HM700 vs EX3

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

Hi.
I am sorry if this has been posted before, but I couldn`t find any thread on the subject.

I am the proud owner of two HD111s and a Sony EX1. I have been very happy with the XDCam EX codec and the picture quality, but I am now looking to buy a camera with interchangeable lenses and want to sell my EX1 before buying.

I am torn between the EX3 and HM700 as they both seem to be excellent cameras. Does anyone have any suggestions? Has anybody done any comparison tests? I kind of now what I am getting if I buy an EX3 but not so with the JVC.

Thanks.

[Marcello Mazzilli]

I have an HM700. I have some noise problems.. nothing unsolvable with extra light but sure the 1280 CCDs are quite darker than the 1920 CMOS. The workflow (SDHC Cards - Final Cut) is fantastic and cards cost much less than Sony's SxS. I could almost cards only once and keep them as a backup... almost. I quite like the camera itself and my problems up to now have been with lenses I got (JVC Italy gave me the 16x and not the 17x that everybody says are much better). You'll need a 300$ quick release plate to use it on a tripod (Sony's compatible product costs 200$ I think). Remember also that allthough MPEG2 HD you get from this camera is fully compatibile with XDCam is obtained by a JVC processor and not a Sony and so it's not "real" XDCAM. I like the pre-rec function I used with good results on nature documentaries. The LCD screen is very good but very difficult to see in brigh light environnement. If you want to see some footage I shot (compressed) you can find it here (my settings have harder black and brighter colours)

siRoma
AREARISERVATA (top right)
login "hm700" (all small)
Donwload with "right click-save as"

[Colin Rowe]

I would most definately go with the EX3, for its 1/2 CMOS alone. You dont need to spend a fortune on SxS cards now that the MxR adaptors allow the use of cheap SDHC cards in the EX series. The advantage of the HM700 is of course it is a shoulder mount therefore far more comfortable for any extended work without support.

[Rick Bolton]

For many applications the JVC has a big advantage - CCD - no rolling shutter issues.

[Leonard Levy]

It's easy to compare the features between these 2 cameras, but I'm interested in hearing how the pictures compare.

The Ex-1/3 is pretty amazing except for an IR problem sand minor rolling shutter issues with flash. How does the 700 picture compare?

[Rick Bolton]

Leonard - your point is well made.

Having said that - we are somewhat reduced to comparing "specs" until enough units have shipped and used and results posted.

[Steve Gerhart]

after using the sony dsr400 for years now I am hooked on larger CCD chips.
For you photographers it is like comparing ISO 400(1/3 chip) to ISO 200(1/2 chip) to the ultimate ISO 100(2/3 chip). I am watching and waiting for JVC for a 1/2 chip CCD, being a wedding guy, I NEED NO rolling shutter Flash issues

[Brian Standing]

I'm guessing with your ASA comparisons, you're talking about image resolution, and not low-light sensitivity. It is my understanding that larger chips (whether CCD or CMOS) are more sensitive in low light than smaller chips.

I would think, if you're talking about light sensitivity, that you could reverse the scale you described, with 2/3" chips being equivalent to ASA 400, 1/2" chips as ASA 200, and 1/3" chips as ASA 100. Keep in mind that every camera has a different inherent ASA rating, and that this will change depending on whether or not gain is applied.

[Sean Adair]

Originally Posted by Steve Gerhart

after using the sony dsr400 for years now I am hooked on larger CCD chips.
For you photographers it is like comparing ISO 400(1/3 chip) to ISO 200(1/2 chip) to the ultimate ISO 100(2/3 chip). I am watching and waiting for JVC for a 1/2 chip CCD, being a wedding guy, I NEED NO rolling shutter Flash issues

Geez Steve - I sold my gydv500 so cheap...
Honestly, some principles don't hold through technology advances. DOF is the principal factor in image size and often it's your friend (staying in focus)
Light sensitivity & resolution will continue to improve in smaller imagers but what so t change is the cost and bulk of lenses etc for larger systems.
I expect JVC will commit to this standard for awhile building on lenses made for them and existing engineering. I think it's a good niche

[Steve Gerhart]

Originally Posted by Brian Standing

I'm guessing with your ASA comparisons, you're talking about image resolution, and not low-light sensitivity. It is my understanding that larger chips (whether CCD or CMOS) are more sensitive in low light than smaller chips.

I would think, if you're talking about light sensitivity, that you could reverse the scale you described, with 2/3" chips being equivalent to ASA 400, 1/2" chips as ASA 200, and 1/3" chips as ASA 100. Keep in mind that every camera has a different inherent ASA rating, and that this will change depending on whether or not gain is applied.

Hi Brian, I am comparing noise in the image, S/N ratio , 2/3 chips low light performance is outstanding. the biggest race now is how to get higher resolution with lower noise without rolling shutter issue

[Steve Gerhart]

Originally Posted by Sean Adair

Geez Steve - I sold my gydv500 so cheap...
Honestly, some principles don't hold through technology advances. DOF is the principal factor in image size and often it's your friend (staying in focus)
Light sensitivity & resolution will continue to improve in smaller imagers but what so t change is the cost and bulk of lenses etc for larger systems.
I expect JVC will commit to this standard for awhile building on lenses made for them and existing engineering. I think it's a good niche

Hi Sean, The Jvc Chip sets in the X2 thru the 5100 are the best i have ever used in 1/2.
That is why I hope jvc expands to 1/2 inch to HD

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

Thanks for all the input. What I am thinking now is, I already own two HD111s. Wouldn`t it make more sense to buy the HM700 if I also invest in a HZCA13U adapter?
My understanding is that this adapter fits every camera in the ProHD range. As I also own the BR-HD50 deck I could use this as a backup for my recordings as well.

I have tried the EX3 and although the picture quality is amazing I sure didn`t like the form factor. The HM700 looks a lot better.

My two concerns is how the HM700 handles low light and shots indoors as I have yet to try one. Also some of my colleagues from other TV- channels don`t seem to take me seriously when I show up with "just" a JVC-camera. They cannot understand that such a small camera can be any good! I on the other hand know what my JVCs are capable of, and they are right up there, with the other big cameras.

The workflow for the 700 seems great however, as I use FCP.

[Ron Edwards]

LOL...So if the "JVC' label is a problem, remove it, find a nice "SONY" label to replace it, charge alot more money for your work, and claim your cam is a "PROTO TYPE" and you are a "BETA TESTER".....lol.....they will love the workflow and footage shot by the 700..... just kiding !

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

Hi all.
This weekend I had the chance to shoot with an EX3. The images were brilliant as expected, but the camera somewhat ackward to work with, meaning in "shouldermounted" mode. But being able to adjust the grip gave the camera a whole new dimension.

Still, after 6 hours of shooting straight ( live event for National TV ) I was kind of fatigued backwise. Felt a little like my old Canon XL1, a bit frontheavy.

I found myself flipping the monocular up and just used the LCD- screen.

The producer asked me whether I would like to use his stabilizer, after a while I felt I should have taken that offer.

I liked the EX3, excellent low light performance, but I probably would have liked it even more on a tripod. I actually missed my HD111s, shoulderwise, during the shoot.

Maybe I am leaning towards the HM700, but have still to try it out.

[Brian Standing]

I wish I could take the guts out of an EX-3 and put them into an HM700 body. Why oh why didn't JVC go with 1/2" chips?