Various posts concerning GR-HD1U and JY-HD10U

Steve Bell · April 13th, 2003, 11:17 AM

Excellent information on the new Toshiba/Warner red laser HD DVD, Toshiba Blue Laser HD DVD and Sony Blu Ray HD DVD. It is a PDF file and it loads slowly. The Blu Ray system seems to be backed by most companies and has a stream of 36 Mbps, about twice as much as the new JVC HD camcorder. All these formats use MPEG2 compression, except the Warner system uses MPEG4 and is ment for prerecorded lower quality HD videos only.

http://www.widescreenreview.com/wsrmmbr/attractions/71pdfs/71yht01.pdf

Glenn Moore III · April 15th, 2003, 07:02 PM

I know the cam is new, but does anyone have any idea if this so called HD is really HD...In other words, sure it's 1280x720, but is it also 4:2:2 sampling and have greater than DV's 8bit color?

Heath McKnight · April 22nd, 2003, 12:50 AM

Has anyone seen the JVC HM-DH30000 in any stores? I said in another thread it wasn't anywhere in a bunch of different stores in Southeast Florida (didn't check Miami or South Ft. Lauderdale). One girl went so far as to say (at Best Buy) the last time she saw this, the company quietly kept the demo/price-for-sale up, but sent no stock to "fix" some problems. I'm gonna try looking again; you can buy and return (after testing/checking/playing with) it after 30 days, but check each store. I think Circuit City has the most liberal laws as far as that's concerned. I'm hoping to either demo or buy (and return, if it's possible) the camera and test it with the HM-DH30000 and a higher-end HDTV (non-plasma--ours suck at work and non-projection). I promise to write a THOROUGH review of each mode, inside, outside, natural/available lighting and my own extensive lighting. BIG REVIEW! (That's if I can buy and return or demo the camera enough to do those tests.)

heath (new HD reviewer) ;-)
www.mpsdigital.com

Heath McKnight · April 22nd, 2003, 06:00 PM

What does anyone know about the Mistubishi HS-HD2000U? I saw one for under $400 at a Sound Advice. Anyone know if it's good or not? It's older, 2001 or 2002 and may be outdated enough to not be worth it.

Thanks,

Heath McKnight
www.mpsdigital.com

Bob Benkosky · May 7th, 2003, 01:21 AM

Although they claim 1 chip is enough, are these JVC camcorders really that good compared to Canon or Sony?

Those JVC GR-DV3000U cams were garbage, why should we trust them now?

$2000 retail price yet $800 online. I've never heard one good thing about those.

Joseph George · May 8th, 2003, 12:37 PM

HD1 has excellent resolution but appears to have washed out colors and has poor light sensitivity; both of these remind of the pre-CCD era cameras with 1 tube pickup.

When it comes to solid-state sensors, 1 CCD is fine in 4:1:1 and 4:2:0 color compression; in less color compressed systems, 3 CCDs are naturally preferred because pixels of all colors land on the same spot.

Unless JVC fixes up the color problem, if Consumer Reports test HD1, they may recommend $500 Digital8 as a better performer.

It seems that with these and other limitations DV3000U and GL2 are overall better cameras.

We may have to wait for Sony to come out with blu-ray HD DVD camcorder to get a quality low cost HD camera. The HD1 may at that time go the way of the DV3000U price wise.

HD1 and HD10 are basically the same cameras. If JVC fixes up the HD1 color problem, they'll also fix it on HD1, if they are capable of doing so any time soon since it appears that new encoder/decoder chips may be needed and JVC has to rely on other companies in this era.

Frank Granovski · May 8th, 2003, 12:52 PM

I think that with consumer cams, and 1 chip pro cams, JVC has shot themselves in the foot for the last 4 years. I say this because year after year, the other major cam companies usually have some good models, and at a cheaper price. I firmly believe JVC has when whistling a different tune for some time. But they are not alone. This year's Canon 1 chip lineup is dismal. I don't understand why JVC hasn't come out with a better 1 chip cam yet. Maybe this will be the one (or 2), I don't know. We'll have to wait and see what develops. I know JVC can build better cams. My older DVL9500 cams are excellent 1 chip cams. My opinion.

Justin Walter · May 18th, 2003, 03:39 AM

Speaking of 3d hd... would the Nu-View SX-2000 Stereoscopic 3-D Camcorder Adapter Kit work with the GR-HD1U / JY-HD10U? Maybe only in certain modes...?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh6.sph/...NUSX2000___REG

Joseph George · May 18th, 2003, 03:18 PM

IMHO: I think that that thing, as far as I remember, and as these things normally work, is made to work with interlaced systems and each eye sees diifferent fields of a frame. So it most likely would not work in the 30p mode, or it would give kind of stroboscopic effect, which may be interesting. 60i shoul be OK and 60p, I don't know. Maybe you could check with the manufacturer and let us all know. The mirror(s) it is probably using should be of good enough quality for the 60p mode; for HD, who knows?.

Joseph George · May 21st, 2003, 10:44 AM

http://www.forbes.com/columnists/free_forbes/2003/0526/156.html

There is an error in the review. With letterboxing of the viewfinder and the LCD you do not lose 20% but 25% resolution. They claim that the viewfinder is totally useless.

Joseph George · May 22nd, 2003, 11:47 AM

It appears that the JVC will be usable for low-end cinema production. I expected it all along but did not want to be too praising. I hoped that a little criticism could possibly make these people improve on the product prior to the US introduction, but that may not been the case. So we may be stuck with weak colors. That will give the picture certain unique quality -- certainly usable to project to a movie theater screen, and that's what counts. With the 720/30p distribution now available at Landmark Theaters, the JVC will become a major tool for independent filmmakers. The next step will be Varicam, for $ 80K min with a lens -- a little sharper, with excellent colors -- 20x more expensive.

Paul Mogg · May 22nd, 2003, 12:49 PM

I'm still waiting to see more footage before I'll go that far, but I have to say that the "Jellyfish" footage blew me away. It does seem like a possibility that it'll be a tool for very low end cinema production, and if 30p projection at cinemas becomes a reality, maybe there'll be an outlet for it.
I think that the 2/3" CMOS camera, maybe coupled with this HD MPEG-2 tape compression, will not be far behind though, and that will really do the trick for me.

Joseph George · May 22nd, 2003, 01:44 PM

Paul, the 30p projection at Landmark is already a reality.

Heath McKnight · May 23rd, 2003, 01:59 PM

Well, I guess the HD revolution is definately on; with the announcement of the JVC mini-HD camera (and the fact that everyone seems inclined to shooting on high-end HD for movies and shows), a lot of companies are jumping aboard the HD revolution. And not just normal video companies, but others like Olympus, Mitchell, companies that do high-end imaging. Here are some links for you to peruse. The one that wows me is Mitchell's HD "disc" that fits into, get this, the magazine compartment of an Arri 16SR 16mm camera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOW!

heath

http://www.uemedia.com/CPC/article_2980.shtml
http://www.towersemi.com/press/apr0402.html
http://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/1007/013.html
http://www.olympus.co.jp/Special/Info/n020522aE.html
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_daily...=21406&issue=5

ps-the 10 mg Cinealta prototype is going to Lucas/Star Wars 3, but because Sony pissed off 700 HD camera owners by releasing the Cinealta so soon after (in 2001) the 700, the new Cinealta won't come out until late 2004, early 2005.

Joseph George · June 9th, 2003, 10:29 AM

There are 720p consumer sets. Check Panasonic. I also think that Samsung makes a projector with this resolution.

You do not need full 1280 horizontal pixels. This camera resolves 960 pixels only.

The screen size is irrelevant. The resolution and image quality matters. With a small screen you sit closer; with a larger one further back. The ideal distance is as close as possible without seeing the scanning pattern, etc. HDTV allows you to sit closer to the screen than TV for the same screen size. The closer distance allows a lot stronger visual impact. Or use a larger distance with a larger screen.

The image is sharp enough to project to cinema-size screen. Digi Beta looks OK when projected to a smaller cinema screen. This camcorder image will look as sharp or sharper than Digi Beta. Varicam image converted to 30p has bit rate 50 Mbps. Varicam has a 3 CCDs with full 720p resolution.

MPEG2 is a more efficient compression technique than the DV-based Varicam type. Once MPEG2 HD camcorders with better resolving chips and better MPEG2 processors became available, the image will be as good as on Varicam. And Varicam image looks OK on a large theater screen. The horizontal resolution of the JVC falls between Varicam and Digibeta. The vertical resolution is very close to Vericam.

I would say that by next NAB some company will come out with a MPEG2 HD camcorder image-wise equal to Varicam. The prosumer and pro DV market will be in the future replaced with MPEG2 HD. It will not take that long. The pro cameras will use (3) 2/3" CCDs. The low-end cameras will use one small chip, fixed lens, etc. But it will all be MPEG2 HD, with better processors than the JVC uses now, of course.

At that time the Varicam and CineAlta will drop in price by some 50%. We'll have equivalent of PD150 in HD, blu-ray HD DVD based, with excellent MPEG2 processors and superb image in a year or 2. The image will be sufficient to show on a large theater screen.

We'll have the following formats or their equivalents, at that time, that will be useable for digital cinema production:

1. MPEG2 HD DVD 19 Mbps at 30p or 24p for student and lowest end indie film production.
2. Varicam HD with 40 Mbps at 24p for very lower end indie film production.
3. CineAlta HD with 110 Mbps at 24 p for indie film production
4. CineAlta SR 4:4:4 for higher end indie cinema production
5. Dalsa type camera with 3 CCDs for high end cinema production

SD and film will be dead for production. It will not take that long.

Projection will be digital in the future and lowest speed used for filming will be 48 fps.

April 13th, 2003, 11:17 AM	#31
Steve Bell New Boot Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 22	3 New Optical HD Formats Excellent information on the new Toshiba/Warner red laser HD DVD, Toshiba Blue Laser HD DVD and Sony Blu Ray HD DVD. It is a PDF file and it loads slowly. The Blu Ray system seems to be backed by most companies and has a stream of 36 Mbps, about twice as much as the new JVC HD camcorder. All these formats use MPEG2 compression, except the Warner system uses MPEG4 and is ment for prerecorded lower quality HD videos only. http://www.widescreenreview.com/wsrmmbr/attractions/71pdfs/71yht01.pdf

April 15th, 2003, 07:02 PM	#32
Glenn Moore III New Boot Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 18	Specs I know the cam is new, but does anyone have any idea if this so called HD is really HD...In other words, sure it's 1280x720, but is it also 4:2:2 sampling and have greater than DV's 8bit color? __________________ -Glenn III

April 22nd, 2003, 12:50 AM	#33
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	The JVC HM-DH30000 Has anyone seen the JVC HM-DH30000 in any stores? I said in another thread it wasn't anywhere in a bunch of different stores in Southeast Florida (didn't check Miami or South Ft. Lauderdale). One girl went so far as to say (at Best Buy) the last time she saw this, the company quietly kept the demo/price-for-sale up, but sent no stock to "fix" some problems. I'm gonna try looking again; you can buy and return (after testing/checking/playing with) it after 30 days, but check each store. I think Circuit City has the most liberal laws as far as that's concerned. I'm hoping to either demo or buy (and return, if it's possible) the camera and test it with the HM-DH30000 and a higher-end HDTV (non-plasma--ours suck at work and non-projection). I promise to write a THOROUGH review of each mode, inside, outside, natural/available lighting and my own extensive lighting. BIG REVIEW! (That's if I can buy and return or demo the camera enough to do those tests.) heath (new HD reviewer) ;-) www.mpsdigital.com

April 22nd, 2003, 06:00 PM	#34
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	ATTENTION EVERYONE (and Steve Mullen) Info on the discontinued Mistubishi HS-HD2000U What does anyone know about the Mistubishi HS-HD2000U? I saw one for under $400 at a Sound Advice. Anyone know if it's good or not? It's older, 2001 or 2002 and may be outdated enough to not be worth it. Thanks, Heath McKnight www.mpsdigital.com

May 7th, 2003, 01:21 AM	#35
Bob Benkosky Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Lake Park, Florida Posts: 202	GL2 vs these JVC HD cams? Although they claim 1 chip is enough, are these JVC camcorders really that good compared to Canon or Sony? Those JVC GR-DV3000U cams were garbage, why should we trust them now? $2000 retail price yet $800 online. I've never heard one good thing about those. __________________ http://www.veoh.com/channels/filmmaker My clips and films.

May 8th, 2003, 12:37 PM	#36
Joseph George Permanently Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 265	HD1 has excellent resolution but appears to have washed out colors and has poor light sensitivity; both of these remind of the pre-CCD era cameras with 1 tube pickup. When it comes to solid-state sensors, 1 CCD is fine in 4:1:1 and 4:2:0 color compression; in less color compressed systems, 3 CCDs are naturally preferred because pixels of all colors land on the same spot. Unless JVC fixes up the color problem, if Consumer Reports test HD1, they may recommend $500 Digital8 as a better performer. It seems that with these and other limitations DV3000U and GL2 are overall better cameras. We may have to wait for Sony to come out with blu-ray HD DVD camcorder to get a quality low cost HD camera. The HD1 may at that time go the way of the DV3000U price wise. HD1 and HD10 are basically the same cameras. If JVC fixes up the HD1 color problem, they'll also fix it on HD1, if they are capable of doing so any time soon since it appears that new encoder/decoder chips may be needed and JVC has to rely on other companies in this era.

May 8th, 2003, 12:52 PM	#37
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I think that with consumer cams, and 1 chip pro cams, JVC has shot themselves in the foot for the last 4 years. I say this because year after year, the other major cam companies usually have some good models, and at a cheaper price. I firmly believe JVC has when whistling a different tune for some time. But they are not alone. This year's Canon 1 chip lineup is dismal. I don't understand why JVC hasn't come out with a better 1 chip cam yet. Maybe this will be the one (or 2), I don't know. We'll have to wait and see what develops. I know JVC can build better cams. My older DVL9500 cams are excellent 1 chip cams. My opinion.

May 18th, 2003, 03:39 AM	#38
Justin Walter Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Justin Walter - Salt Lake City Posts: 51	Speaking of 3d hd... would the Nu-View SX-2000 Stereoscopic 3-D Camcorder Adapter Kit work with the GR-HD1U / JY-HD10U? Maybe only in certain modes...? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh6.sph/...NUSX2000___REG

May 18th, 2003, 03:18 PM	#39
Joseph George Permanently Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 265	IMHO: I think that that thing, as far as I remember, and as these things normally work, is made to work with interlaced systems and each eye sees diifferent fields of a frame. So it most likely would not work in the 30p mode, or it would give kind of stroboscopic effect, which may be interesting. 60i shoul be OK and 60p, I don't know. Maybe you could check with the manufacturer and let us all know. The mirror(s) it is probably using should be of good enough quality for the 60p mode; for HD, who knows?.

May 21st, 2003, 10:44 AM	#40
Joseph George Permanently Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 265	New HD1 Review by Forbes http://www.forbes.com/columnists/free_forbes/2003/0526/156.html There is an error in the review. With letterboxing of the viewfinder and the LCD you do not lose 20% but 25% resolution. They claim that the viewfinder is totally useless.

May 22nd, 2003, 11:47 AM	#41
Joseph George Permanently Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 265	HD10 as a Cinema Tool It appears that the JVC will be usable for low-end cinema production. I expected it all along but did not want to be too praising. I hoped that a little criticism could possibly make these people improve on the product prior to the US introduction, but that may not been the case. So we may be stuck with weak colors. That will give the picture certain unique quality -- certainly usable to project to a movie theater screen, and that's what counts. With the 720/30p distribution now available at Landmark Theaters, the JVC will become a major tool for independent filmmakers. The next step will be Varicam, for $ 80K min with a lens -- a little sharper, with excellent colors -- 20x more expensive.

May 22nd, 2003, 12:49 PM	#42
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	I'm still waiting to see more footage before I'll go that far, but I have to say that the "Jellyfish" footage blew me away. It does seem like a possibility that it'll be a tool for very low end cinema production, and if 30p projection at cinemas becomes a reality, maybe there'll be an outlet for it. I think that the 2/3" CMOS camera, maybe coupled with this HD MPEG-2 tape compression, will not be far behind though, and that will really do the trick for me. __________________ Paul

May 22nd, 2003, 01:44 PM	#43
Joseph George Permanently Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 265	Paul, the 30p projection at Landmark is already a reality.

May 23rd, 2003, 01:59 PM	#44
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Other new HD cameras Well, I guess the HD revolution is definately on; with the announcement of the JVC mini-HD camera (and the fact that everyone seems inclined to shooting on high-end HD for movies and shows), a lot of companies are jumping aboard the HD revolution. And not just normal video companies, but others like Olympus, Mitchell, companies that do high-end imaging. Here are some links for you to peruse. The one that wows me is Mitchell's HD "disc" that fits into, get this, the magazine compartment of an Arri 16SR 16mm camera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOW! heath http://www.uemedia.com/CPC/article_2980.shtml http://www.towersemi.com/press/apr0402.html http://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/1007/013.html http://www.olympus.co.jp/Special/Info/n020522aE.html http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_daily...=21406&issue=5 ps-the 10 mg Cinealta prototype is going to Lucas/Star Wars 3, but because Sony pissed off 700 HD camera owners by releasing the Cinealta so soon after (in 2001) the 700, the new Cinealta won't come out until late 2004, early 2005.

June 9th, 2003, 10:29 AM	#45
Joseph George Permanently Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 265	HD10 as a Cinema Tool and Future Indie Formats There are 720p consumer sets. Check Panasonic. I also think that Samsung makes a projector with this resolution. You do not need full 1280 horizontal pixels. This camera resolves 960 pixels only. The screen size is irrelevant. The resolution and image quality matters. With a small screen you sit closer; with a larger one further back. The ideal distance is as close as possible without seeing the scanning pattern, etc. HDTV allows you to sit closer to the screen than TV for the same screen size. The closer distance allows a lot stronger visual impact. Or use a larger distance with a larger screen. The image is sharp enough to project to cinema-size screen. Digi Beta looks OK when projected to a smaller cinema screen. This camcorder image will look as sharp or sharper than Digi Beta. Varicam image converted to 30p has bit rate 50 Mbps. Varicam has a 3 CCDs with full 720p resolution. MPEG2 is a more efficient compression technique than the DV-based Varicam type. Once MPEG2 HD camcorders with better resolving chips and better MPEG2 processors became available, the image will be as good as on Varicam. And Varicam image looks OK on a large theater screen. The horizontal resolution of the JVC falls between Varicam and Digibeta. The vertical resolution is very close to Vericam. I would say that by next NAB some company will come out with a MPEG2 HD camcorder image-wise equal to Varicam. The prosumer and pro DV market will be in the future replaced with MPEG2 HD. It will not take that long. The pro cameras will use (3) 2/3" CCDs. The low-end cameras will use one small chip, fixed lens, etc. But it will all be MPEG2 HD, with better processors than the JVC uses now, of course. At that time the Varicam and CineAlta will drop in price by some 50%. We'll have equivalent of PD150 in HD, blu-ray HD DVD based, with excellent MPEG2 processors and superb image in a year or 2. The image will be sufficient to show on a large theater screen. We'll have the following formats or their equivalents, at that time, that will be useable for digital cinema production: 1. MPEG2 HD DVD 19 Mbps at 30p or 24p for student and lowest end indie film production. 2. Varicam HD with 40 Mbps at 24p for very lower end indie film production. 3. CineAlta HD with 110 Mbps at 24 p for indie film production 4. CineAlta SR 4:4:4 for higher end indie cinema production 5. Dalsa type camera with 3 CCDs for high end cinema production SD and film will be dead for production. It will not take that long. Projection will be digital in the future and lowest speed used for filming will be 48 fps.