Why would you buy that for use with Vegas given that Vegas only supports SDI?
Does anyone know if the AJA support is any better?

This is a standalone system...it will transcode outside of Vegas. Vegas may be nice, but, it's not the do all- end all, as you point out, Bob.

Well that's what I thought too.
However I think others are saying it will not work. That I don't quite get. I would have thought the Multibridge would look the same to Vegas regardless of whether the vision is coming in SDI or component. Yet Sony are saying analogue capture is not supported, you'd have thought if it did work through the Multibridge they'd mention that!

Bob.

Haven't had a lock up yet using the AJA, and they seem to be more "Vegas-interested" for what that's worth. I don't have the newer multibridge working in Vegas any longer, because the newer driverset isn't AMD compatible. It might be more solid with new Intel CPU's tho.

Considering there are very few 4-lane PCIe mobo's available, this may not be bad news...hehehe. But, thanx for bringing this up. I just ordered a JVC GY-HD110U and am looking for a capture solution for component out. As DSE says, the AJA/XENA line looks good, too. Someone mentioned that the Convergent Design box works with Vegas.

Spot, which Xena card do you use?

Do you want to capture HD component out of the camera?

I know of no conversion box that'll fill your need.
Convergent's HD Connect LE does HDV <-> HD SDI only.

I assume you're wanting to capture live from the camera's head, no point in playing back HDV via component that I can think of, just means you need to support a monster data rate for no gain in image quality and if you wanted to work in a 4:2:2 space you might as well transcode in Vegas, then you don't need the fast disk arrays.

If we are talking about taking the component out of the camera head I hope you realise you're going to need a pretty fast PC to keep up.

Bob.

Yes, I wanted to make full use of the 422 color space. Not only a fast PC but massive storage. Also, this camera will convert to 1080i output on the component jacks only. It won't output 1080i over the firewire jack.

Quoting from the JVC propaganda: "the GY-HD110U can output an analog component 720p HD signal at 60 frames per second. With a third-party HDSDI converter, you can stream the uncompressed full-resolution signal to an array of systems

If that's what you wanted Canon have two cameras with the HD-SDI built in and they're higher res sensors.

LOL...the Canon XLH1 costs 2x as much as the HD110, it's more suited to those who want to attract women, and hasn't got nearly the technical following the JVC has with it's real 24P and not some kluged proprietary format.

So you can get a JVC HD110 with a comparable lens for $4,500 now? Wow, that's a contender, even considering its technical shortcomings (ask any broadcast TV engineer).

I don't use either of these cameras, but I'm baffled that the chicks would get hot over one vs. the other. What's the secret? (Besides the $4500 worth of Dom Perignon or whatever you spend the difference on?)

Quite apart from the cost of getting a decent lens for the JVC and their pretty bad reputation you need to factor in that component video is a right PIA, HD SDI is way easier to deal with cabling wise.
Both the Canon XL H1 and it's little brother are built for serious work in OB applications, that may or may not count for much in your situation but if I was forking out such serious sums of money I'd be looking to get the best return on my investment and a camera that can be used in all situations seems a wise business move.

Plus if you don't think Canon's clever de-interlacing is doing it for you you could still start with 1080i and use Vegas's Interpolate de-interlacing and most likely still get more res from the Canon than the JVC.

Bob.

Interesting to read your perspective. I've looked at video streams from both cams, and, quite honestly, don't see much of a difference. Rez tests on the Fujinon lens show it to be quite adequate, albeit the zoom range is somewhat inadequate. Funny, I've seen more stunning Indie trailers come from this cam than from the H1, wonder why? The real beauty here is that the output of the JVC will go straight to film. I think the hoops I'd have to go thru with the canon are beyond my scope. Adam Wilt rated the H1 arguably better than the JVC, but, he pretty much likes the JVC, as do I. If you like the canon better, i guess it's just a matter of taste.

Why would the JVC go straight out to film and not the Canon.
Probably one of the most critical things for a film out is resolution.
Also you can run the Canon with the Wafian recorder although as a package that's getting expensive.

Mind you if that was my game plan I'd not choose either!
Hopefully we'll soon be able to see how Spoon looks an 35mm and then I think (hope) we'll be buying the SI camera.

Then again I'm just an old boffin.

Bob.

Clearly, Bob, if I was paid by someone else to make these choices, my choices might be different. I've resisted the HDV bandwagon and stuck by my XL2 until I just can't wait to play with one of these newfangled HDV cameras. It's too intriguing to stay away. Yet, I've not one customer who's clamoring at my door for HDV format. I may still be premature in my purchase, but, hell, I want to play with HDV.