I too would like to know why you are purchasing that camera, Harris. And just when are you dirty chims coming out with another picture anyway. I was lookin forward to the one about the graverobber. My balls are blue from anticipation

Joren said:

quote:

...I'd like to know more about Harris' decision and why he turned on dvcproHD and hdv.

Actually, Joren, I just turned on Panasonic's DVCproHD. I now favor HDV, though my stance had been the opposite just a couple of weeks ago.

The story goes like this: I bought a Sony MircoMV cam four years ago (I think), and it turned into a huge hassle. Plus, we had some extreme problems with editing because of the MPEG2 compression. Being the all-or-nothing hard-headed force that I am, I swore never again to use Sony or MPEG2. Sony makes some great stuff, though, and I soon removed its name from the list.

As for MPEG2 compression, I used that as really my only excuse for shunning HDV. Those fitful nights with third-party software, motion artifacts and fragmented stills didn't even let me consider HDV as an upgrade option.

Now, here comes the Panasonic HVX200, and it sounds like a dream: It's priced right. It's 24p in both 720 AND 1080. I've always wanted mechanical zoom, and that 60p in-camera slow-mo gives me goosebumps. It has a big fat LCD (a necessary feature for me which led me to curse my XL1s), and, above all, it's not HDV. Too good to be true.

Much too good to be true. Once you add up all the goodies required to make P2 capture a worthy enough tapeless option, that HVX bundle costs almost as much as a Canon XLH1. Compounding this is tons and tons of pixel shifting, leaving that HD image dull and soft, not crisp as expected. Plus, with such a ridiculous image enlargement, there's no telling what might happen to your image if you shoot a scene lit in monochrome; one little CCD can only handle so much.

The JVC HD100/110 seems like a nice compromise: It shoots 720/24p (not 1080p, but I admit I was getting greedy with all that resolution). Mechanical zoom, yes, and it's 16x as opposed to Panny's 13. It handles 60p, alas at only 480, not 720 (the HD200 brings that... somehow), but that's good enough. The price is even righter; I can score a new 110 with an extra battery for $5500 now. And, as a bonus, I get an interchangeable lens system (something I never utilized with my Canon, but maybe this time around), and it looks a LOT cooler than the stumpy HVX.

That's it. As for the MPEG2 hangup, I'm mostly over it... though I know the first time I capture and start chopping footage, my fingers, toes and lungs will be crossed.

Joren, are you really anti-HDV? If so, for what reasons? Also, I'm very happy with the decision I'm about to make, but do tell: If you had to make the same decision, what would you buy? Or would you wait?

And Fash, don't worry. We've got stuff in the works; it's just on hiatus 'til our new gear arrives. By the way, I know several other people who have had their email and forum accounts recently hacked by Mel Gibson. Be warned: He's targeting more than just Hebrews now.

Edit follows:

Jerry said:

quote:

Do you 'need' such a great camera for a proffesion? a job? Or is it for your independent filmmaking?

All of the above. Actually, that's another reason I opted for HDV. MiniDV tapes last a long time; they're cheap and readily available. I'll need this camera for personal use (Dam Dirty Apes shorts), professional use (doc of Corps of Engineers training/missions and maybe some actual disasters) and semi-professional use (filming music videos and live performances). The JVC just seems like an adaptable workhorse.

And Josh, how do you edit? Software package? System specs? I'll need to upgrade my system, so I'm curious.

Dam Dirty Apes

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Harris,

Very thorough research Harris. All I can add is that I've imported and cut about a dozen hours of HDV 1080/60i footage (using the HDV codec, recorded on the Sony Z1U which is a gorgeous camera) in Final Cut Pro 5 and it worked seamlessly, even on slower computers. I did most of the work on a maxed out G5 system, capturing to a G-RAID drive (best thing ever) and I was worried about jumping the project over to my 1.5ghz 12" Powerbook, but as long as I kept using that drive for media, it worked fine. The MPEG2 thing is not as big of an issue as it seems like it would be, either.

I did notice some odd red horizontal lines bleeding a few dozen pixels out of motion blurs once in a blue moon, and the extremely occasional artifact, but in general, it's beautiful footage.

Reading the comment about 60p in-camera slow motion reminded me. This is still something of a holy grail for the video world, I guess.

My 16mm cameras can do 64 fps no problem... of course, that burns through 100' of film in under a minute, but it's still fun. I might use it in an upcoming project.

I'll be using Premiere Pro 2.0 with Cineform Aspect HD to capture and edit (all on PC), though I must seriously invest in a new tower. I downloaded a free trial version of Aspect to fool around with some HDV test shots (which I also downloaded), and it offers a fantastic color adjustment tool, a nice little bonus, something I'll definitely use. Also, I should really get one of those HDTVs I've heard so much about... but first things first.

And yeah, I've done some reading on the Red Scare. Quite a few HD100s have had serious problems with that (much worse than what you describe), but JVC seems very accomodating with the repairs and replacements for all this new stuff.

Well, Evan, you'll have slow-mo seven percent slower than mine. I'm willing to take a leap of faith on this HDV stuff, but real film is just such a revolutionary new medium... I can't take a chance that big. By the way, how fast can you undercrank?

HDTVs are awesome. It's so hard to go back once you start watching hd content. In fact in the next month I'm getting a 50" plasma for my living room. I have 2 HDTVs in bedrooms, but have gone 3 years without a living room TV. Work has been kind to me this month so I'm going for it. I've been holding off because I want a mac mini with a blu-ray drive to power the plasma, but I don't see that hapening in the next 6 months. If I had to predict, apple is having buyer's remorse in joining the blu-ray consortium and is hesitating bringing products to market.

As for the HDV/DVCproHD, I'll take DVCproHD any day of the week for editing/compositing. But, the hvx200 is far from perfect and the hdv cameras do give a great picture. But so does the hvx200. There still isn't a perfect sub-10k hd camcorder. I really don't like tapes, capturing, or building a new video format on a 10 year old piece of equipment like the miniDV drive. Further, I'm so totally over interlaced video (not that all hdv is interlaced).  On the other hand, the hvx200 isn't balanced right, is more expensive, doesn't do well in low light, and even with pixel shifting (which I don't think is a bad thing), doesn't resolve anywhere near 1080. But that's okay. I really could live with 720p. And the hvx200 has much better color latitude, can do 60 fps (which I think I'd use a fair bit), and doesn't have those pesky linear tape drives (err, well it does, but not for hd). In the end, I think the hvx200 is still better for cinematic movie making. But it's just not there yet for me to spend 10k on a system (or even 7k). I think I'm gonna get a cheaper 2k hdv camcorder in the mean while for work and around the house shooting and hope that something better comes along.

That's my stream of consciousness thoughts on the two formats.

quote:

By the way, how fast can you undercrank?

Down to 8 fps. 3x faster than actual, I guess.

"HDTVs are awesome. It's so hard to go back once you start watching hd content."

It's very easy to go back, if you're in most areas of the country, when you realize that the only HD offerings are HBO, ESPN, and the Discovery Channel.

quote:

It's very easy to go back, if you're in most areas of the country, when you realize that the only HD offerings are HBO, ESPN, and the Discovery Channel.

No TV for me. I'll be watching only Blu-Rays on my 1000" HDTV... in my gold-trim hot tub... ON THE MOON.

I know exactly where you're coming from, Joren, and I think any sub-10k camera you buy right now will be a compromise in some regard. I think I've found the compromise with which I'm most comfortable, but that choice may be totally different for someone else. And if I decided to wait for a better camera, I would probably end up waiting for a still better one, and so on and so forth. The time is now; the day is here.

It's astonishing (to me) that you guys have so much money to throw around on digital cameras that are going obsolete faster than Vanilla Ice albums. I thought my GL2 was pretty expensive at $1800 or so - I could never dream of paying $4-5k for a camera. My main camera (Kinor 16CX-2M) was about $650 for everything (body, three lenses, five mags, battery).

For $8-10k you could get an Aaton XTRprod if you looked hard, and certainly a decent SRII.

quote:

For $8-10k you could get an Aaton XTRprod if you looked hard, and certainly a decent SRII.

But then you'd be spending a fortune on a film camera AND a fortune on film. This way, you're only spending one fortune.

It's astonishing (to me) you keep bringing film cameras into discussions about video cameras. Apples and oranges. We could also just start making radio plays. Or painting on canvas. They would be cheaper too. Troll some other topic.

Can you be any more hostile? I was just saying that for most people on this forum (high school and college students, maybe 17-21) $5000 is a hell of a lot of money to spend on a camera.

You don't have to get defensive. It's just funny how 'acceptable' prices for cameras have become far higher recently. When miniDV was the only option for very low budget productions that was even remotely affordable, decent cameras were in the $2-4k range. Now with HDV and the new Panasonic somehow that range is $5-8k.

Joren is right, Evan. You do push film every chance you get, and it is often excessive. Just keep that in mind.

Well, I apologize. I do think the new crop of video cameras are pretty cool, but the price escalation is moving faster than most people are aware of - the promise of miniDV was that anyone could buy a camera for $1-2k and make a project. Obviously you can still do this, but HDV is becoming de rigeur among video people, and the cost to play is quite a bit higher. At that point I would seriously start to think about the overall amount the camera would be used and whether the cost savings over film are significant. Many of these people buying HDV cameras will never put more than 8-10 hours of necessary shooting time on them.

I'm glad I have a GL2 for occasional Super 8 transfer jobs and docu-style recording, but I've only made 7-8 shorts on it. Doing the same amount of stuff on Super 8 would not have been significantly more expensive.

I'm an Army contractor (as well as a part-time student); I shoot docs and training exercises for the Corps of Engineers. I also shoot live music every so often -- something I hope to do more and more. It would be less than practical to roll film in those circumstances. That's another reason I opted against the HVX -- those tiny P2s.

I understand I'm in the minority here, but those are (some of) my reasons for going the digital route.

Also, I'm just not comfortable with film. I've never tried it, and I have no idea what's required. It's like dating guys: Sure, it's easier on the wallet, and it's probably more enjoyable... but I'm so used to the opposite sex I think I'll just stick with that. Hey-oh!