HM600 vs XF300 - thoughts?

[Jamie Jewett]

Greetings Sports Fans!

need to buy a camera this week -
I have used and LOVED the XF300

BUT
most of what I shoot is on stage in a theater and I need better low light
so I have been looking a hard at the HM600 -

the XF300 has come down so much n price that I could almost actually swing it

thoughts?
thanks!
Jamie

[Scott Berrington]

The JVC uses SD cards, the Canon uses CF cards. The Canon can record at 50Mb/s and the JVC at 35Mb/s. The JVC has more record formats/codecs. According to HD Warrior, the JVC is better in low light.

1st Exclusive Review of the JVC HM600 on Vimeo

[Scott Kase]

The GY-HM600 has great picture quality. Keep in mind that there is free extra battery mail in rebate from JVC, and just announded a 500.00 loyal customer mail in rebate if you have ever owned select older JVC Cameras

[Tim Polster]

The JVC camera has been a little under the radar since its release. I have not seen a lot about the camera on the web.

I would be interested to see these side by side. The XF300 is very nice and the JVC would have to best it in order to sway my vote.

[Alex DeJesus]

The 'HD Warrior' guy above also did a comparison article of JVC vs Panasonic AG-AC160:

HD Warrior Blog Archiv The Panasonic AG-AC160A or the JVC GY-HM600 a question I am frequently asked

Never an easy choice. I'm in the same boat. I'm looking to upgrade from two Canon XHA1s's. Close to buying the JVC but looking at the Canon XF300 and C100. Maybe a DSLR, but I hear they are still too fidgety for run and gun work

Will this be your primary camera? I do lots of work in low light casino showrooms and theaters and the XHA1s are killing me

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by Alex DeJesus

The 'HD Warrior' guy above also did a comparison article of JVC vs Panasonic AG-AC160:

HD Warrior Blog Archiv The Panasonic AG-AC160A or the JVC GY-HM600 a question I am frequently asked

Never an easy choice. I'm in the same boat. I'm looking to upgrade from two Canon XHA1s's. Close to buying the JVC but looking at the Canon XF300 and C100. Maybe a DSLR, but I hear they are still too fidgety for run and gun work

Will this be your primary camera? I do lots of work in low light casino showrooms and theaters and the XHA1s are killing me

Have you considered the FS100? It's the low light king, and it can be a run and gun camera.

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

Hi Jamie.
I haven`t used either camera so I can`t comment on that directly but if low light is an issue I would go with the cam that seems to perform better. In this case I think it is the JVC after my readings.

I have filmed a lot of stage events and in many places with low light. Too me one of the most important things is how a camera performs under low or variable lights and I have chosen cameras accordingly. Not entirely but is has been a significant part of it.

However I have used the older JVC HD 110 series, which weren`t the best low light performers and installed of one Tim Dashwoods picture profiles that made the camera perform better. I am not sure if it applies to the HM- series but it could be worth checking out if you have access to the HM600 or if anyone else can comment. This is the profile I used with great success: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/jvc-gy-h...scn-files.html Go to recepies and open the PDF and choose Low light. Basically I think it stretches the black level.

Also if HDSDI is important, now or at a later stage, it is my impression that the JVC has that whereas the XF300 has HDMI only. Another matter which may or may not be important to you, is that the files from the XF300 will be larger if shot at 50mbps. This could affect storage and archiving space. To me the XDCam EX codec has the right balance between quality and file size.

I read mr Alister Chapmans review of the HM650 today and his impressions were good. JVC HM650 Review. Camera made for news and journalism. |

Just a side note, I think any 1/3 camera will not be the king of low light due to the sensor size, but they have improved greatly in recent years. If it is too dark you will have to add lights. I always bring a small 300w lamp with me just in case and it has come in handy many times.

[Alex DeJesus]

My other concern is the ability to do more artsy cinematic work for fashion modeling and such. Not sure how the JVC would compare with a large sensor camera. Furthermore, I don't understand why so many codecs. I almost would prefer one 'good' codec. I guess they are all for different purposes.

So, in my readings so far, these are the important things to look for:

1) Price
2) Form factor (shoulder/handheld, Fixed lens/interchangeable, Need a rig, etc.)
3) Recording format
4) Sensor size/Qty
5) Price
6) Ease of use
7) Bitrates
8) Onboard monitoring (EVF & LCD)
9) External outputs (for recording, monitoring)
10) Concensus on expert reviews
11) Special features
12) Signal/noise ratio and low light capable

Not sure of the order.Seems like no camera is optimal on 'every' feature listed, so it's a sacrifice either way.

[Alex DeJesus]

All of reviews of the HM600 are great, but I keep seeing the subtle clues suggesting a chance of buyer's remorse. That is, the phrase, "...great for the price" or "...not too bad for 1/3" sensors." So I get the sense that in the grand scheme of things, the HM600 is probably only average, but that without budget constraints most pros would choose something else. Am I wrong in this?

The HM600 may be a good camera, or great, depending on your expectations. I am actually now considering a 5d mk III with a great lens at about the same price. Wondering now which is better choice, a good camcorder for the price - or the 'best' DSLR, period, in about the same price range that can shoot video?

I need to be flexible. Sometimes I cover events, and other times cinematic. And I am often asked to do still photos. I do have a Canon HXA1s to do the things that a DSLR doesn't do as well. I hope my logic makes sense- open to suggestions.

Glen, I did check out the FS100 because of picture quality, but it looks like a camera I would throw out of a window in frustration.

[Alex DeJesus]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

Have you considered the FS100? It's the low light king, and it can be a run and gun camera.

Glen, I did check out the FS100, but a bit too complicated looking for me.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by Alex DeJesus

Glen, I did check out the FS100, but a bit too complicated looking for me.

If you can work a DSLR, you can work an FS100. It will give you that cinematic look.

[Jody Arnott]

Originally Posted by Alex DeJesus

All of reviews of the HM600 are great, but I keep seeing the subtle clues suggesting a chance of buyer's remorse. That is, the phrase, "...great for the price" or "...not too bad for 1/3" sensors." So I get the sense that in the grand scheme of things, the HM600 is probably only average, but that without budget constraints most pros would choose something else. Am I wrong in this?

The HM600 may be a good camera, or great, depending on your expectations. I am actually now considering a 5d mk III with a great lens at about the same price. Wondering now which is better choice, a good camcorder for the price - or the 'best' DSLR, period, in about the same price range that can shoot video?

I need to be flexible. Sometimes I cover events, and other times cinematic. And I am often asked to do still photos. I do have a Canon HXA1s to do the things that a DSLR doesn't do as well. I hope my logic makes sense- open to suggestions.

Glen, I did check out the FS100 because of picture quality, but it looks like a camera I would throw out of a window in frustration.

I've owned my HM600 for over a month now, and absolutely no buyers remorse.

The image is fantastic, the best of any camera I've owned so far. It's small and light enough for run and gun without needing a shoulder rig. SD cards and Quicktime MPEG2 workflow is extremely fast and simple. I can't say enough about how much I love this camera.

My ONLY complaint about the camera, if I had to find something, would be lack of 50/60p. But JVC are talking about firmware updates. They've already released 3 updates since the cameras release which have fixed a lot of small issues, so it's great to see they listen to their customers.

For those wanting a sample of image quality, here's a video I put together, shot entirely on the HM600:

Sights & Sounds of Hamilton, NZ - YouTube

[Alex DeJesus]

I appreciate the advice, Glen, and will look into FS100 further. But I have to say Jody's input and video is very comforting, to say the least
.
By complicated I was referring to a review I read. Said the ergonomics were terrible and the button scheme made no sense. Looking at the pictures, I have to agree. Those kinds of things tend to screw me up when I'm under pressure. I know that's an issue with DSLRs, too, but the Mk III seems to have improved a bit. FS100 has a large sensor though, and definitely looks versatile enough.

I'd sure like to pick something up soon, but I wonder if holding off until NAB is a good idea.

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

Alex.
I had the same dilemma last year. I wanted a traditional videocamera but also the cinematic look, so I opted for a combination of the Sony EX1R and Sony FS100. The camera I normally end up with is the EX1R. It has 1/2 inch chips and if you light correctly and use ND filters it can certainly provide a cinematic feel to the scene, although not to the same extent as a large sensor camera, but it is a good compromise.

What I didn`t take into account when buying the FS100 was all the extra bits and pieces to make it work. I still haven`t chosen lenses for it other than a Tokina 11-16 and the stock lens. I am not sture whether to keep it or sell it, mainly because I don`t like the workflow of AVCHD. XDCam EX is much more sophisticated. The F3 should have been my obvious choiche but that was way to expensive back then.

What I have learnt is that a large sensor camera is great in planned situations or for interviews, whereas a videocamera will allow you to grab images more quickly in those run and gun situations. I think it is important to use the tool for what it is.

A 5D camera will no doubt give good images, but it is more fiddly, you`ll have to use XLR- adaptors and so on to make it work like a video camera.

[Petter Flink]

Originally Posted by Jody Arnott

My ONLY complaint about the camera, if I had to find something, would be lack of 50/60p. But JVC are talking about firmware updates. They've already released 3 updates since the cameras release which have fixed a lot of small issues, so it's great to see they listen to their customers.

That was a beatiful clip.
Is it shot in its native 35Mbit? Stunning quality.

Unfortunately the 1080p50/60 might never make it as JVC have stated the current fan is not capable of cooling down the camera enough in 1080 50/60p.
Perhaps a hardware upgrade of the fan, cooling system, newer revision of the image processor or software change in some way could give the 50/60p at last.