New XDCAM EX camera - JVC not Sony

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Erik Phairas

it will always have the stigma of being a 1/3 inch camera..

But the EX3 has the stigma of being a 1/2" camera.
These 2 will definitely compete as long as the image from the JVC is good. If it's the same chips as the HD200 etc., and up-rezzed I get the feeling it'd be way way below the EX cameas.
I like the idea of having CDD rather than CMOS and rolling shutter. Also if you shoot wildlife then smaller chip gives more magnification to lenses, always a good thing.

Steve

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Tyge Floyd

So I'm a bit confused. I take it that this new offering will shoot full 1920 x 1080 at 35Mbps, ..........

It will make a 1920x1080 RECORDING, but that's not to say the camera front end will be capable of producing a picture with enough resolution to fully take advantage of this. A little like printing a 16mm film negative on to 35mm stock - you end up with a 35mm print, but the actual resolution is mostly determined by the resolution of the 16mm neg.

I fully agree with all Alister says - that JVC haven't mentioned pixel counts, just H,V pixel shifting, leads me to suspect 1280x720 chips. I also fully agree about the form factor. I do note the power consumption is quoted as 20watts that seems pretty high considering the new Panasonic HPX300 is 18watts with full res chips (and a lot of other features) and the EX3 is only 13.5watts, and that with 1/2" chips!

[Tyge Floyd]

Thanks for that, David. I get what you're saying. It may RECORD at 1920 x 1080 but the real question will be what does the image look like. I guess we'll just have to wait and see when it starts shipping.

I found the other huge thread on this camera and am reading through it.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-pro-h...camcorder.html

I'm still excited about this camera and can't wait till it's released and we get some feedback from those who are shooting it.

[Mick Haensler]

I'm wondering if Discovery will give it the same respect as the EX series. I'm also wondering about low light performance with the 1/3" chip.

Mick Haensler
Higher Ground Media

[Mark David Williams]

It's a shame they cant make the HZ-CA13U adapter that allows you to use 16mm lenses a lot cheaper. I think many would then be tempted.

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Mark David Williams

It's a shame they cant make the HZ-CA13U adapter that allows you to use 16mm lenses a lot cheaper. I think many would then be tempted.

Why not just get a simple metal adapter made, there should be plenty of space to do it? Not sure what benefit you'd get from 16mm lenses though?

Steve

[Jay Gladwell]

Originally Posted by Mick Haensler

I'm wondering if Discovery will give it the same respect as the EX series. I'm also wondering about low light performance with the 1/3" chip.

Just a guess on my part, but I seriously doubt it.

Considering all the speculation about the JVC being comparable to the EX, put yourself in Sony's position. Would you share all such technology with your competitor to produce a camera that would be in direct competition with two of your products? Or would share only part of that technology in order that the competing camera maintained a step or two below yours?

[Erik Phairas]

Originally Posted by Steve Phillipps

But the EX3 has the stigma of being a 1/2" camera.
These 2 will definitely compete as long as the image from the JVC is good. If it's the same chips as the HD200 etc., and up-rezzed I get the feeling it'd be way way below the EX cameas.
I like the idea of having CDD rather than CMOS and rolling shutter. Also if you shoot wildlife then smaller chip gives more magnification to lenses, always a good thing.

Steve

EX stigma for 1/2" chips? In all the comments I've read it was more like buzz and excitement! The JVC will have it's place, but you can see in this very thread the disappointment in the chip size.... whether it's misplaced or not is another discussion all together. :)

[Craig Seeman]

1/2" CMOS Sony - The ONLY way any manufacturer can currently get 1/2" chips in a camera as small as the EX series is with CMOS. It has to do with, at least in part, heat. CMOS chips generate less heat than CCD AFAIK.

If you want 1/2" CCD you must have a bigger body to disperse the heat.

1/2" chips in a small body is a BIG PLUS if you MUST have a small body. Sony is the only one to have done this. It's a trade off. You want Big Body, Big Chips, CCD OR you want Small Body and you either have 1/2" CMOS or 1/3" CCD.

Unless there's another design breakthrough, you will NOT get 1/2" CCD in a small body.

It seems some people don't get that.

[Erik Phairas]

Can you even get full 1920x1080 from a 1/2" CCD? Seems Cmos has more than one advantage below 2/3 inch.

[Mark David Williams]

Originally Posted by Steve Phillipps

Why not just get a simple metal adapter made, there should be plenty of space to do it? Not sure what benefit you'd get from 16mm lenses though?

Steve

Hi Steve

This link may help to understand better. The idea is to use 16mm lenses IE in my case Zeiss superspeeds that would give the same dof as 16mm film cameras or you can use 35mm camera lenses.

JVC Professional Features page

[Alexander Kubalsky]

Originally Posted by Mark David Williams

Hi Steve

This link may help to understand better. The idea is to use 16mm lenses IE in my case Zeiss superspeeds that would give the same dof as 16mm film cameras or you can use 35mm camera lenses.

JVC Professional Features page

so this adapter is like a relay lens? It condenses the 16mm or 35mm image down for the 1/3 inch image block of the HD camera and keeps the original depth of field?

[Shaun Roemich]

The adaptor mounts right up to the 1/3" lens mount on the JVC and allows you to mount PL mount S16 and 35mm motion picture lenses and take advantage of the FOV and DOF characteristics of those lenses. I own the adaptor and just spent several hours Thursday at our local ciné rental house trying out lenses.

One note: don't bother with high speed lenses, unless you already own/have access to them. The adaptor/camera combination has an inherent T2.8 maximum aperture. Don't be discouraged though: the adaptor, through the magics of physics, imparts a 1.5 stop INCREASE in light over 1/3" zoom lenses. Check out this thread for more info.

HD200 and Primes - Help Me Understand, please. - The Digital Video Information Network

[Shaun Roemich]

BTW, the PL adaptor is NOT just a piece of metal to allow one size mount to adapt to another. There are all sorts of adaptors out there for 35mm still lenses to be used on cameras. All of these impart a magnification factor (in the case of 35mm to 1/3" the factor is 7x) due to the different size image target.

The PL lens adaptor takes the image from the ciné lens and using multiple optical glass elements, refocuses the image so the camera's sensors can acquire it with FOV and DOF intact from the ciné lens.

There's a reason it's $5-6k. Well built and HEAVY.

[Craig Terott]

Originally Posted by Ed David

awesome. thanks for sharing! this looks like the next best camera in the $7000 range. curious to see how Sony and Panasonic combat it during the rough economy.

They don't have to combat it.

JVC released an inferior camera with 1/3" sensors and wants to charge more for it. I'm not fooled.