|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
September 29th, 2007, 11:23 AM
|
#1 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: california North and South
Posts: 642
|
Other lens choices for JVC HD110/200/250's
Hello, I've been using my JVC HD110 for 6+ months now. Pretty happy with it. (except the tapes, but that is another thread) The weak link for me is the stock 16x lens. I did go to the JVC seminar a few months ago in SF and saw the 200 series JVC's with the 13x Fujinon lens next to the Pansonic HPX500 with thier stock lens. That 13x Fujinon is a REAL nice lens. It really looked better than the panasonic did with it's STOCK lens. Of course if you put a $8,000 lens on the Pansonic, it would look great too.
Anyway, has anyone had any first hand knowledge of these lenses, or good threads, examples or reviews of them? Fujinon Th17x5BRM $2,999 (how is this compared to the stock lens?) Fujinon 13x $6,500 Fujinon HTs18x4.2BRM-M48 $8,999 CANON 20:1 HD ZOOM LENS $9,000 |
|
|
|
September 29th, 2007, 12:06 PM
|
#2 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,290
|
You're saying the 200 IMAGE looked better than the panasonic's?
I thought the 13x as more expensive than that? |
|
|
|
|
September 29th, 2007, 12:29 PM
|
#3 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Alex, this is one of the most frequently asked questions in this forum. Please search for existing discussions and direct your replies there. Thanks in advance,
|
|
|
|
|
September 29th, 2007, 12:37 PM
|
#4 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: california North and South
Posts: 642
|
Quote:
Fujinon TH13x3.5BRMU $6,599 JVC had about 6 HD200 & 250's there. 1 Panasonic HVX200, 1HPX500, 1 Sony FX1. (no Canon's) All the cameras were pointing at a still life of flowers, books, resolution charts with half dozen spot lights and such illumination. Each camera was plugged into one of thier new Pro LCD HD studio monitors (nice by the way). The JVC's had the 13x Fujinon as well as I believe the 18x Fujinon. I didn't think to look to see if any were the 17x fujinon. There were NO stock 16x for comparison, but I know most of it's short comings. The panasonic had I presume the stock lens. So we were roughly looking at a $10k to $12k JVC vs a $15k Panasonic, and under those conditions the 200s were several times sharper and had a real nice over all image. The HPX500 is a real nice camera however, so P2 fans to get mad. I was reading at DVXurser.com a whole long list of lenses that people are using on the HPX500. So it is likely the stock lens on the $15k isn't the 1st choice anymore than the stock 16x fujinon is for the JVC, but it keeps the price low for entry level on the platform. The Pansonic and JVC 200 series both had good color. I am not sure if the PHX500 was on 720p or 1080p/i or what if any sharpness settings might have been adjusted. JVC reps stated that all the cameras were set to factory defaults, but there were a few of us playing with them so I wont guarantee someone didn't go into the sub menues.. but I didn't see anyone doing that. I did check the 200 I was on, and it was zero'd out. I was mostly looking at the 13x, and it was sweet. If I were doing a paying gig for a week I would seriously rent a 13x for a week. However if the 17x is sharp like the 13x, I'll buy one for $3,000 and keep my 16x as a paperweight. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
