Confused

[Gabor Lacza]

Did anybody seen this website..it is japanase but look at those pictures.Especially at this one:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/do...30514/ez10.jpg

No depth of field ????
The website is about the JVC HD cam...!

[Alex Raskin]

Granted, on the telephoto end of HD10's lens, you get shallow depth of field.

Try moving to the wider angle and keep DoF shallow...

Also, who knows just how far the background objects were relative to the leaves in your pic. If they indeed were far enough, then naturally they'll be out of focus. Again, try to get shallow DoF on the objects that are relatively close to each other...

That's why you need a mini35 adapter with any small-chip camera - otherwise the acquired video displays too deep DoF comparing to the movie cams, which gives away the video origin of the material.

[Gabor Lacza]

Thanks Alex....so this JVC is not different than any other video cam in lack of shallow DOF...but as Heath said the image is great.

[Alex Raskin]

Correct. DoF is simply a function of the size of the optical image sensor (referred to as "chip" in my prev. post) the image is being projected onto.

35mm cameras have 24x36mm area onto which the lens projects the image.

If you go DOWN in size of that area, then DoF gets increasingly deeper with the same lens. This is simply the physics of the optical system and cannot be worked around, as I understand.

Bottom line: unless your digital cam has a large sensor comparing to the 24x36mm size (and none except experimental HD cams do), your cam's lens will be unable to produce movie-like shallow DoF. This is because today's affordable digital cams only use smallish optical sensor like 1/3" to maximum 2/3" in size. HD10 uses 1/3", for instance.

So the solution is to have an *additional* optical system that would project the 35mm lens's image onto the "Academy-size" :) 24x36mm screen, producing that sought after shallow DoF, and THEN shoot that screen's image with your digital camera.

See the link to one of such mini35 adapters' discussion in my prev. posts.

[Gabor Lacza]

Thanks Alex for the explanation....the mini35 is great just a bit expensive at least for me...anyway I think I need to go with the JVC cam since the image is really great relative to dv cams.The DOF is almost the same like any other video camera and the "film look" at 30p is pretty good I heard.But I am still not decided yet..i still read around hopefull somewhere I will see a "sign" to help to decide.
Gabor

[Gabor Lacza]

So after a few weeks of reading and learning about this camera i am still nowhere.You all say that manual controls not that good,audio is terrible ,chroma noise way too much but it is HD and the image is great so....not easy...
Anyway one more question..is it possible to convert the HDV footage to PAL ???
Gabor

[Heath McKnight]

Click on over to this posting about PAL. As for everything else, it's still up to you, man. You can minimize chroma noise with more light, I've learned!

heath

[Gabor Lacza]

Thanks Heath,
is this the only way to move from HD to Pal ?? For $1500??
Gabor

[Heath McKnight]

That i'm aware of.

heath

[Gabor Lacza]

Well after all the readings and learning and hearing about the bad and good side of the JVC I still think that those HD images are wonderful and I think I will go for the JVC...My really big concern is now only how I will go from 30p to 25p PAL DVD...
Gabor

[Les Dit]

Gabor,
Try just letting the edit software do the conversion. I let Vegas do a 30 to 24 fps conversion, and was surprised that it didn't look too bad at all.
The 'normal' person looking at it would not notice.
The wannabe tech geek can spot the difference, but that's not who will be looking at the film.
-Les ( Laci in Hungarian )

[Sten Newfield]

I've set my mind on HD10 as well, though, I've read that JVC might come out with an updated version in the coming months. I cannot remember where I read that from, can anybody dispel or confirm that rumor?

[Heath McKnight]

I would say probably not; look for new HDV cameras in another year, though, from JVC and Sony (and Canon and Sharp, likely).

heath

[George Beck]

If I were you I would go for DVX100,
but if I can I would wait for a month, until the full specs for GS400 come out.
From what we know, the cam processes 1mega frames, and tho it will not be HDV, it's possible to have some HD720 SD/HD solution if that will workout for you.... (especially in the light of the 3K$ 1080i HD Pana mockup at NAB, and 1GB SD)

it's much cheaper, and will not have the "look" or size of the pros...

here are the partial specs:

PV-GS400/NV-GS400

3CCD x 1,070,000 pixels
CCD size 1/4.7"
4 MEGA still (2304 x 1728)
Lens 58 mm
Leica Dicomar Lens
Crystal Engine
12xOptical Zoom
Telemacro Mode
MEGA O.I.S.

Pro Cinema Mode
High Picture-Quality Wide Mode
Colour Night View
Soft Skin Mode
Motion Video/Still Picture (1 MEGA) Simultaneous Rec
True recording 25 images/sec video MPEG4 (PAL version)

Multi Manual Ring
3.5" LCD Monitor
Air Soft Grip
Built-in Flash

4ECM stereo microphone
Wind noise decrease function

SD/MMC Card Compatible
USB 2 (HS Mode)
Webcam

Quick start
DV/Analogue In- and OUtput
MX500/DV953 replacement

[Sten Newfield]

I'd hate to start comparing apples and oranges, but here's what tipped the scale for me in favor of HD10 (in no particular order):

• True HDV
• High resolution
• No jagged edges, no color smearing
• True progressive scanning

Granted, some of the DV cameras provide these features and HD10 itself has its own specific problems (chroma noise, not-so-manual controls, etc), but there's no competition when it comes to resolution. My advise for Gabor would be that take a look at some of the HD10 footage posted to this forum, compare them to footage captured by your favorite DV camera and try to be objective :)

Bunch of clips to look at here http://www.dvinfo.net/jvc/media/

I'll be getting the HD10 in May.