1st impressions on 700 & 100

[Amos Kim]

Hey enzo, just pure image quality wise, which is better in your opinion: hm700 (without noise problem) or ex3?

[Enzo Giobbé]

Hands down, the EX3.

Everybody at the weekend camera fest we had was pretty impressed with this "prosumer looking" camera that could.

While it's more pricey that the HM700 (overall and media wise), in this case, the extra money does equate to better image quality.

This was my first experience with the EX3 (it somehow passed under my radar, probably because of how it looks), but I think this would be a good choice for second camera to the RED (if you can't afford two REDs that is). It's that good, image-wise.

The rental house that sponsored the week-end fest has now added the EX3 to their rental catalog, and on my suggestion, made up a Steadicam package using the EX3 mated to a Flyer, which is an excellent match.

What I didn't like about the EX3 were the ergonomics, control layout, and non-standard connectors. It's also too short, too light, and has the VF in the wrong place for effective use on a gear head. But like the paddle shift on my F430 (hate that paddle shift), the end performance far outweighs the idiosyncrasies.

[Steven Auerbach]

I'd just like to add to Enzo's comments concerning the EX-3's ergonomic characteristics. "Left-eyed videographers" considering the purchase of this camcorder should be aware of the fact that the lateral adjustment capability of the viewfinder is rather limited. I normally wear glasses when I shoot. I examined the EX-3 at a video trade show several months ago and found it virtually impossible to comfortably use my left eye for the viewfinder. The HM-700's viewfinder, on the other hand, has a much greater adjustment range and accommodates "left eyed shooting" very well.

[Alex Humphrey]

I tried an EX-1 on a shoot once that someone else had brought.... I never saw the footage so I can't speak as to how it looked, but I was so turned off by size/shape/ergonimics of the EX1. I felt it was another Sony handy cam so I never took either the EX-1 or EX-3 seriously since I hated operating it so much. I think if Sony wanted to make a light shoulder mount, fully manual camera like the JVC I would have looked at it. But for the way I work, I couldn't really use the EX1/3 for much of how I work even if image quality was as good as the Red. Sony are you listening? Not everyone loves the handycam size and shape. It's not handy except for realty shows with short takes and medium to wide shots, otherwise it has to stay on a tripod anyway. Might as well have a should shaped version with removable lenses and come with a REAL manual lens in a comparably priced camera... Sony? The sounds of crickets is deafening... Nah. I would probably go with a Panasonic HPX-500 just out of spite at this point because of my realationship with Sony Pro gear. Damn those P2 cards are expensive though!

[Enzo Giobbé]

Just doesn't exist (and probably never will).

As far as ergonomics go, the JVC ProHD line is what works best for me as an event cam, and it's a very nice production cam as well. I like that the focus puller (working from the left side) can use the onboard LCD (flipped) with focus assist turned on (and tuned) to do a confidence check, and it also balances very well on a tripod or gear head, and has a long enough VF to boot.

The RED has had many color shift problems over its development life. RED has been able to address these problems pretty quickly as they crop up, but even with the latest units and software, the colors are very desaturated right out of the box. Not a problem except to a director that is used to working with say a F35 (which has the best image quality straight out of the box of any of the electronic cameras I have ever worked with).

The beauty of the RED is that you get a 4K cam for less than $20K. And, that's really all you get for that $20K. By the time you configure it as a real production cam, you're getting close to the $75K mark. Still a very reasonable price for the great image quality, but not exactly the $15K price point cam everybody bandies about.

The EX3 also has color shift problems, mostly that the grays are contaminated with a magenta cast. The one that was used in the tests we did had a gelly over the lens to bring the grays back in line. Bad ergonomics, great image.

The HM 700A (with the latest software) continues to have serious noise issues at 1920 x 1080/35Mbps when used as advertised (as a camera for shooting movies). But the image looks very nice on a 65" monitor, and there is no noise (to speak of) shooting native (1280 x 720/19Mbps) even when the image is projected on a 50' screen.

So it all boils down to what works for you, and what limitations you are willing to accept for the features you want.

[Robert Rogoz]

"The HM 700A continues to have noise issues at 1920 x 1080/35Mbps when used as advertised (as a camera for making movies). But the image looks great on a 65" monitor, and there is no noise (to speak of) shooting native (1280 x 720/19Mbps) even when the image is projected on a 50' screen."
I was looking on my 40" TV at some footage shot with HM100 and 720 looks to me much better then 1080, at least to my eye.

[Steve Mullen]

It shouldn't be surprising that recording at the native chip size provides the best QUALITY picture.

However, as I read the JVC marketing material, I think JVC is claiming that the chips are always supplying 1280x720 to the H&V "adaptive" shifting logic so that all internal processing is done at 1920x1080p. If this is true -- the noise/quality should be the same no matter the recording frame-size.

This way of operating makes no sense to me. I would expect that when recording 720p, the chips are directly fed to the encoder as no H&V shifting are needed -- or wanted.

[Enzo Giobbé]

Steve I don't believe those JVC marketing materials are correct.

It is my understanding in conversations with JVC Japan (sometimes rocky because of the language differences, and it is a personal embarrassment to me when I cannot speak a language that is native to the person I am having the conversation with), when shooting native, there is no adaptive shifting of the image. When shooting native it's pretty much "straight wire".

[Steve Rosen]

I currently own an HPX500 (and an HVX200), but have been impressed with the JVC since I first saw it for ergonomic reasons... I shot for 20+ years with (and still own) a super16 Aaton, which is one of the best designed shoulder cameras ever - and the 700 is very similar - before that I owned Eclair NPRs (the tool that every ENG camera was designed after) and ACLs.

I, too, Enzo am an old dog (probably one of the few others on this site that has shot with an R200, or a Mitchell) and, having recently turned 65, am still shooting documentaries handheld - and I am really hoping for a lighter, better balanced camera with a better viewfinder - thus my renewed interest in the JVC...

I have been reading these posts with interest and am understandingly disappointed with this noise issue and the apparent CA... I'll keep checking till JVC gets it right though.

[Enzo Giobbé]

Steve, in spite of me having worked with Mitchell BNC and BNCR's, as well as the R200, you do realize that I started my career at a very, very early age, right?

My early years:

At 3 months in the womb, received my very first Nikon F (mom wasn't too happy about that).

At 7 months gestation, I shot my first still photo layout for Vogue Italia (mom was even less happy about that!). Asked the models on the shoot if they wanted to be on a Vogue cover.

At 1 day old, ordered my first Arri IIB. Asked the the girls in the nursery with me if they wanted to be in movies.

At 2 years old, went to work for Cinemobile as their "in-house" Steadicam Op. I had to wear stilts that made me 6'3" tall and put cayenne pepper on my right hand so I would be a lefty. Asked the women on the shows I worked if they wanted to be stars.

At 5 years old, I was working as a full DP in Italy. Worked out pretty well for me except for when another DP on an adjacent lot asked his gaffer to "put a bambino up". Man, those light stands are really, really uncomfortable to sit on! But not a bad vantage point in the heyday of Italian movie mega cleavage. Asked the female stars in the movies I shot if they wanted to be even bigger stars.

So, while I have been around for a long time, I was also lucky in getting a very early start :)

And now for something completely different...

Ah, the S16 Aaton. The ultimate refinement of the Eclair design (a design that changed the way all cameras where designed from then on). I also owned one, and I still have one of the last French made NPRs (and my first Arri IIB too!), sometimes, nostalgia is hard to break away from.

We used an NPR, as well as the JVC, to shoot some scenes in the feature film "Parasomnia", directed by William Malone. I was the digital film DP, and my friend Christian Sebaldt, ASC, was the main (and film) DP on the show. The Parasomnia film trailer is here: Parasomnia Trailer (use the 720P option). Bet you can't tell which scenes were shot with what cameras :)

Which brings me to segue to your JVC concerns.

Steve, my issues with the noise is only as it relates to shooting feature films @ 35Mbps. On the very latest "A" series, the noise is just barley perceivable on a large screen TV. It's only when the footage is projected onto the big screen that the noise rears its ugly head. So if you are shooting docs with a limited big screen distrib, the 700 (or 200B) should work well for you. And remember, there is no noise when shooting native.

While JVC US is playing this 700 noise issue pretty close to the chest, I can tell you that JVC Japan is very concerned about it and are diligently working to find a solution to eliminate it entirely.

Old dogs indeed...

[Steve Rosen]

Enzo, thanks for the update on the 700.. Although I really like the look I'm getting from the HPX500, and I sleep well at night using the robust P2 cards, the benefits of a lighter camera and a better (and color) viewfinder are very attractive...

Yes, old dogs.. I graduated from UCLA film school in 1967 and did a year and a half graduate school, my graduate thesis film, DDT - KNOWING IT SURVIVES US, was shot with UCLA's NPR... The motor was heavier than the HVX200, but I did love that camera - at the time... I bought my Aaton with Cooke 10.4-52mm lens from Curtis Clarke, I'm the second (and apparently last) owner... I also used a Cinemobile once (when DPing commercials for John Urie Associates) - I thought they were a great idea, would work well for independents today.

Thanks again for the info.. these forums are remarkable in their diversity...

[Alex Humphrey]

Good to hear from many sources that the later or updated HM700's have less noise, and virtually no noise, or at least no more than the HD100 series in 720p. Since I'm only intersted in 720p at 35mbs, it's OK in my book. I have heard rumors of the first batch of the HM700 was not user upgradable and had nois EVEN at 720p modes... confirm/deny anyone?

I'm curious though. I've always LOVED the Panasonic HPX-500 and DVCPRO in general for it's ability to handle color better etc, etc etc. But how did the 720p 35mbs compare to 720pHDV or DVCPROHD? Any significant gain in color or macroblocking when using the 35mbs XD-CAM over the older 17mbs HDV? Is there any tangible benefit for you with the extra headroom? Does it handle color signficantly better and start to give DVCPROHD a run for it's money, or does it still look like HDV, just a little more robust?

[Eric Deyerler]

It looks better and sharper then HDV (better when you use 1080i with 35 MBit

I shot since I got the HM700 on the first of Juli
nearly every day, the look looks great, in darker
areas you can change the gammacurve from standard
to filmout (and stretch your dark/black-tones) and
you will get less noise and some dB more
to shot in the night with less noise.

The one thing is to enable the improved DNR,
you must set it to on in the menu.

[Steve Rosen]

I have not tested the JVC against the 500, in fact I haven't even seen a 700 yet (I live in Monterey, pretty far from a place to do that)... My guess is that the Panasonic, which has always seemed to outshine the competition in "film look", and which, further, is a 2/3" camera, will continue to dominate - in this venue at least - and I wouldn't sell my 500 even if I do get a 700.

Panasonic does make the 300, which has CMOS chips, and so far I'm underwhelmed... Resolution with a capitol "R" is not the only factor to consider, and I personally prefer the more tactile quality of the 500 and the clips I've downloaded here from the 700 - the look is more like the super16 that I'm used to (BTW, I like to shoot 720/24pn).

The big factor, again, is that JVC seems to be the only manufacturer that has actually considered the needs of those of us who handhold for a living. Their cameras (based on my experience with the earlier model, which I discounted originally because of the unfortunate split screen issue) are lighter, balance well, and, supposedly, the viewfinder on the new 700 is very good. These factors are major failings with the 500 - it is unaccountably heavy (about like that old NPR mentioned above, but without the class), and the viewfinder is truly miserable (even though I spent $2,500 for a wide-screen one and modified it to sit one and a half inches farther forward to better balance the camera).

I will probably rent a 700 as soon as I have some free time and do a comparison for myself. In the meantime I will continue to read the opinions posted here and elsewhere.

(NPR, by the way, stood for 'NOISELESS PORTABLE REFLEX" - Hard to believe now that those three things were major breakthroughs in camera design.)

[Amos Kim]

Is there ugly noise on 1080p 35mbs on the hm100?