Why is the hd100 worth so little used?

Guy Barwood · March 13th, 2007, 05:06 AM

It seems to me that JVC as a brand name just doesn't have the 2nd hand market value that other brands like Sony and Canon have. It has little to do with the quality of value of the product, just peoples inclinations to bigger brand names.

When I buy JVC products I accept up front that I will not expect to sell it second hand for anything what it is worth. Therefore I buy it planning to run it into the ground.

Jonathan Nelson · March 13th, 2007, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

It seems to me that JVC as a brand name just doesn't have the 2nd hand market value that other brands like Sony and Canon have. It has little to do with the quality of value of the product, just peoples inclinations to bigger brand names.

When I buy JVC products I accept up front that I will not expect to sell it second hand for anything what it is worth. Therefore I buy it planning to run it into the ground.

It's true, people care more about brands/trends than they do actual quality. With that in mind, I am going to start calling my hd100 "Al" from now on, lol.

The good thing is I think the JVC is a well built camera and suitable as a trusty companion for years to come. IMO, everything about the JVC is made for the long haul. Everything except maybe the EVF.

The only thing that might dampen it's future versatility is it's lack of speedy HD frame rates. No HD news or reality shows for the hd100, unless you have some kind of external analog digitizer.

Werner Wesp · March 14th, 2007, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Nelson

Pretty much what you said, I feel the issue with auction sites such as ebay is the demographic is more consumer/prosumer users. My only guess, the hd100 is too hard core for faint of heart (even though I find it really easy and I am a complete newb!)

I think this is part of the reason. How much video professionals or filmmakers shop on eBay or other 2bd hand markets? probably not that much. It might just not be the right demographic. on the other hand, for $1800 less, they have no warranty, battery life that has gone down already, etc... It might have the same value to you as when it was new, but for buyers it hasn't. They're not the first owner and can you really trust anyone that sells you anything 2nd hand? (sometimes you can, but sometimes you can't...)

Scott Jaco · March 14th, 2007, 02:54 AM

I don't think it has anything really to do with the HD110. The differences just aren't big enough to make the HD100 "old". In every way that really matters, it's the same exact camera.

The market is now currently flooded with HD100's. Everybody's brother owns one it seems. The good news is that the camera won't become obsolete for quite a while. The downside is that the HD100 no longer has the "wow" factor since it's becoming an industry standard workhorse. It's almost as common as a PD-150, and that is why the value has dropped.

Heath McKnight · March 18th, 2007, 05:16 PM

It's like the DVX100 when the "A" came out a year later with more features and much better audio capabilities in 24p modes. My friend couldn't sell his DVX100 in 2004 (two years old) because the A was so popular.

heath

Greg Corke · March 18th, 2007, 06:18 PM

Keep the camera mate and do something with it.

All these new HDV cameras are a revalation whether first generation or some of the more recent models.

I sometimes wish there was a little less focus on the the subtle nuances of these cameras as though these factors are somehow going to make a vast difference.

I admit that to the trained there are differences but to the average viewer you might as well be talking another language. I like to think of it as more of a means to an end rather than an end in itself.

G

Heath McKnight · March 18th, 2007, 06:23 PM

Good point, too--stick with what you've got! It's a great camera, nonetheless.

heath

Jonathan Nelson · March 19th, 2007, 12:48 AM

I am going to keep the hd100. I actually do not feel that it is outdated at all.

That is why I am going to keep it :)

I hate being behind in the technology.

Either way, the hd100 has already paid for it's self several times over and it still has more dollars to earn. I was just thinking it would be fancy to have all hd200(s) instead of just the one. I rather keep it than take such a ridiculous loss.

From this thread, it sounds like it is common for prices to drop and so forth, even in such a small time frame.

I have to say though, other cameras such as the canons really do retain their value pretty well. I wish it was the same with the JVC's.

Greg Corke · March 19th, 2007, 01:43 PM

Glad to hear it mate.

Its going to carry on being a great 'B' camera.

With regard to the canons holding there value, that may be the case but I know which one i'd rather have.

G

Seth Bloombaum · March 20th, 2007, 10:18 AM

As I look at the used market, I am amazed that so many sellers seem to think of equipment as some sort of investment in itself. I don't quite understand the expectation that a used camera would be valued at 75-95% of new.

Nothing personal, but, if the original poster's camera has "has already paid for it's self several times over..." then he has done well with it. Congrats.

When I look at purchasing used (and I buy perhaps half of my gear used) the first thing I think about is ***warranty***. This applies so much more to a camera than almost any piece of gear because of the delicacy of the tape transport. Even if your camera has only 25 drum hours on it, the transport could go out tomorrow, requiring the purchaser to spend hundreds and lose use of the camera for weeks.

Second is trust. If I'm on ebay, I trust less and am willing to spend less. On DVInfo classifieds, I trust more and am willing to spend more.

Then value. I guess I'm just cheap... but used equipment starts to make sense to me at 50-70% of discount retail. Why risk a private transaction with no returns and no warranty if there aren't substantial savings?

BTW, there's another Sony HVR-Z1 in the local portland craigslist today for $2500. Yet another lying weasel scam artist, no doubt. That scammer just reduced the value of your HD100 another little bit.

March 18th, 2007, 05:16 PM	#20
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	It's like the DVX100 when the "A" came out a year later with more features and much better audio capabilities in 24p modes. My friend couldn't sell his DVX100 in 2004 (two years old) because the A was so popular. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

March 18th, 2007, 06:18 PM	#21
Greg Corke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 245	use it or lose it? Keep the camera mate and do something with it. All these new HDV cameras are a revalation whether first generation or some of the more recent models. I sometimes wish there was a little less focus on the the subtle nuances of these cameras as though these factors are somehow going to make a vast difference. I admit that to the trained there are differences but to the average viewer you might as well be talking another language. I like to think of it as more of a means to an end rather than an end in itself. G

March 18th, 2007, 06:23 PM	#22
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Good point, too--stick with what you've got! It's a great camera, nonetheless. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

March 19th, 2007, 12:48 AM	#23
Jonathan Nelson Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Kingman Arizona Posts: 298	Thanks for all the advice. I am going to keep the hd100. I actually do not feel that it is outdated at all. That is why I am going to keep it :) I hate being behind in the technology. Either way, the hd100 has already paid for it's self several times over and it still has more dollars to earn. I was just thinking it would be fancy to have all hd200(s) instead of just the one. I rather keep it than take such a ridiculous loss. From this thread, it sounds like it is common for prices to drop and so forth, even in such a small time frame. I have to say though, other cameras such as the canons really do retain their value pretty well. I wish it was the same with the JVC's. __________________ Florescent tungsten hovered under cubicle design

March 13th, 2007, 05:06 AM	#16
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	It seems to me that JVC as a brand name just doesn't have the 2nd hand market value that other brands like Sony and Canon have. It has little to do with the quality of value of the product, just peoples inclinations to bigger brand names. When I buy JVC products I accept up front that I will not expect to sell it second hand for anything what it is worth. Therefore I buy it planning to run it into the ground.

March 14th, 2007, 02:54 AM	#19
Scott Jaco Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Sherman Oaks, CA Posts: 471	I don't think it has anything really to do with the HD110. The differences just aren't big enough to make the HD100 "old". In every way that really matters, it's the same exact camera. The market is now currently flooded with HD100's. Everybody's brother owns one it seems. The good news is that the camera won't become obsolete for quite a while. The downside is that the HD100 no longer has the "wow" factor since it's becoming an industry standard workhorse. It's almost as common as a PD-150, and that is why the value has dropped.

March 19th, 2007, 01:43 PM	#24
Greg Corke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 245	Glad to hear it mate. Its going to carry on being a great 'B' camera. With regard to the canons holding there value, that may be the case but I know which one i'd rather have. G

March 20th, 2007, 10:18 AM	#25
Seth Bloombaum Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,420	As I look at the used market, I am amazed that so many sellers seem to think of equipment as some sort of investment in itself. I don't quite understand the expectation that a used camera would be valued at 75-95% of new. Nothing personal, but, if the original poster's camera has "has already paid for it's self several times over..." then he has done well with it. Congrats. When I look at purchasing used (and I buy perhaps half of my gear used) the first thing I think about is *warranty. This applies so much more to a camera than almost any piece of gear because of the delicacy of the tape transport. Even if your camera has only 25 drum hours on it, the transport could go out tomorrow, requiring the purchaser to spend hundreds and lose use of the camera for weeks. Second is trust. If I'm on ebay, I trust less and am willing to spend less. On DVInfo classifieds, I trust more and am willing to spend more. Then value. I guess I'm just cheap... but used equipment starts to make sense to me at 50-70% of discount retail. Why risk a private transaction with no returns and no warranty if there aren't substantial savings? BTW, there's another* Sony HVR-Z1 in the local portland craigslist today for $2500. Yet another lying weasel scam artist, no doubt. That scammer just reduced the value of your HD100 another little bit.