I've saw this baby in a magazine today. It made me wonder... I know the Gl2's and XL1's are the best low end fancy cams. But what do people use if they move up from here in digital. Some say once you get into buying add ons for the XL1's you mine as well have gotten a different camera in the first place. so what camera are they talking about? Not like I've got money but its nice to dream.
p.s.what does high def mean exactly??

generally, in the digital realm, DV25 (ie DVCpro, DVcam, miniDV and digital8) are on the bottom of the ladder. Then D-9 is next--mainly used for ENG and industrial. Then digibeta--again mainly used for ENG and industrial. Then D-1 and D-5, which are slightly higher quality and more exspensive. Then high definition. This issue is that the price jumps from 500 bucks for low end DV-25 cameras to 20000 dollars for a low end D-9 with lens.

The new JVC HD consumer camera is very misleading when it comes to quality. I sugest you do serious reseatch if it interests you.

High Definitions is a new set of standards. The picture size is larger than standard definition formats (DV-25 through D-1) and therefore better quality.

It's cool to know and use the latest and greatest technologies, but it's also important to not get too wraped up in it. The fundimentals to telling a story are the same on a 500 dollar camera as on a 2 million dollar 3-d imax camera.

yes ditto to what joren has stated in regards to the variations of digital video.

more specific, as you probably know, DV as you know it probably shoots in 60i interlaced, with a resolution of 720 pixels by 480 pixels. now, the exceptions to this on the low-end are in the ag-dvx100 from panasonic, which shoots 24p, as well as that JVC consumer cam, which via high-definition, also must shoot in a progressive format.

high-definition is what joren said: its a larger image, therefore higher quality. high-definition expands the 720x480 pixel standard into a widescreen 1280x768 frame, supporting also 1080 lines of resolution. it is also not interlaced, as it is in progressive scan.

as joren has also mentioned, the JVC GR-HD1 camera is not very good if you look into it. and its simple if you think about it. yes, the image is larger and higher quality... however, it still is only recording a small amount of information to tape because of its reasonably small CCD... not to mention, it only has 1 CCD, not 3, and the color is really not pleasing on it. ive worked with it a bit where i work, and am rather disapointed. since its also trying to record a lot of information to a standard MiniDV tape, it probably also won't surprise you that the thing had occasional drop-outs.

oh well. i guess i just expanded on what joren said. so i didnt have much new to say :-)

how bout i expand a little more! haha. i just must say, that if anything on these forums should be read, its th bit about the basics of storytelling. its always nice to have a camera that produces a great quality image, but you still need the talent, skill, storyline, editing, etc to make the movie work. i have a gl-2, ive used an ag-dvx100, xl-1s, gr-hd1, lots of other cameras... i also have filmed on a single-chip sony cam. and you know what, the image quality difference mostly didnt even matter with the sony because the films were well-done.

film. practice. upgrade equipment when necessary, not just because its new and its there and you want it. :-)

Hi Insomniac. I'm from the south bay (palo alto). Where do you work in scotts valley where you shoot and edit in high definition? What's the setup? A TV station in santa cruz?

hope I'm not putting you on the spot, I'm just curious.

HD is only a format in the broadest sense of the word. HD only exists contrary to SD (Standard definition) like NTSC, PAL and Secam. The broadcast standard for HD (At least in the U.S.) is 1080i (Interlaced), although most HD capable cameras (And formats at that) are switchable between this and 720p. Some newer generations can achieve 1080p. There are also algorithms to bridge formats just like in SD, although 30p to 24p is still problematic.

All that aside the consensus seems to be that the JVC camera does neither HD nor SD very well. I believe it does have a component out which would allow you to skip the camera's massive compression. However, what's the point as you lose much of your cost savings (Which you could apply to getting a better camera in the first place).

The small data rate is not related to chip size or number, but rather due to the transport. Regardless, the chip is not good and the compression and color space of the format leaves much to be desired (MiniDV is barely acceptable for SD IMO).

Check your local library for a copy of the American Cinematographer's Video Manual. It has the most comprehensive chapter on formats available in one place (Although even the newest edition preceded many of the current technologies).

Nota "Prefers to add to confusion" Mono