Would you rather...

Michael Maier · November 17th, 2005, 12:17 PM

Steve, if you are not talking about a prosumer type of lens like the ones in the PD170/DVX100a/HVX200 when you suggested an AF lens for a $5,000 camera, so what are you talking about? I hope you don't mean the extremely expensive Broadcast style special lenses with AF and IS. Because if you do, you are even more off than I initially thought. A lens like that, being HD capable and all, would cost way more than the 13x wide angle. Most likely the double. Not a realistic thing for a $5,000 camera. Might as well ask them why don’t we have 4:4:4 uncompressed HD recording on board.

Steve Mullen · November 17th, 2005, 02:03 PM

All I said was: " It's now clear to me that JVC needs one of the new AF HD lenes."

I never said one was available because I know it's not. I also said the HD100 needs more sensitivity for ENG work. I also know the HD100 won't have that either.

I even said "... and here I hope I don't start another war ..." but some folks just can't resist jumping in after not reading the words "new AF lenes" and making assumptions about "consumer" and "servo." By doing so, it gave them an excuse to start an argument with a comment "Oh my lord. No, it needs operators who practice focus skills."

Wouldn't have been a lot more reasonable to ask "what are these new lenses? Do they use servo manual control?"

But no -- asking questions seems to be far less fun for some than jumping in with remarks that had no relation to the topic which was "for ENG should I go Z1 or HD100."

My answer was on this topic. And I stand by it. The Z1 AF is a very strong positive for ENG. And, LCD and VF are not adequate for HD focusing because of their low rez. The Sony solution is far smarter because it deals with the lack of LCD resolution. And, yes, I would like one of the Canon's AF lenses for the HD100."

Worse, even with clarification of how these AF lenes work, the diatribe about AF and servo continues. Have fun beating a strawman.

Bill Pryor · November 17th, 2005, 03:55 PM

As to the original question...it's a difficult decision. My first inclination might be to pick the JVC because it is a shoulder mount camera and has most controls positioned where they should be. On the other hand, it's the first batch of a brand new camera. The Z1, I think, could be considered second generation because the FX1 was on the market first, and perhaps Sony jumped on any early issues. Or not, that's just speculation on my part.

Assuming both cameras turn out pretty good images for their price range, then it gets down to questions of reliability, what's comfortable for you, and what type of shooting you will be doing now and in the near future.

If you do a lot of hand-held shooting, then I'd advise strongly on some kind of detachable shoulder mount if you get the Sony. It's difficult for me to hand hold a "handycam" type camera for long periods.

This is a wishy-washy answer, because it's not really all that black and white to me. My leanings would be toward the JVC because of functionality. I'm much more comfortable with professional type cameras than the others. As to the focusing issue, I have had trouble with JVC low res viewfinders in the past on their SD cameras. I guess that's what the focus assist is for. Sony has something similar in that it doubles the size of the middle of the image in your VF, or something along those lines.

I've seen some really, really nice footage from a couple of the Z1 cameras, and I've yet to see anything as good from the JVC. I don't think that's a camera issue--it's more of who's shot the stuff I've seen.

One thing I would do before buying either of them--I would absolutely 100 percent go try both of them out.

Having said that...if that wide angle expensive lens for the JVC dropped down to a couple of thousand bucks or so, then I would most likely go for the JVC.

Jiri Bakala · November 17th, 2005, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

...if that wide angle expensive lens for the JVC dropped down to a couple of thousand bucks or so, then I would most likely go for the JVC.

You don't have to own it, just rent it (or other lenses) when the project/budget requires/allows it. Or go with any of the other micro35/primes whatever combinations, again, as a rental option to the stock lens.

Michael Maier · November 17th, 2005, 05:22 PM

Steve, I see your point. But keep two things in mind . The Z1 AF lens is a prosumer lens, and the HD100 was never marketed to ENG, or it would have an interlaced mode.

Huiy Tang · November 17th, 2005, 06:45 PM

I suppose what I was trying to get at by asking would you rather have a pimped out z1 or a bare bones hd100, is which camera will give me more bang for my buck? I have worked with both cameras and the sony was incredibly easy camera to work with, even the AF was wonderful in run and gun situations. And one battery, even on the low end lasted three times as long as the JVC's largest battery (excluding the anton bauer and idx batteries, which would be a hefty financial investment.) The lenses are the worst of two evils. The JVC is soft and breaths way too much, but you can get in nice and tight, and I agree with Steve that the View Finder and LCD Screen suck. On the other hand the sony lens is very limited as well, tough to achieve a rack focus at times, and you need to be up close and personal to get good shots. Don't use it in the back of an auditorium if you want close ups of whats happening on the stage. The view finder and lcd ont the z1 are far superior as well. For the money I can pimp the camera out with plenty of accessories. But the shoulder mount for the z1 makes no sense, as it only makes the camera that much more front heavy. I interview a lot of celebrities and notable people, and showing up with the z1 sucks, but when you only have 5 minutes with someone, it's the convenience that counts. However, I don't know if press agents are going to put you at the top of the interview list if you look like a bush league operation showing up with the z1 in hand. Shoulder mount or no shoulder mount. Huzzzahhhh....I have to spend around $7000.00 before my companies year end and don't know which camera to invest in. I owned the z1 and returned it because it was plagued with issues. I hoped that JVC would have ponied up and correct the cameras problems and was led to believe that they would have by a JVC rep. Despite what has been reported on the forums. These forums (though often speculative) are a more reliable source for info than even hearing it from the horses mouth. Sad really. Back to my point...Pimped Out z1 or basic hd100 package????

Huiy Tang · November 17th, 2005, 06:49 PM

over the past Sony has been able to win over it seems much more customer loyalty by providing A+ customer service, and reliable gear. I am afraid that if I buy into the JVC and the huge investment that will be required to make the camera as versatile as I need it that I may end up with egg on my face. Do I make the risk to invest in the slicker, and more upgradable camera for the long haul? or do I settle for the old reliable which will make me happy at least for the interm. The way I see it a camera is a 4 to 6 year investment. Hopefully six in this case with the advent of the firestore drives.

Thoughts-feedback are more than welcome????

Stephen L. Noe · November 17th, 2005, 07:02 PM

OK,

Do you already own some of the accessories that you've listed you'd purchase with a Z1?

Tommy James · November 17th, 2005, 08:30 PM

Actually the The JVC HD100 has been marketed extensively for ENG applications. On JVCs website you see a barage of photos of news cameramen using this camera. Of course you can only record 30 frames per secound but does this mean the camera cannot deliver the live look ? Well yes and no. As far as spatial resolution is concerned the camera will have a live look like you are really there in person which is good for news but its temporal resolution gives it the film look which is not so good for news. At any rate its a welcome improvement over 480i. For years up until the late 1970s news was captured using 16mm film cameras at low temporal rates. So for the 720p networks this camera may be a good choice for ENG and remember for tethered operations 720p60 can be captured for a price.

Steve Mullen · November 17th, 2005, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy James

Of course you can only record 30 frames per secound but does this mean the camera cannot deliver the live look ? Well yes and no. As far as spatial resolution is concerned the camera will have a live look like you are really there in person which is good for news but its temporal resolution gives it the film look which is not so good for news.

After the first gen 720p30 I too thought interlace was necessary. But with the camera shooting 60p and the Motion Filter engaged I doubt anyone is going to see it as "worse" than 60i. Perhaps, "diffferent" -- at worst.

Plus stills are wonderful.

Marty Baggen · November 18th, 2005, 12:55 AM

Steve... how do stills shot with the motion filter look? Is there any difference between those, and still used from footage with the filter off?

Steve Mullen · November 18th, 2005, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marty Baggen

Steve... how do stills shot with the motion filter look? Is there any difference between those, and still used from footage with the filter off?

The difference will be motion blur in proportion to the amount and speed of movement.

I'll run some tests -- although its hard to think of some continous motion.

Barry Green · November 18th, 2005, 02:51 PM

The motion smoothing filter shots will have a double-image on them. You definitely don't want to be taking stills from anything shot with motion-smoothing on.

November 17th, 2005, 02:03 PM	#17
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	All I said was: " It's now clear to me that JVC needs one of the new AF HD lenes." I never said one was available because I know it's not. I also said the HD100 needs more sensitivity for ENG work. I also know the HD100 won't have that either. I even said "... and here I hope I don't start another war ..." but some folks just can't resist jumping in after not reading the words "new AF lenes" and making assumptions about "consumer" and "servo." By doing so, it gave them an excuse to start an argument with a comment "Oh my lord. No, it needs operators who practice focus skills." Wouldn't have been a lot more reasonable to ask "what are these new lenses? Do they use servo manual control?" But no -- asking questions seems to be far less fun for some than jumping in with remarks that had no relation to the topic which was "for ENG should I go Z1 or HD100." My answer was on this topic. And I stand by it. The Z1 AF is a very strong positive for ENG. And, LCD and VF are not adequate for HD focusing because of their low rez. The Sony solution is far smarter because it deals with the lack of LCD resolution. And, yes, I would like one of the Canon's AF lenses for the HD100." Worse, even with clarification of how these AF lenes work, the diatribe about AF and servo continues. Have fun beating a strawman. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

November 17th, 2005, 06:45 PM	#21
Huiy Tang Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 37	Thanks for your responses I suppose what I was trying to get at by asking would you rather have a pimped out z1 or a bare bones hd100, is which camera will give me more bang for my buck? I have worked with both cameras and the sony was incredibly easy camera to work with, even the AF was wonderful in run and gun situations. And one battery, even on the low end lasted three times as long as the JVC's largest battery (excluding the anton bauer and idx batteries, which would be a hefty financial investment.) The lenses are the worst of two evils. The JVC is soft and breaths way too much, but you can get in nice and tight, and I agree with Steve that the View Finder and LCD Screen suck. On the other hand the sony lens is very limited as well, tough to achieve a rack focus at times, and you need to be up close and personal to get good shots. Don't use it in the back of an auditorium if you want close ups of whats happening on the stage. The view finder and lcd ont the z1 are far superior as well. For the money I can pimp the camera out with plenty of accessories. But the shoulder mount for the z1 makes no sense, as it only makes the camera that much more front heavy. I interview a lot of celebrities and notable people, and showing up with the z1 sucks, but when you only have 5 minutes with someone, it's the convenience that counts. However, I don't know if press agents are going to put you at the top of the interview list if you look like a bush league operation showing up with the z1 in hand. Shoulder mount or no shoulder mount. Huzzzahhhh....I have to spend around $7000.00 before my companies year end and don't know which camera to invest in. I owned the z1 and returned it because it was plagued with issues. I hoped that JVC would have ponied up and correct the cameras problems and was led to believe that they would have by a JVC rep. Despite what has been reported on the forums. These forums (though often speculative) are a more reliable source for info than even hearing it from the horses mouth. Sad really. Back to my point...Pimped Out z1 or basic hd100 package????

November 17th, 2005, 06:49 PM	#22
Huiy Tang Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 37	My other beef... over the past Sony has been able to win over it seems much more customer loyalty by providing A+ customer service, and reliable gear. I am afraid that if I buy into the JVC and the huge investment that will be required to make the camera as versatile as I need it that I may end up with egg on my face. Do I make the risk to invest in the slicker, and more upgradable camera for the long haul? or do I settle for the old reliable which will make me happy at least for the interm. The way I see it a camera is a 4 to 6 year investment. Hopefully six in this case with the advent of the firestore drives. Thoughts-feedback are more than welcome????

November 17th, 2005, 12:17 PM	#16
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	Steve, if you are not talking about a prosumer type of lens like the ones in the PD170/DVX100a/HVX200 when you suggested an AF lens for a $5,000 camera, so what are you talking about? I hope you don't mean the extremely expensive Broadcast style special lenses with AF and IS. Because if you do, you are even more off than I initially thought. A lens like that, being HD capable and all, would cost way more than the 13x wide angle. Most likely the double. Not a realistic thing for a $5,000 camera. Might as well ask them why don’t we have 4:4:4 uncompressed HD recording on board.

November 17th, 2005, 03:55 PM	#18
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	As to the original question...it's a difficult decision. My first inclination might be to pick the JVC because it is a shoulder mount camera and has most controls positioned where they should be. On the other hand, it's the first batch of a brand new camera. The Z1, I think, could be considered second generation because the FX1 was on the market first, and perhaps Sony jumped on any early issues. Or not, that's just speculation on my part. Assuming both cameras turn out pretty good images for their price range, then it gets down to questions of reliability, what's comfortable for you, and what type of shooting you will be doing now and in the near future. If you do a lot of hand-held shooting, then I'd advise strongly on some kind of detachable shoulder mount if you get the Sony. It's difficult for me to hand hold a "handycam" type camera for long periods. This is a wishy-washy answer, because it's not really all that black and white to me. My leanings would be toward the JVC because of functionality. I'm much more comfortable with professional type cameras than the others. As to the focusing issue, I have had trouble with JVC low res viewfinders in the past on their SD cameras. I guess that's what the focus assist is for. Sony has something similar in that it doubles the size of the middle of the image in your VF, or something along those lines. I've seen some really, really nice footage from a couple of the Z1 cameras, and I've yet to see anything as good from the JVC. I don't think that's a camera issue--it's more of who's shot the stuff I've seen. One thing I would do before buying either of them--I would absolutely 100 percent go try both of them out. Having said that...if that wide angle expensive lens for the JVC dropped down to a couple of thousand bucks or so, then I would most likely go for the JVC.

November 17th, 2005, 05:22 PM	#20
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	Steve, I see your point. But keep two things in mind . The Z1 AF lens is a prosumer lens, and the HD100 was never marketed to ENG, or it would have an interlaced mode.

November 17th, 2005, 07:02 PM	#23
Stephen L. Noe Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,214	OK, Do you already own some of the accessories that you've listed you'd purchase with a Z1?

November 17th, 2005, 08:30 PM	#24
Tommy James suspended -- contact admin Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 214	Actually the The JVC HD100 has been marketed extensively for ENG applications. On JVCs website you see a barage of photos of news cameramen using this camera. Of course you can only record 30 frames per secound but does this mean the camera cannot deliver the live look ? Well yes and no. As far as spatial resolution is concerned the camera will have a live look like you are really there in person which is good for news but its temporal resolution gives it the film look which is not so good for news. At any rate its a welcome improvement over 480i. For years up until the late 1970s news was captured using 16mm film cameras at low temporal rates. So for the 720p networks this camera may be a good choice for ENG and remember for tethered operations 720p60 can be captured for a price.

November 18th, 2005, 12:55 AM	#26
Marty Baggen Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: monroe, or Posts: 572	Steve... how do stills shot with the motion filter look? Is there any difference between those, and still used from footage with the filter off?

November 18th, 2005, 02:51 PM	#28
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	The motion smoothing filter shots will have a double-image on them. You definitely don't want to be taking stills from anything shot with motion-smoothing on.