Side by side test HD101, Z1, HC1, HDX400

[Mikael Widerberg]

I have orderd the HD101, but I am starting to get worried. The problems with the picture seemes to be the same as in the posted threads on this forum.

It doesent even hold up against the one chip HC1!!

[Joe Carney]

Seems to be some difference between what was shown at NAB and what people are experiencing in the field. I hope someone from JVC steps up and addresses this.

[Steve Mullen]

"HD101 was tested in 720/25p and converted to 1080/25p."

HOW -- in camera? And WHY? You should be feeding 720p60 into your monitor letting it do any scaling. And, WHAT display?

"At normal lighting levels the color was less rich, more muted."

SOME might consider this an advantage. This same complaint was raised against the first JVC HDVs, and while true, many of us now prefer this "Non Sony" look.

"At +18 dB gain the picture color was not uniform, with more red noise on one side (with the lens capped)."

WITH a cap on there was no "picture" so a silly test, IMHO.

There was chroma distortion at low light. AM or PM noise?

"The camera's low light performance was ... not as good as on Z1."

We expect ANY 3 CCD progressive camera to be 6dB less sensitive than a 3 CCD interlace camera.

Have to wonder if JVC isn't dumping the first factory run in Europe which could account for nothing being shown in the USA.

[Chris Hurd]

To me it proves only that a person can conclude anything they want when posting to the web from behind a nameless, anonymous presence. I would caution interested folks to withold judgement until we run our own formal, organized comparisons here at (H)DV Info Net.

[Rodolfo Carrara]

Hi,
I think it was not a very impartial test. Mikael, I'm going to order one so we'll can cry together. But the most important internet shop in Italy (they're very competent and they have the first stock of the cam) in a hd100E first look says:
http://www.adcom.it/visnew.php?id=76
I translate (syntesis):
1) The video quality it's exceptional.
2) The HDV e DV sensibility it's above Sony HVR-Z1E. (sic!).
3) A good director of photo can do what he wants live with the manual controls of the cam (and an HD monitor).
4) Exposure latitude (dynamical) above our expectations.
5) The HDV 720p records (with MPeg2 4:2:0) keeps one's very good resolution also with speed cam movements.
6) In vtr BR-HD50E: play without drops.
Ok, ok, it's only a first look, they sell it ( yet also the sony Z1) but the 2&5 points are interesting also 'cause in june the Adcom organized a comparison with the beta-press HD100vsHVR Z1E and the result was on the contrary.
I'll buy in Italy, you can find it from 4500€ without tax.
Sorry for my Frankenstein english, I live near him.

[Joe Carney]

Thats been my contention on this and other boards. JVC hasn't gotten this camera into pro reviewers hands, at least not anyone I've heard of. Even a few days before release would have great.
So all we hear is disapointment and worry and ignorance. Bad PR by JVC IMHO. But I'm not passing judgement until a qualified review comes around.

[Scott Webster]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

"HD101 was tested in 720/25p and converted to 1080/25p."

HOW -- in camera? And WHY? You should be feeding 720p60 into your monitor letting it do any scaling. And, WHAT display?

"At normal lighting levels the color was less rich, more muted."

SOME might consider this an advantage. This same complaint was raised against the first JVC HDVs, and while true, many of us now prefer this "Non Sony" look.

"At +18 dB gain the picture color was not uniform, with more red noise on one side (with the lens capped)."

WITH a cap on there was no "picture" so a silly test, IMHO.

There was chroma distortion at low light. AM or PM noise?

"The camera's low light performance was ... not as good as on Z1."

We expect ANY 3 CCD progressive camera to be 6dB less sensitive than a 3 CCD interlace camera.

Have to wonder if JVC isn't dumping the first factory run in Europe which could account for nothing being shown in the USA.

I would have to say I would be more than upset if Australasia and Europe were the dumping ground for any pre-production ccds before the US release!

Either that or they working right up to the US release date to get the reported issues so far, right. Have you had a US release date?

"At +18 dB gain the picture color was not uniform, with more red noise on one side (with the lens capped)."

WITH a cap on there was no "picture" so a silly test, IMHO.

The red noise is in the blacked out VF and more visable on one side than the other. My concern is this is the 4th report of this. And I would like to know what effect this has on the 'normal picture'.

This is of course taking into account that it was a legitimate review.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Scott Webster

Either that or they working right up to the US release date to get the reported issues so far, right. Have you had a US release date?

I was talking with Tim Tokita, the General Manager of Product Engineering for JVC today, about the HD100. I asked him about a delivery date for the US, and he repeated "August." So no specific date yet, but at least August beats the "September" quote we've been hearing from resellers.

A few other things -- he said that the analog output is full color resolution, prior to color decimation. Should mean that for studio applications where you have the hardware and ability to capture 720/60p footage uncompressed, you should get excellent color keys.

Also, about "motion blur" -- you don't see the effect in the viewfinder! Or on the monitor! If you put on the "motion blur" filter, you're effectively shooting without knowing what you're getting -- you'd have to stop and rewind the tape and play it back to see what it looks like.

Also, to forever put to rest anybody's hopes -- there is not, and will not, and never will be, 60p (or 50p) out the firewire port of the HD100. Not possible, not gonna happen.

Also, I asked about the modification for HD-SDI that replaces the tape drive. He said it would be a different camera model with *very* limited applicability. It would be only for locked-down studio situations, basically. No ability to record whatsoever; it would be strictly for a live camera.

He also confirmed that the US version would have the 25p frame rate. So all HD100-series cameras in all worldwide territories shoot 720p at 24, 25, and 30fps. They also all shoot 480/60p and 576/50p. However, they do not share PAL/NTSC. US cameras shoot standard-def in NTSC; European/Australian cameras shoot standard-def in PAL. There is no PAL/NTSC switchability.

He also mentioned that there may be an announcement about a PAL/NTSC switchable version of the HD100 made in a few months. It would be a more expensive camera, but it would be the same basic camera but with PAL and NTSC capability in both.

Let's see... what else... oh -- he said the 19 megabit data rate leaves the PCM audio tracks untouched. So some day, in some future product (but NOT the HD100 or BR50 deck!) they could make a 720p HDV camera that included uncompressed audio. Repeat, this will not now nor ever apply to the HD100, but some future product could.

Oh, and get this -- the HD7000U, the 2/3" shoulder-mount cam, will also support 1080i. But it will *not* be HDV 1080i. They are not going to make it compatible with Sony HDV. It will have 720p HDV compatibility, but not 1080i HDV. He didn't say specifically why; might be some licensing thing. But they want to do 1080 anyway. So they'll come up with their own format. And, while they're at it, he said they will use 1920x1080 (not 1440x1080)! And maybe they'll use a higher bitrate. And maybe they'll use a higher profile level in MPEG -- as in, specifically, they may use 4:2:2. And HDV/1080i doesn't support progressive, but their version will.

So it looks like the already-fragmented HDV format is about to be splintered again (June 2006 at last rumor date) but hey, if you're gonna splinter, what a way to splinter! 3-CMOS 2/3" camera shooting 1920x1080 at 4:2:2 at both interlaced and progressive frame rates...

Some footage from the US version will be sent to Chris tomorrow.

[David Slingerland]

I am currently testing the jvc gy-100 and comparing it to my old xl1.
I have a jvc multiformat monitor and when comparing the footage as shot in HD it of course blows away the xl1. What a picture!!
But if i put the cam on pal 50i there is hardly any difference...that is a disappointment to me, I would have thought that the quality of the fujinon glass would be better then the standard xl1 lens. Maybe you have better or different results? I would be very interested in a good comparison test from a credible source...

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Scott Webster

I would have to say I would be more than upset if Australasia and Europe were the dumping ground for any pre-production ccds before the US release!

The red noise is in the blacked out VF and more visable on one side than the other. My concern is this is the 4th report of this. And I would like to know what effect this has on the 'normal picture'.

Yes, its the pix that's important. But I'll bet it is fixed in the NTSC models.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Also, about "motion blur" -- you don't see the effect in the viewfinder! Or on the monitor! If you put on the "motion blur" filter, you're effectively shooting without knowing what you're getting -- you'd have to stop and rewind the tape and play it back to see what it looks like.

We shoot with B&W viewfinders without seeing how colors look on tape -- nothing new. Simply, put you really must use the filter in 25p/30p. And, I wouldn't in 24p/25p going to film. It's not something you turn on and off.

Let's see... what else... oh -- he said the 19 megabit data rate leaves the PCM audio tracks untouched. So some day, in some future product (but NOT the HD100 or BR50 deck!) they could make a 720p HDV camera that included uncompressed audio. Repeat, this will not now nor ever apply to the HD100, but some future product could.

Interesting, since I think the circuit is there. They were debating turning it on.

Oh, and get this -- the HD7000U, the 2/3" shoulder-mount cam, will also support 1080i. But it will *not* be HDV 1080i. They are not going to make it compatible with Sony HDV. And, while they're at it, he said they will use 1920x1080 (not 1440x1080)! And maybe they'll use a higher bitrate. And maybe they'll use a higher profile level in MPEG -- as in, specifically, they may use 4:2:2. And HDV/1080i doesn't support progressive, but their version will.

Yes -- what has been called ProHD EX. At least 36Mbps to disk.

[Mikael Widerberg]

Originally Posted by David Slingerland

I am currently testing the jvc gy-100 and comparing it to my old xl1.
I have a jvc multiformat monitor and when comparing the footage as shot in HD it of course blows away the xl1. What a picture!!
But if i put the cam on pal 50i there is hardly any difference...that is a disappointment to me, I would have thought that the quality of the fujinon glass would be better then the standard xl1 lens. Maybe you have better or different results? I would be very interested in a good comparison test from a credible source...

If this above is true.


Ops, the JVC can not even beat the old xl1 in SD.
Is it the lens or is it the CCD:s. Ither way its better if it is the CCD:s, then I just have to by a new camera instead of the 10000 dollar 13x zoom lens.

JVC must be kidding!

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by David Slingerland

I am currently testing the jvc gy-100 and comparing it to my old xl1.
I have a jvc multiformat monitor and when comparing the footage as shot in HD it of course blows away the xl1. What a picture!!
But if i put the cam on pal 50i there is hardly any difference...that is a disappointment to me, I would have thought that the quality of the fujinon glass would be better then the standard xl1 lens. Maybe you have better or different results? I would be very interested in a good comparison test from a credible source...

I think many folks underestimate the quality of glass that Canon provides. Even the original 16X IS auto lens that the XL-1 came with was rated at over 600 lines of resolution while the format only calls for a max of around 570.

So David, your statement just goes to show you that the format is the limiting factor to picture quality and not the glass in the SD comparison you mentioned above. The Fujinon lens may be better glass by necessity for HD, but that difference will be masked by SD limitations.

regards,

-gb-

[David Slingerland]

There are other reasons why the lens is better, its a manual lens with proper zoom control, it has all the features professional lenses have. Meaning: RET button on the right place, possibility to check what the auto iris would do either continual or as a push button. It has a manual macro function that works the same way as on very expensive broadcast lenses and most of all : proper markings on the lens and a good feel when turning the rings...not top quality but like any good industrial lens.
I can't separately judge the lens compared to the canon xl1 lens. But that also does not interest me..I want to know what the picture is like compared to my old XL1. So far the SD package is disappointing to say the least. I will try to load some footage in to fcp 5 and then down convert it to sd and will then compare it to the footage of the canon xl1. That should give a good impression how the camera actually holds up to canon

[David Slingerland]

Checking the menu there are several option (pal-version) 25 and 50 HD and the frame rate can be ntsc 30/60 or 25/50 for pal but there is also 24?? Its obviously ntsc..It does not say so on the manual but my multiformat jvc monitor calls it that, maybe I am missing the point here.... The camera is very much ntsc/pal switchable except for when you shoot in DV....Then it is a pal camera...
I tried the smooth motion on and of on 25p or 24p but could not notice any less motion blur or more when switched off. It is quit possible that there is but then it must be very very subtle...