Has anyone been to NAB and tried the camera? at DVinfo.net

Steve Bell · April 9th, 2003, 02:43 PM

Could anyone describe the picture quality under normal and low light conditions? How is the sharpness and color? How does it compare to Sony PD150 and Panasonic Varicam? There was an NBA report in another forum that JVC setup this camera side by side next to a pro HD camera and the JVC picture was very poor by comparison.

Lynne Whelden · April 9th, 2003, 05:05 PM

Nobody expects a $3500 fixed-lens camera to "compare to" an $80,000 pro HD camera with separate lens. We've had that discussion before. Nor does anyone expect a rushed and subjective eyeball test under the fluorescent lights of a convention hall to tell us anything substantial. However, I find it strange that nobody has posted anything at all. We're almost into day 4 of NAB. All I've heard is that there were only 3 cameras on display. Is everyone pretending like they're not really interested and just walking past? I find the silence rather strange....

Frank Granovski · April 9th, 2003, 06:05 PM

Re: "Nobody expects a $3500 fixed-lens camera to "compare to" an $80,000 pro HD camera with separate lens."

Or, a 1 chip cam compared with a 3 chip cam, or a 1 chip MPEG2 cam compared with a 3 chip DV cam.

Steve Bell · April 9th, 2003, 07:51 PM

Steve Mullen or anyone who was able to check out the camera well at NAB: Is the increase in quality about the same between PDX10 (16:9) and DVX100 (progressive, anamorphic adapter) as between HD10 and Varicam 27F, if we would have plenty of light. If not, compare it somehow to these cameras, or other ones.

Heath McKnight · April 10th, 2003, 05:04 PM

I read this at the 2-pop.com site:

"And the high-def prosumer HD10. The HD10 presentation was a little puzzling, they didn't have any decent demo footage from the unit at all, just some handheld walking-around-the-strip handycam-looking footage with flat colors. Definitely not impressive, they should have done much better. They did have a "JVC Cafe" camera test area, with the HD10 set up next to a 3-CCD hi-def camera, which was probably a mistake on their part because the side-by-side monitors showed how vast the gap is between "consumer" HD and "real" HD." - journey man

Go to this link for more:

http://www.2-pop.com/ubbthreads/show...5&o=14&fpart=1

Steve Mullen · April 11th, 2003, 02:14 AM

<<<-- They did have a "JVC Cafe" camera test area, with the HD10 set up next to a 3-CCD hi-def camera, which was probably a mistake on their part because the side-by-side monitors showed how vast the gap is between "consumer" HD and "real" HD." -->>>

And, if I go to the Sony booth they'll say for REAL HD I need a 4:4:4 HDCAM SR camera at $110,000. Therefore, I guess the image from a $55,000 Varicam must be so poor you wouldn't use it?

Sounds like those complaing the JVC doesn't have 24p. But neither does the $65,000 Sony 700 HDCAM. I guess I should reject this because it doesn't do 24p and the DVX100 does.

And, the PDX10 is far better than the JVC because it has a 7 lux sensitivity! Wow! Of course, the PDX10 shoots HD. Right?

Frank Granovski · April 11th, 2003, 03:36 AM

No, the PDX10 shoots "HD-ready."

Heath McKnight · April 11th, 2003, 11:19 AM

Steve,

Any relation to David Mullen I've seen on other boards? Just curious.

Anyway, look 35 lux is a HUGE step back, trust me. I'm 27 years old and have only been in this business (video) for about 6 years, mainly in local TV news. We've gone from using Panasonic's VHS-sized M2 to DVCPro to our studio cameras being hi-def (we have a $25 million new building). Our expensive new DTV tower goes live soon and we'll be almost 100% HD soon (except we're still on DVCPro). We have an interest in mini-HD and affordable HD. But 35 lux is ridiculous.

I will admit, though, it's a step in the very right direction! It will only get better!

Thanks for all you knowledge, Steve!

heath mcknight

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen : <<<-- They did have a "JVC Cafe" camera test area, with the HD10 set up next to a 3-CCD hi-def camera, which was probably a mistake on their part because the side-by-side monitors showed how vast the gap is between "consumer" HD and "real" HD." -->>>

And, if I go to the Sony booth they'll say for REAL HD I need a 4:4:4 HDCAM SR camera at $110,000. Therefore, I guess the image from a $55,000 Varicam must be so poor you wouldn't use it?

Sounds like those complaing the JVC doesn't have 24p. But neither does the $65,000 Sony 700 HDCAM. I guess I should reject this because it doesn't do 24p and the DVX100 does.

And, the PDX10 is far better than the JVC because it has a 7 lux sensitivity! Wow! Of course, the PDX10 shoots HD. Right? -->>>

Charles Papert · April 11th, 2003, 10:29 PM

I visited the JVC booth and the description above was pretty accurate. The footage they showed at the hosted demo was absurd, typically overexposed exteriors shot like home movies.

Frank Granovski · April 11th, 2003, 11:18 PM

Look what John Jackman just wrote on the dv.com camera forum:

As to the JVC camera, I don't regard MPEG II as a serious acquisition format. It was and is a distribution format, but has innumerable shortcomings for origination.

John Jackman

Heath McKnight · April 11th, 2003, 11:32 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Look what John Jackman just wrote on the dv.com camera forum:

As to the JVC camera, I don't regard MPEG II as a serious acquisition format. It was and is a distribution format, but has innumerable shortcomings for origination.

John Jackman -->>>

I think we have to wait until it comes out and we can all test it. I'm thinking if I can't demo it all, and if the HD-300000 D-VHS deck returns to stores, I may just buy the camera, deck and an HDTV and test it myself. I'll write my thoughts (whether I buy and return or demo) and reviews here, plus I'll post pictures at a temporary website I'll set up soon.

Frank Granovski · April 12th, 2003, 03:35 AM

Thanks Heath.

Personally, I'm excited about consumer/prosumer HD, but I've never been excited about MPEG2 based cams. Like you say, let's wait and see.

Heath McKnight · April 12th, 2003, 10:27 AM

I agree; maybe someone else will either make MPEG2 good or go for a different acquisition format altogether.

Only a month away!

heath

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Thanks Heath.

Personally, I'm excited about consumer/prosumer HD, but I've never been excited about MPEG2 based cams. Like you say, let's wait and see. -->>>

April 9th, 2003, 02:43 PM	#1
Steve Bell New Boot Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 22	Has anyone been to NAB and tried the camera? Could anyone describe the picture quality under normal and low light conditions? How is the sharpness and color? How does it compare to Sony PD150 and Panasonic Varicam? There was an NBA report in another forum that JVC setup this camera side by side next to a pro HD camera and the JVC picture was very poor by comparison.

April 10th, 2003, 05:04 PM	#5
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	2-Pop has viewers of the GR-HD10 I read this at the 2-pop.com site: "And the high-def prosumer HD10. The HD10 presentation was a little puzzling, they didn't have any decent demo footage from the unit at all, just some handheld walking-around-the-strip handycam-looking footage with flat colors. Definitely not impressive, they should have done much better. They did have a "JVC Cafe" camera test area, with the HD10 set up next to a 3-CCD hi-def camera, which was probably a mistake on their part because the side-by-side monitors showed how vast the gap is between "consumer" HD and "real" HD." - journey man Go to this link for more: http://www.2-pop.com/ubbthreads/show...5&o=14&fpart=1

April 11th, 2003, 02:14 AM	#6
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	Re: 2-Pop has viewers of the GR-HD10 <<<-- They did have a "JVC Cafe" camera test area, with the HD10 set up next to a 3-CCD hi-def camera, which was probably a mistake on their part because the side-by-side monitors showed how vast the gap is between "consumer" HD and "real" HD." -->>> And, if I go to the Sony booth they'll say for REAL HD I need a 4:4:4 HDCAM SR camera at $110,000. Therefore, I guess the image from a $55,000 Varicam must be so poor you wouldn't use it? Sounds like those complaing the JVC doesn't have 24p. But neither does the $65,000 Sony 700 HDCAM. I guess I should reject this because it doesn't do 24p and the DVX100 does. And, the PDX10 is far better than the JVC because it has a 7 lux sensitivity! Wow! Of course, the PDX10 shoots HD. Right? __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

April 11th, 2003, 11:19 AM	#8
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Re: Re: 2-Pop has viewers of the GR-HD10 Steve, Any relation to David Mullen I've seen on other boards? Just curious. Anyway, look 35 lux is a HUGE step back, trust me. I'm 27 years old and have only been in this business (video) for about 6 years, mainly in local TV news. We've gone from using Panasonic's VHS-sized M2 to DVCPro to our studio cameras being hi-def (we have a $25 million new building). Our expensive new DTV tower goes live soon and we'll be almost 100% HD soon (except we're still on DVCPro). We have an interest in mini-HD and affordable HD. But 35 lux is ridiculous. I will admit, though, it's a step in the very right direction! It will only get better! Thanks for all you knowledge, Steve! heath mcknight <<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen : <<<-- They did have a "JVC Cafe" camera test area, with the HD10 set up next to a 3-CCD hi-def camera, which was probably a mistake on their part because the side-by-side monitors showed how vast the gap is between "consumer" HD and "real" HD." -->>> And, if I go to the Sony booth they'll say for REAL HD I need a 4:4:4 HDCAM SR camera at $110,000. Therefore, I guess the image from a $55,000 Varicam must be so poor you wouldn't use it? Sounds like those complaing the JVC doesn't have 24p. But neither does the $65,000 Sony 700 HDCAM. I guess I should reject this because it doesn't do 24p and the DVX100 does. And, the PDX10 is far better than the JVC because it has a 7 lux sensitivity! Wow! Of course, the PDX10 shoots HD. Right? -->>>

April 11th, 2003, 10:29 PM	#9
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	I visited the JVC booth and the description above was pretty accurate. The footage they showed at the hosted demo was absurd, typically overexposed exteriors shot like home movies. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

April 9th, 2003, 05:05 PM	#2
Lynne Whelden Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: williamsport, pa Posts: 604	Nobody expects a $3500 fixed-lens camera to "compare to" an $80,000 pro HD camera with separate lens. We've had that discussion before. Nor does anyone expect a rushed and subjective eyeball test under the fluorescent lights of a convention hall to tell us anything substantial. However, I find it strange that nobody has posted anything at all. We're almost into day 4 of NAB. All I've heard is that there were only 3 cameras on display. Is everyone pretending like they're not really interested and just walking past? I find the silence rather strange....

April 9th, 2003, 06:05 PM	#3
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Re: "Nobody expects a $3500 fixed-lens camera to "compare to" an $80,000 pro HD camera with separate lens." Or, a 1 chip cam compared with a 3 chip cam, or a 1 chip MPEG2 cam compared with a 3 chip DV cam.

April 9th, 2003, 07:51 PM	#4
Steve Bell New Boot Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 22	Steve Mullen or anyone who was able to check out the camera well at NAB: Is the increase in quality about the same between PDX10 (16:9) and DVX100 (progressive, anamorphic adapter) as between HD10 and Varicam 27F, if we would have plenty of light. If not, compare it somehow to these cameras, or other ones.

April 11th, 2003, 03:36 AM	#7
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	No, the PDX10 shoots "HD-ready."

April 11th, 2003, 11:18 PM	#10
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Look what John Jackman just wrote on the dv.com camera forum: As to the JVC camera, I don't regard MPEG II as a serious acquisition format. It was and is a distribution format, but has innumerable shortcomings for origination. John Jackman

April 11th, 2003, 11:32 PM	#11
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	The Final Word for now???? <<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Look what John Jackman just wrote on the dv.com camera forum: As to the JVC camera, I don't regard MPEG II as a serious acquisition format. It was and is a distribution format, but has innumerable shortcomings for origination. John Jackman -->>> I think we have to wait until it comes out and we can all test it. I'm thinking if I can't demo it all, and if the HD-300000 D-VHS deck returns to stores, I may just buy the camera, deck and an HDTV and test it myself. I'll write my thoughts (whether I buy and return or demo) and reviews here, plus I'll post pictures at a temporary website I'll set up soon.

April 12th, 2003, 03:35 AM	#12
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Thanks Heath. Personally, I'm excited about consumer/prosumer HD, but I've never been excited about MPEG2 based cams. Like you say, let's wait and see.

April 12th, 2003, 10:27 AM	#13
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I agree; maybe someone else will either make MPEG2 good or go for a different acquisition format altogether. Only a month away! heath <<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Thanks Heath. Personally, I'm excited about consumer/prosumer HD, but I've never been excited about MPEG2 based cams. Like you say, let's wait and see. -->>>