GY-HD Series is Dying. GY-HM Replace It? I Don't think so...

[Burk Webb]

I'm having a similar experience to Ted's. I was going to buy a Letus adapter for my HD100 but the low light issue was going to be a real problem for an upcoming project. I had heard about the Canon 5D and checked one out for a day. I was really blown away with the footage.

Got a 7D as soon as they came out and it's been having a pretty huge impact on my work. Clients are responding to the footage in a way they never did with the HD100 and they are seeking me out because of my work with DSLR's.

I've really liked my HD100. I wanted to love it but it was just so needy..... dead pixels, split screen, constant back focus checks, chroma fringing, tape drop outs...

I still think it's the best looking of the early HDV cams, by far the best ergonomics. After tasting the forbidden DSLR fruit though - I just can't go back to light hungry 1/3 inch sensors and zoom lenses.

[Claude Mangold]

The reason I am working with this camera is the truly progressive, totally cinelike feel it gives. I have not to this day seen anything like it - unless it's on film, of course. JVC has a shutter 'system' which truly emulates the camera gate, sweeping across, not interpolating etc as other cameras do. The result is film, especially in 24p.

Any lens and adapter option I want I can get. Any format (16/9, widescreen, 35, 16, 1/3, even 3-D), and HDSDI out provides sufficient quality. You guys have worked up wonderful scene files.

Also, the sensor has a few wonderful qualities. Some of them you see when you shoot a naked light bulb agains a black background. Swing the bulb - amazing!

Blacks are wonderful once the settings are right, rich, deep, hardly ever loosing detail.

Shortcomings ? Sure: a lousy viewfinder and even poorer LCD. Some imaging problems. A standard lens with super-nasty breathing . A flimsy FW port. But these are all things we can work around easily, especially filmmakers like me.

Plus it's an elegant-looking camera. Do I find better ? Yes, of course, ARRI and Pana have some amazing things, as does Sony. But at xxx-times the cost, and much less readily available. Or you can shoot on film, if you don't mind the workflow. (I often do.)

The story is still out on DSLRs.

I say to JVC: keep up the good work.

[Shaun Roemich]

Speaking of ciné lens adaptors... mine is up for sale.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/private-...ml#post1507606

[Steve Phillipps]

Claude what camera are you using? 200 series or the HM700?
Be nice to know your settings that you're happy with too if you don't mind sharing.
Steve

[Adam Letch]

Indeed I chose the HD251e for all the mentioned reasons, and I believe its a great camera.
I'd like to put a few things out there.
1) How long will a DSLR last with heat generated and shutter life, most pro dslr state around 100 000 cycles guaranteed for their shutters, that makes 66.66hours of shooting at 25p, half that at 50p.
2) Being that they are stills cameras with a video ability, you guys who have used dlsrs as video cameras, how do they go with heat dissapation etc?

Indeed I think even a native internal codec of 35mbps 4:2:0 or 50mbps 4:2:2 should be something easily obtainable in this day and age, and the only other thing to ensure a long life for JVC would be to go at least 1/2 inch on ccds. And to stick with CCDs, as the negatives with CMOS to me isn't worth the lower noise.

The one thing in a run and gun / doco / wedding that one always cries for is more sensitivity and less noise. Improved codec and 4:2:2 will improve that a bit, but I think unless a larger chip is sourced that won't happen. In fact, even more so than the noise issue is the need for greater exposure latitude.

Another member of this forum went from the HD110 to the Panasonic HPX (300 or 500 can't remember) and the one thing he said is the light sensitivity is what really makes it worth the change. I know I've shot rodeo's at night under tungsten lighting and had to lower my shutter speed to 1/25 and 1/12 just to get shots of dull noisy footage.

For those who can't control the lighting environment this would make all the difference. And I personally don't think 720p is dead, so increase the chipsize to 1/2inch, but don't make it a true 1080p as you'll still get the pixel cramming problem which creates noise, keep the 1080i pixel shifting output if need be, but lets crush the noise and lighting issue for once and all.

I'll get back into my box now, sorry need coffee!

[Burk Webb]

66 hours! No wonder they're so cheap!

I kid, sorry. That 100,000 number is for the mechanical shutter used when taking a still photo. In video mode the electronic shutter works the same as any other CMOS video camera.

I have heard of DSLR's overheating but it doesn't seem to be a consistent problem. I have not had it happen to me (knock on wood).

[William Hohauser]

I'm still using a HD100 and frequently pair it up with HM700s in multi-camera shoots. The HD100 image still holds up great.

The last concert I did used 2 rented HD100s (Technisphere in NYC still rents them), 1 HM700 that came with the cameraperson and my HD100. It was during a terrible blizzard and one cameraman was snowed in so the HM700 got put into a static wide shot and was started 4 minutes before the concert began. That was a life saver as we didn't have anyone trustworthy who could switch tapes if it was another HD100.

Years ago a pro could have a 20/30 year old 16mm rig and no-one would question using it. These days we are convinced that every 3 to 4 years major equipment needs to be replaced. That said, along with other users, I would like to see a hybrid HD/HM, simultaneous built-in tape and SD chip recording. Perhaps the tape remains HDV but we could have the choice of XDCam EX on the chip. Not to make it too Apple-centric but I could use a ProRes recording option available by FireWire to a standard off the shelf hard drive.

[Chad Haufschild]

Claude:
100% agree with your entire post. I’m assuming you’re using some version of the HD250 from the details you mention. The cost for performance ratio on this rig is truly a killer deal, no doubt.

So, my question to you as a fellow filmmaker is this. What do you want from JVC in their next incarnation in the ProHD line up? You have to have some wants/wishes/dreams. What are they?

Adam:
Spot on, man. Spot on... More color! More data! Less noise!

I totally agree with you when it comes to 720p. 1080 alone just doesn’t offer much more. I jacked into a 70” 1080p plasma (component) with some football footage shot at the local university after a broadcast engineer buddy of mine wanted to test my HD250 before buying a couple for his HD implementation. What did he and his his engineering minions say when they saw it? “Beautiful...”

William:
What a great point. Why do we feel like we have to upgrade so often? My last upgrade was from SD to HD. That's a pretty big leap. I guess that's what my real consideration is. What is a big enough deal for me to drop the cash again? Tapeless isn't enough. Tapeless to a more robust codec isn't enough. Add 1080, still isn't enough. I guess I'm back to what Adam mentioned... More color! More data! Less noise!

Excellent posts, everybody. Thanks!

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

i shot a movie with loads of compositing and heavy color correction - all in native HDV, and the results, on DVD, look stunning on 56 inch LCD Full HD Screen. And I didn't use an adaptor - just the stock lens.

What I didn't like:
1. Audio was way to compressed to be top notch.
2. It's too front heavy, especially with GMP batteries - which are better than IDX or AB but more light weight.
3. The LCD is a huge pain in the a**.

What would I like to see? An adapter built in! Why not make a camera with a built in PL mount? This with an appropriate sensor and a little more data going in. The camera drinks light like a rocket drinks fuel, so what difference is it going to make anyway? This with fantastic sound and a JVC battery that is heavy and lasts longer! What more could one ask for?

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Sareesh Sudhakaran

Why not make a camera with a built in PL mount? This with an appropriate sensor and a little more data going in. The camera drinks light like a rocket drinks fuel, so what difference is it going to make anyway?

The only problem is only a couple of hundred would ever be sold, meaning the amortized cost of research and development would be HUGE and never recouped. Development would have to be on the scale of a RED or other large sensor, PL mount camera and it has been suggested that RED is having some issues with getting the next generation to market. Not saying JVC can't, just saying that given that a LARGE number of digital cinematographers on here seem to think that $5000 is "WAY too much" to pay for a camera, I'm just not sure how interested I would be as a manufacturer in taking THAT risk right now. If it was part of ongoing R&D, that's a no brainer but a new project JUST for a large sensor PL mount camera that might never break even? Pass.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

What is happening is very simple; it's the transition from tape-based recording to file-based (tapeless) recording.

Observe the transition:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-gy-h...iewfinder.html

The new HM790 is basically the tapeless version of the HD250.

To the original poster: ProHD is alive and well.