Various posts concerning GR-HD1U and JY-HD10U

Heath McKnight · June 30th, 2003, 01:50 AM

Barring no problems, I'll have the HD10 in my hands in about 9 hours! Clips and such to follow that evening.

heath

Heath McKnight · June 30th, 2003, 01:39 PM

Got the camera, pretty cool; will be shooting later (I'm at work now).

Also, Computer Videomaker (I had a subscription when I was 13--1989--and DV was a distant dream) has an HD1 review. I trust this magazine, as the ad content (and lack of a free subscription) is lower. :-) Here's the jist:

Strengths: HD, progressive scan. Easy to use.

Weaknesses: Limited editing options. Quality depends on TV used.

No mention of the iris, etc. functions, which is interesting. Maybe
this isn't a thorough review....

The summary says it best: A pioneering camera that shoots HD for folks who own HD televisions.

They dig it. For more, check out the July 2003 Computer Videomaker!

heath

Heath McKnight · June 30th, 2003, 03:13 PM

I'll post some stuff up under this thread of the HD10.

First impressions (since testing/demoing it):

1. It's EASY to focus, just like a regular camera.

2. More balanced than the XL-1, since the lens is small. After 4 years of dealing with that, I'm happy to see balance.

3. I put on the lens cap, fired it up, and it screamed, LENS CAP! Nice for the idiots out there (I've done it before, for a couple of seconds then realized how dumb I was).

4. It was easy to put the XLR/handle on.

More later as I record stuff. I get the HD monitor tomorrow (tiny Sharp 15 in. LCD, perfect for editing and field shooting).

heath

Heath McKnight · June 30th, 2003, 06:14 PM

More:

The on/off switch is both easy and a pain in the @$$; it can be easy when I'm facing it, hard when I'm trying to do it from an angle, if that makes sense.

The iris thing is tricky, but I haven't used it enough.

I'm interested in what my XL-1 and this camera in DV mode will look like together, same shots and such.

heath

Heath McKnight · June 30th, 2003, 08:40 PM

Steve Mullen and everyone else,

Which DVHS deck should I get:

1. The consumer model we've been talking about?

2. The new SR-VD400US that lists the same as the consumer model (but may be cheaper overall)?

Thanx,

heath

Steve Mullen · June 30th, 2003, 09:17 PM

That's easy. Unless you need DTS -- save the money.

Get the 30K then have the free firmware upgrade if you get one under S# 157xxxxxxxxx.

Peter Moore · July 1st, 2003, 02:51 PM

As I was talking in another thread about this, I took the clips posted on the site here and used Vegas to make them 24p. So far, they look just fine. We need some clips with more movement ot test this, though.

The really cool thing is that Vegas imported the mpeg transport stream right away.

I'm optimstic about the future of pro-sumer HD now. I might not buy this camera, but I know that good stuff is to come having seen this.

Jeff Kilgroe · July 1st, 2003, 03:33 PM

Fast motion will definitely give problems going from 30p to 24p. Although Vegas does do a pretty good job. Vegas converts by shuffling the drop frame order to help keep motion jitters more random than a consistent pattern. The consistent pattern is much more noticeable to the human eye/brain.

Going to 24p from the 480p60 SD resolution on this camera is no problem at all.

I've decided not to buy the HD1/HD10U for now. But for any consumer/prosumer and gadget enthusiast people who have a HDTV and also a DVHS deck (or don't mind buying one) this is the perfect camcorder for their home movies and simple editing.

For serious stuff, if it needs to be in HD, I'll go rent a real HD camcorder and then I'll have the control and color range ability I need.

I have played with the footage I took while demoing the camera as well as a lot of what's been posted online - including quite a few of Paul's clips that were just made available. The noise and compression artifacting is just too much to get serious professional results out of this camera - especially if any significant amount of editing or compositing will be done. For home movies with straight edit cuts and minor color correction to put back on DVHS, this camera is awesome.

If JVC had put out this camcorder with a better ergonomic design, better optics, and true manual controls and a variable or adjustable encoding bitrate ability, I would have bought it - even at a bit higher price. This unit does tend to blow out bright areas, but this can be corrected with filters and a little thinking ahead and shadow detail isn't all that great, but color is good for a single chip camcorder and the CCD resolution is less than 10% different from a Varicam and other pro HD camcorders. IMO, what holds this camera back the most is the poor optics. It uses optics that are equivalent to $450 camcorders and it's usually pretty obvious on shots with a lot of fine details.

Anyway, it's great camcorder for what it is and a bad camcorder for what it isn't. I commend JVC on releasing this product, but I think I'll wait for round 2 of the HD camcorder offerings.

Vladimir Koifman · July 3rd, 2003, 06:15 AM

I'm not sure this review is that big deal now, when many people got a hold on it already, but here it is:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scite...iew030703.html

All in all, looks like they more like it than hate.
A fairly balanced review in my opinion.

Frank Granovski · July 3rd, 2003, 09:41 AM

Thanks. I didn't see/read this one yet.

Hmmm, it's called, "Shoot your kids - in high definition video style."

Heath McKnight · July 7th, 2003, 09:30 PM

Shocking, but I'm keeping the camera. Though Steve has told me something COMPLETELY different than what Ken Freed said, and it makes sense, I think, I'll keep the camera.

The S/A button isn't something to adjust, right Steve, just whatever the camera feels is right.

And, yes, the XL-1's shutter and aperature adjustments are harsh, happening so quickly you can't use that. So I'll give the HD10 that it's smoother.

heath

Steve Mullen · July 8th, 2003, 01:46 AM

When you get an HD monitor you'll be glad you did.

I've been watching movies tonight, and it's amazing how most set-ups are very simple. NO zooms. Very few pans.

Of course, all are carefully lit. It looks like it should be possible for us to figure-out what the optimum light level is for 1/30th. I expect a 1000W light kit will be enough. Especially something that mixes soft fill -- with a key light.

I've also found very dark shadows do not get noise -- the same result I've had with the VX1000. For dramatic a look, keep some areas well lit and others in deep shadow.

Steve Mullen · July 9th, 2003, 01:13 AM

Reviewing what I shot to decide between 1/30th and 1/60th -- I noted that as I expected freeze frames of 1/30th were a tad too full of blur. (Afer all 1/30 is what 18fps silent 8mm used!) Of course, moving objects had far more detail at 1/60th as would be expected. (The DVX100 shoots 30p at 1/60th.)

But I was surprised that static objects at 1/30th didn't look as clear as when I switched to 1/60th.

I suspect that's because the aperature was nearly fully closed at 1/30th. Which says you must use an 8ND or 16ND filter if you want to use 1/30th or 1/60th -- which you do want to do. That should keep the iris from closing too far and lowering image quality.

I suspect 8ND is fine for cloudy days, but 16ND may be needed for sunny days. Anyone who has both, please run some tests comparing them.

Paul Mogg · July 9th, 2003, 11:43 AM

Hi, it's become clear to me since getting my Monivision 720p capable HDTV yesterday and doing comparisons, that the ELecard and VLAN sorftware HD players degrade the image quality of the JVC's output significantly, and introduce a lot of color noise that just isn't there in the original. I would recommend to anyone trying out th JVC cam, that in judging the picture quality, they ONLY view it directly from the camera, or from a DVHS deck connected to a native 720p capable HD monitor. NOT on an "HD Ready TV" which will do conversions, or on a computer monitor. There is a wold of difference in the image quality when viewed this way, which is how it should be viewed. The software players, in doing their on-the-fly resolution conversions, are introducing at least 50-75% of the color noise that is visible on computer monitors. I was amazed at this finding, which I didn't at all expect.

Cheers

David Newman · July 9th, 2003, 11:56 AM

I expect that there is nothing wrong with most software decoders, and the problem actually is related to the different gamma curves and constrast ratios of computer monitor vs the intended output display. Standard definition production handles this by having a reference NTSC monitor next to the editing system. Computer monitors will always give false results.

June 30th, 2003, 01:50 AM	#61
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Finally getting the camera! Barring no problems, I'll have the HD10 in my hands in about 9 hours! Clips and such to follow that evening. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 30th, 2003, 01:39 PM	#62
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Got my HD10 (finally!) and a HD1 review in Computer Videomaker! Got the camera, pretty cool; will be shooting later (I'm at work now). Also, Computer Videomaker (I had a subscription when I was 13--1989--and DV was a distant dream) has an HD1 review. I trust this magazine, as the ad content (and lack of a free subscription) is lower. :-) Here's the jist: Strengths: HD, progressive scan. Easy to use. Weaknesses: Limited editing options. Quality depends on TV used. No mention of the iris, etc. functions, which is interesting. Maybe this isn't a thorough review.... The summary says it best: A pioneering camera that shoots HD for folks who own HD televisions. They dig it. For more, check out the July 2003 Computer Videomaker! heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 30th, 2003, 03:13 PM	#63
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Heath's ongoing HD10 review tonight (and beyond) I'll post some stuff up under this thread of the HD10. First impressions (since testing/demoing it): 1. It's EASY to focus, just like a regular camera. 2. More balanced than the XL-1, since the lens is small. After 4 years of dealing with that, I'm happy to see balance. 3. I put on the lens cap, fired it up, and it screamed, LENS CAP! Nice for the idiots out there (I've done it before, for a couple of seconds then realized how dumb I was). 4. It was easy to put the XLR/handle on. More later as I record stuff. I get the HD monitor tomorrow (tiny Sharp 15 in. LCD, perfect for editing and field shooting). heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 30th, 2003, 06:14 PM	#64
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	More: The on/off switch is both easy and a pain in the @$$; it can be easy when I'm facing it, hard when I'm trying to do it from an angle, if that makes sense. The iris thing is tricky, but I haven't used it enough. I'm interested in what my XL-1 and this camera in DV mode will look like together, same shots and such. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 30th, 2003, 08:40 PM	#65
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	DVHS recommendations? Steve Mullen and everyone else, Which DVHS deck should I get: 1. The consumer model we've been talking about? 2. The new SR-VD400US that lists the same as the consumer model (but may be cheaper overall)? Thanx, heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 30th, 2003, 09:17 PM	#66
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	That's easy. Unless you need DTS -- save the money. Get the 30K then have the free firmware upgrade if you get one under S# 157xxxxxxxxx. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

July 1st, 2003, 02:51 PM	#67
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	24p As I was talking in another thread about this, I took the clips posted on the site here and used Vegas to make them 24p. So far, they look just fine. We need some clips with more movement ot test this, though. The really cool thing is that Vegas imported the mpeg transport stream right away. I'm optimstic about the future of pro-sumer HD now. I might not buy this camera, but I know that good stuff is to come having seen this.

July 1st, 2003, 03:33 PM	#68
Jeff Kilgroe Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Golden, CO Posts: 681	Fast motion will definitely give problems going from 30p to 24p. Although Vegas does do a pretty good job. Vegas converts by shuffling the drop frame order to help keep motion jitters more random than a consistent pattern. The consistent pattern is much more noticeable to the human eye/brain. Going to 24p from the 480p60 SD resolution on this camera is no problem at all. I've decided not to buy the HD1/HD10U for now. But for any consumer/prosumer and gadget enthusiast people who have a HDTV and also a DVHS deck (or don't mind buying one) this is the perfect camcorder for their home movies and simple editing. For serious stuff, if it needs to be in HD, I'll go rent a real HD camcorder and then I'll have the control and color range ability I need. I have played with the footage I took while demoing the camera as well as a lot of what's been posted online - including quite a few of Paul's clips that were just made available. The noise and compression artifacting is just too much to get serious professional results out of this camera - especially if any significant amount of editing or compositing will be done. For home movies with straight edit cuts and minor color correction to put back on DVHS, this camera is awesome. If JVC had put out this camcorder with a better ergonomic design, better optics, and true manual controls and a variable or adjustable encoding bitrate ability, I would have bought it - even at a bit higher price. This unit does tend to blow out bright areas, but this can be corrected with filters and a little thinking ahead and shadow detail isn't all that great, but color is good for a single chip camcorder and the CCD resolution is less than 10% different from a Varicam and other pro HD camcorders. IMO, what holds this camera back the most is the poor optics. It uses optics that are equivalent to $450 camcorders and it's usually pretty obvious on shots with a lot of fine details. Anyway, it's great camcorder for what it is and a bad camcorder for what it isn't. I commend JVC on releasing this product, but I think I'll wait for round 2 of the HD camcorder offerings. __________________ - Jeff Kilgroe - Applied Visual Technologies \| DarkScience - www.darkscience.com

July 3rd, 2003, 06:15 AM	#69
Vladimir Koifman Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Israel Posts: 115	ABC reviews GR-HD1 I'm not sure this review is that big deal now, when many people got a hold on it already, but here it is: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scite...iew030703.html All in all, looks like they more like it than hate. A fairly balanced review in my opinion.

July 3rd, 2003, 09:41 AM	#70
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Thanks. I didn't see/read this one yet. Hmmm, it's called, "Shoot your kids - in high definition video style."

July 7th, 2003, 09:30 PM	#71
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	The camera stays in the picture Shocking, but I'm keeping the camera. Though Steve has told me something COMPLETELY different than what Ken Freed said, and it makes sense, I think, I'll keep the camera. The S/A button isn't something to adjust, right Steve, just whatever the camera feels is right. And, yes, the XL-1's shutter and aperature adjustments are harsh, happening so quickly you can't use that. So I'll give the HD10 that it's smoother. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

July 8th, 2003, 01:46 AM	#72
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	When you get an HD monitor you'll be glad you did. I've been watching movies tonight, and it's amazing how most set-ups are very simple. NO zooms. Very few pans. Of course, all are carefully lit. It looks like it should be possible for us to figure-out what the optimum light level is for 1/30th. I expect a 1000W light kit will be enough. Especially something that mixes soft fill -- with a key light. I've also found very dark shadows do not get noise -- the same result I've had with the VX1000. For dramatic a look, keep some areas well lit and others in deep shadow. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

July 9th, 2003, 01:13 AM	#73
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	ND filters Reviewing what I shot to decide between 1/30th and 1/60th -- I noted that as I expected freeze frames of 1/30th were a tad too full of blur. (Afer all 1/30 is what 18fps silent 8mm used!) Of course, moving objects had far more detail at 1/60th as would be expected. (The DVX100 shoots 30p at 1/60th.) But I was surprised that static objects at 1/30th didn't look as clear as when I switched to 1/60th. I suspect that's because the aperature was nearly fully closed at 1/30th. Which says you must use an 8ND or 16ND filter if you want to use 1/30th or 1/60th -- which you do want to do. That should keep the iris from closing too far and lowering image quality. I suspect 8ND is fine for cloudy days, but 16ND may be needed for sunny days. Anyone who has both, please run some tests comparing them. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

July 9th, 2003, 11:43 AM	#74
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	Software HD players degrade picture Hi, it's become clear to me since getting my Monivision 720p capable HDTV yesterday and doing comparisons, that the ELecard and VLAN sorftware HD players degrade the image quality of the JVC's output significantly, and introduce a lot of color noise that just isn't there in the original. I would recommend to anyone trying out th JVC cam, that in judging the picture quality, they ONLY view it directly from the camera, or from a DVHS deck connected to a native 720p capable HD monitor. NOT on an "HD Ready TV" which will do conversions, or on a computer monitor. There is a wold of difference in the image quality when viewed this way, which is how it should be viewed. The software players, in doing their on-the-fly resolution conversions, are introducing at least 50-75% of the color noise that is visible on computer monitors. I was amazed at this finding, which I didn't at all expect. Cheers __________________ Paul

July 9th, 2003, 11:56 AM	#75
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	I expect that there is nothing wrong with most software decoders, and the problem actually is related to the different gamma curves and constrast ratios of computer monitor vs the intended output display. Standard definition production handles this by having a reference NTSC monitor next to the editing system. Computer monitors will always give false results.