Advice taken. So if DVD and web delivery is my intention, I suppose the DVX100a would be better for around the same costs. Agree?

ABSOLUTELY!
A far nicer camera, and a pretty deidcated user base and forum.
Also with the DVX100 you can get lots of VERY nice (read expensive) add ons.

Depends on your workflow. The HD1 and HD10 could do with better optics and detector, however in the right natural or artificial conditions, these are special cameras for the price. DVX100A and PD-170 are also very fine 4:3 cameras (PD-170 is also OK for ana-16:9). You can go either way in price for 16:9, more so probably after NAB2004.

A workflow that takes you to transfer the footage using the software provided with the camera will work. You could transfer DV25 and then replace the media with the .trp/.m2t files.

I don't have either cameras but have previously (through HDV/DVHS forums) been able to download sample clips in 720p HDV (c. 19Mbps MPEG2). Vegas on my outfit was a bit of a dog, although my PC only just meets the fluidity required for nice and easy uncompressed D1 work anyway.

I transfer to PICVideo (Mjpeg) quality 19 as my intermediate codec. Unlike the ConnectHD, this has to be done after acquisition, by re-rendering. Same task, but requires a post process to get there. Then, in MJPEG, Vegas manages the i-frame-only format very well. Fluid play and suitable for random access timeline repositioning.

Then when you need to go out to HDV or DVHS, you can follow the transport stream export guide given here by Sony Pictured Digital. Once rendered, use the camera/deck software to bung it out for publishing/archives.

WMV9 HD-DVD or web-HD as (DiVX/VP6/WMV9/Mpeg-2) should all then be possible.

If you are making SD-DVD the downconversion should be fine, and your print art should benefit from the res of the HDV source.

Nothing is perfect in the first gen of anything new and economic.
Check out NAB, or head down the DVX100A or PD170 route.
SD isn't dead, but HDV isn't going to be dire forever.

With so much money on the line. Why not download a sample, you'll surely find a .trp or .m2t if you search hard enough? That'll prove my research to you.

Check out NAB or the coverage and then you really should rent or evaluate before putting that much cash down. ConnectHD and AspectHD have their place but they are not necessary to own on the same day as you want to edit Hd on Vegas. It is software and as always, you can pretty well get the same features for $18 as you can for $900!

Happy purchasing.

Much thanks. Excellent advice from everyone as always :)

Something I should have mentioed before. If you're a gun and run man I'd give the DVX100A a miss and go with the PD170 / VX2100. Same goes for HD1.
The HD1 needs a fair bit of care to get the most out of it (read fight with the consummer dumbing down), the DVX100 is more like a film camera, to get the most out of it think manual everything. Not saying you could use it gun and run just that I think it's a waste. The Sony kit is usually more robust as well.

If you can wait until after NAB you should. From what I am getting JVC has a 24p version in the works that JVC is unofficially saying will appear at NAB. ( NAB POST) P + K is going to be introducing a Mini35 adaptor for it at NAB as well. And putting 2 + 2 together from things I have been hearing Vegas 5 will more than likely support HDV (Vegas 4 already supports it, just can not capture or PPT it)....and no I do not have official word just that I can do basic math. ;)

Considering JVC's abysmal repair record I would think twice about buying their consumer cameras.

John

no no no no no!!!

( i assume you mean JVC GR-HD1, btw)

the HD1 only shoots 15fps when in HD mode!!! it's a total piece of junk!!

it's big brother, the HD10, shoots true 30fps and 24fps. i have not seen or tested a HD10 and have no clue if its any better or not than the HD1.

but the HD1 bites, big time... the 15fps HD mode alone is enough to make the camera an expensive paperweight, but also its ccd is very bad and even in well it scenes the image crawls with noise and artifacts. so much so you don't even need a high def tv to see them.

my $.02 is save your money for something more worthwhile. i expect sony, cannon and panasonic will have alternatives soon.

also, i am not a jvc-hater. i just bought a jvc sr-vs30u dual format dv/s-vhs editing deck, and i love it. i also have a $12,000 br-d80u D9 (digital-s) deck, which is also a fantastic piece of equipment.

but the HD1 is certainly a flawed product.

The HD10 is the same camera as far as i know with a few bits bolted on. From the one I've played with it wasn't truly aweful if you were very careful.

HD1 and HD10 are 30p acquisition HD capable cameras.
The 15fps camera of which was referred to isn't JVCs and is an SD camera.
Anyhing cutting edge needs careful purchase when you make a living off it.

New 3CCD HDV cameras with better controls and auto/aids are likely to be seen at NAB. HDV is the new consumer cine-camera format. Make sure you are covered for a professional SD look whichever cameras you have in your collection.

Rent the HD10 and make sure you get the companion installation software disc too. I'm expecting to see economic HDCam, DVCPro HD and even stills cameras that can take fast-flashmemory/microdrive clips at 720/60p in the next few years. The tools don't make the art on their own though.

>>The 15fps camera of which was referred to isn't JVCs and is an SD camera.<<

i wish that were true, but unfortunately its not.... on both accounts.

-nate

Do you have a link to your tests? Just would like to see. In all the reviews and info I have read on the camera not one person other than you mentions any sort of locked in 15fps frame rate. I think you purchased a bad camera - other wise this info would be all over the place and I doubt CBS would have used it to shoot a new TV series, let alone all the people who are using it.

>>>Considering JVC's abysmal repair record I would think twice about buying their consumer cameras.<<<

For me I wouldn't know because I have yet to have any JVC gear break down. I have a JVC S-VHS deck still going strong from almost 20 years ago and not one repair/breakdown on it ever.

i don't own the camera... i'd certainly never buy something so junky! so i don't have tests on a webpage. but this forum member seems to have had a similar experience to me when taking the camera for a test run:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=d3798e5f7f1f682928c5fb1d5c1bb210&threadid=13224

but in the review, he doesn't say that he actually recorded an image on a tape and then played it back on a monitor. the reason this is important is that the camera does not output HD to a monitor unless playing from the tape... and that is when you see the 15fps artifacts. e.g., when playing with the camera hooked up to a monitor, you only see a SD image at 30fps. if you record in HD mode to a tape, it records 720 HD at 15fps. but you can only see the 720 resolution and 15fps "effect" when playing back recorded footage.

but certainly the GR-HD1 is a jvc camera that does have HD capabilities. i mean, here is the jvc website link:

http://www.jvc.com/product.jsp?modelId=MODL027075&page=2

notice that the spec does boast 720 HD resolution, but does not mention framerate. this is in contrast to the JY-HD10 webpage:

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/Attributes/features.jsp?feature_id=01&tree=&itempath=&model_id=MDL101394

which specifically highlights 720/30p capability.

i think there is confision because jvc has 4 camera models that all are similar and sound the same: GR-HD1, GR-HD10, JY-HD1, JY-HD10.

to be absolutely honest, i can't remember if the model i saw was the "GR" or "JY", but for sure it was an "HD1" and not an "HD10." also for sure it was jvc.

-nate

Ok - now I am even more confused. You don't own the camera and you also say "to be absolutely honest, i can't remember if the model i saw was the "GR" or "JY", but for sure it was an "HD1" and not an "HD10." also for sure it was jvc." and you send me over to link that you imply backs up your claim but mentions nothing about 15fps. Matter of fact from what i can tell the post was pretty much a "WOW" tpye post about the camera, and how the output looked when hooked up to an HDTV monitor. ..it wasn't saying anything about frame rates.

So just to play devils advocate here - You don't seem to have any sort of experiance with it but you imply you do when you say: when playing with the camera hooked up to a monitor, you only see a SD image at 30fps. if you record in HD mode to a tape, it records 720 HD at 15fps. but you can only see the 720 resolution and 15fps "effect" when playing back recorded footage. But, again, how could you know this when you don't own the camera and admit that you only saw a camera that you were sure was a JVC camera that said HD1?

So I go back to what I said before - but I will change it to say whatever camera you actually saw may have not really been what you think you saw or it may have been a bad camera if it was, indeed, a JVC HD1 camera. I can not say for sure because I was not there, but from what I can tell no one else was either.


*****PS -
Ok - so I did some research and I found out that some SONY cameras shoot at 15fps. In specifc the VX2100 and VX2000. It is explained much like you explain the JVC - The VX2000's FPS(frames per second) typically shoots at 60fps, but in progressive mode it drops down to 15fps. I also found some brief mentions of the PD150/PD170 and the TRV900 doing the same thing. I do *not* use Sony gear so I have no hands on fact gathering about this, however there seems to be a lot about these SONY cameras really doing 15fps and not 30p/60p. The JVC HDV cameras I can't seem to find anything, as I said, outside of your post.

Beyond that - the JVC GY-DV300U "Streamcorder" does shoot 15fps when it shoots in Mpeg-4 web mode (or whatever it is called). Maybe what you saw was this JVC camera?

filmy,

for cripes sakes... its not an oliver stone conspiracy. just take a dv tape to your local camera store and see for yourself. dont take my word for it.

it was either a GR-HD1 or a JY-HD1; the differences are minor: one is just a more recent model of the other. since the JY-HD1 is not on the jvc website and appears to be discontinued, i strongly suspect it was the GR-HD1.

-nate

Short film shot with the HD10 - here is a clip.
Hotel Room

This is a mighty confusing camera, I still don't know if the PAL version will shoot HiDef or not (latest I heard was it wouldn't).
Either way the one I played with would output HD to a monitor.
Still has lots of problems though, certainly not a camera for a serious use.

Although there's an aweful lot of excitment about this emerging technology I think a bit of a reality check is in order. Stop for a moment and consider what is trying to be achieved.
We're expecting a camera that can shoot at about 1080x1800 pixel resolution at 30 fps. Firstly that's a lot of pixels, more pixels means more time to scan them, and poorer low light performance. We can improve the later with more glass BUT up go the costs, at about the square of the light gathering capability. It has to be good glass too, HiDef and the slightest lens defects are not a good look. Better answer is bigger 3 chip CCDs, at least 2/3" CCDs. Good luck trying to fit that into a hand held camera.
Assuming we can get a good image onto a good set of CCDs we've got to record it to something. To keep costs down it's going to be recorded to MiniDV tapes and the only way to do that is with some form of temporal compression, mpeg-2 in this case. Now doing that in real time is a BIG ask. Doing that with silicon that doesn't draw huge amounts of power is much, much harder. Sure Moores law has held true, but it didn't say anything about power consumption.
I've no doubt we're going to see some amazing results from the next round of HDV cameras but they'll never be anywhere near as good as a CineAlta camera, there's just too many constraints imposed by the physical limitations.
And again, the cameras is only a small part of the HiDef issue and cost. I'd suggest if you want to shoot HiDef on a shoestring budget Super 16 is a pretty cheap way to go. If you've looked at the costs of that and it scares you, then you haven't done a realistic budget for the rest of the project. You haven't considered that shooting HiDef cranks up the costs of everything, even before the light hits a lens your costs go up, HiDef shows up the defects in everything that much better. Your lighting needs to be better, your makeup needs to be better, I suggest even your talent needs to be better and your audio sure needs to be better.

any idea if HDV will use 4:1:1 (like standard DV) vs. true 4:2:2?
-nate

i'm not sure what looked better.... the footage or tracy...
-nate

When I watch the sample "Meeting Tracy" movie on my computer, am I seeing it in HD ? When I use the full-screen option on the Quicktime player, it doesn't look that great to me, even though the production values appear to be at a completely professional level. If I'm not viewing this clip in HD, what do I have to do to do so ? I presume that since computer monitors can display HD resolutions, this should be possible ?