS interlaced 4:3

720x576 MPEG-2 50 FPS progressive either 16:9 or 4:3

720x576 MPEG-2 25 FPS progressive 16:9

The confusion probably comes from the fact that the camera downsamples from same hi-def CCD used in HD10U.

In the first shooting mode it uses 839x576 CCD cells to generate the PAL DV.

In the second it uses either 941x485 or 839x576 depending on whether you shoot 16:9 or 4:3 respectively.

The third mode uses 1280x659 CCD elements to create the 16:9 image.

So the camera is not really hi-def when it comes to what is laid down to tape.

All of this is in the manual for it.

[Heath McKnight]

Thanks, Phil. Most of us don't know of this, because it's a PAL camera, and not HDV.

It's like the HD10/HD1 camera, minus HDV, right?

heath

[David Newman]

It is still considered an HDV camera as it uses MPEG2-TS on a DV tapes. Plus there are advantages to the 720x576x25p over standard PAL DV cameras, HD resolution just isn't one of them.

[Sam Sharpe]

Thanks for your input people, I'm in the process of trying to sort out a swap with my retailer for an HD1, its very cheap over there in the US, best price I found worked out to about £865, quite a good saving seeing as I got the best price I could find in the UK for the PD1 was £1445, kind of strange to find out just how much over the odds us Europeans have to pay for a Camera with limited features, I've realised its all down to JVC's marketing campaign, apparently Europe is getting pushed Standard Definition progressive as opposed to everyone else in the Western World who are pushing HD progressive,
Even JVC's high end TV's are still standard def even if the same US model is HD.

PAL/NTSC seem to just confuse the whole HD issue in this country, HD doesn't have these standards I just wished someone at JVC europe would realise that people buying a camera such as the PD1 aren't buying it to shoot PAL DV footage, its all about the higher resolution, so give us a version that shoots HD please JVC its not much to ask, I believe all it would take is a firmware update.

[Les Dit]

Watch out for mail order retailers that are charging the least for the camera.
Many dealers are totally dishonest, look up the dealer name on Google and see what other buyers say. you may be shocked!
-Les

[Sam Sharpe]

Got the Issues sorted, I'm going to stick with the PD1 for the moment, it makes more sence, ive got a 5 year warranty and we're in the process of securing quite a big job to be done in PAL, so the PD1 is fine for the Job.

[Heath McKnight]

Sam,

Glad you thought it out! Good luck with the "big shoot!"

heath

[Alex Lake]

What's the low-light performance like?

I know it's only f1.6/1.8 and there are lots of pixels, but at 1/3" it must still be pretty good.

I guess my comparison points are Sony TRV950 and Panasonic MX500, neither of which is much cop indoors at night.

[Sam Sharpe]

Low light performance seems just like most digital camcorders, not much cop! I dont really see the benefits of low light performance cause good lighting's so important to a shot, even if im shooting at night i'd still usually want a nice backlight or key on the subject, I'd tend to shoot with enough light then get busy with Fusion or Combustion in post!

[Alex Lake]

I can see the logic there!
I guess it's something that's important to me because my applications are more informal than yours where I don't always have control over the lighting and, even when I do, I don't want to be intrusive.

[Sam Sharpe]

I'll take some footage tonight on my camera indoors and try and get some frame grabs up on my website if this would be any use to you?

It would be hard to compare with other cameras, cause I dont have access to a PD170 but I know a man that has one so I'll give him a bell and see if we can compare low light shooting on both.

I'll do it in my front room lit with a 100W standard room light.

I'll try and do this tonight and I'll try and get something online too!

[Alex Lake]

That would be quite interesting.

100W lighting will probably be not too bad.

Where are you in London? (During the day) If central, we may be able to do a direct comparison with my (1/6" chipper) MX500