Jump to content


Photo

SOny pmw ex3 or JVC gyhm 700


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 inge lichtenberg

inge lichtenberg

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 26 September 2009 - 01:48 AM

i have to choose between the Sony PMW ex3 and the JVC gyhm 700.

i will use the camera for both documentary and fiction/narrative.

the sony is 1080, what is the JVC? from the B&H specs it seems the JVC is 720. how much of a difference is this in image quality?

apparently the 1/2 inch sony sensor and the 1/3 inch JVC sensor differences are pretty much equalised once you put on the Letus lens converter and other lenses. is this true?

i'm desperate to know ASAP, as i HAVE to buy the camera buy this coming tuesday, 29th for shoot starting sun 4th.

please HELP, i'm drowing in indecision.

Thanks all :blink:
  • 0

#2 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 27 September 2009 - 09:15 PM

Of course the Sony EX-3 produces a higher quality image with native 1080 half inch chips. The JVC uses one third inch 720p chips pixel shifted to 1080 resolution. However the ergonomics of the JVC are infinitely superior and it may be a nightmare to try to struggle with holding the Sony because it is very front heavy while the JVC is perfectly balanced. So if I were buying a camera I would go for the JVC because it will make your job a lot easier and that makes a lot of sense if you want to make it to the end of the shift without killing yourself.
  • 0

#3 gabriel deloach

gabriel deloach

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 26 January 2010 - 02:13 PM

Of course the Sony EX-3 produces a higher quality image with native 1080 half inch chips. The JVC uses one third inch 720p chips pixel shifted to 1080 resolution. However the ergonomics of the JVC are infinitely superior and it may be a nightmare to try to struggle with holding the Sony because it is very front heavy while the JVC is perfectly balanced. So if I were buying a camera I would go for the JVC because it will make your job a lot easier and that makes a lot of sense if you want to make it to the end of the shift without killing yourself.


i spent the last year shooting documentary and wildlife with the ex3. i eventually got used to the design, shooting all day and into the evenings, but i always wished i had a shoulder mount.

i bought the hm700 a few weeks ago. despite the slight decrease in image quality compared to the ex3, the camera--for the price range--seemed superior in design and functionality. the media is far cheaper and the canon stock lens is sharp though not very wide.

but if resolution is really an issue, you can shoot straight to a nanoFlash on a cf card at about 100/mbs--this method should give you killer quality but at an added cost of 2k (still cheaper than a few sxs cards).

http://www.convergent-design.com/

because the ex3 uses a cmos chip you will find that image blur is bad and jumping will occur often while filming motion, or are in motion. the ccd chips do not have this problem.

also, be sure to tweek the picture/scene files before shooting with the hm700. it looks like dog doo out of the box.

Edited by gabriel deloach, 26 January 2010 - 02:15 PM.

  • 0

#4 Ryan Mast

Ryan Mast

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Director
  • Philadelphia, PA

Posted 30 January 2010 - 11:34 PM

also, be sure to tweek the picture/scene files before shooting with the hm700. it looks like dog doo out of the box.


What settings do you recommend for camera process in the HM700?
  • 0

#5 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 31 January 2010 - 08:34 PM

Also one thing to remember is that when you are shooting in the 720p60 mode, which is the best high definition for fast action sports, when you are shooting with the Sony you are not using the full half inch chip but rather your chip size is only about one third inch because the chip is letter boxed. So if both the Sony and JVC have effective chip sizes of only one third inch for 720p I think the JVC with its CCD will handle motion a lot better than the Sony CMOS with its rolling shutter problems.

I think people rave about the Sony because when there is little motion the native 1920x1080p chips will do a good job when displayed on a 1080p television. However for fast action sports all bets are off and the JVC comes out ahead.
  • 0

#6 Steve Phillipps

Steve Phillipps
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 02 April 2010 - 05:56 PM

Also one thing to remember is that when you are shooting in the 720p60 mode, which is the best high definition for fast action sports, when you are shooting with the Sony you are not using the full half inch chip but rather your chip size is only about one third inch because the chip is letter boxed. So if both the Sony and JVC have effective chip sizes of only one third inch for 720p I think the JVC with its CCD will handle motion a lot better than the Sony CMOS with its rolling shutter problems.

I think people rave about the Sony because when there is little motion the native 1920x1080p chips will do a good job when displayed on a 1080p television. However for fast action sports all bets are off and the JVC comes out ahead.


Just came across this thread. This statement is simply not true - the EX3 does not letterbox in 720 mode, it downconverts from the full 1/2" chip. If it letterboxed then the effective magnification of the lenses would change and they don't.
Steve
  • 0

#7 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 03 April 2010 - 11:30 AM

If what you say is true that the Sony scales the 1080p image and converts it to 720p that still does not solve the problem because all that creates is scaling artifacts. To properly downconvert to 720p without artifacts you need to start with a 1440p image. However if all you want is a full high definition 1080p image then the camera has to be able to record 1080p at 60 frames per second otherwise it is not full high definition and you are better off sticking with native 720p.

Edited by Thomas James, 03 April 2010 - 11:34 AM.

  • 0

#8 David Williams

David Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 03 April 2010 - 05:22 PM

If what you say is true that the Sony scales the 1080p image and converts it to 720p that still does not solve the problem because all that creates is scaling artifacts. To properly downconvert to 720p without artifacts you need to start with a 1440p image. However if all you want is a full high definition 1080p image then the camera has to be able to record 1080p at 60 frames per second otherwise it is not full high definition and you are better off sticking with native 720p.


1) Please point out the commercial broadcast or distribution standard which defines 1080/60P.

2) Please show us examples of an EX displaying scaling artefacts in 720P.

Bet you can't do either. Your making them both up.

Neither Blu-Ray or DTB does 1080/60P, so they must not be full HD I guess.

I have _never_ heard or read about a single person ever complaining about the EX series 720P.

Baseless assertion.
  • 0

#9 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 03 April 2010 - 08:25 PM

To meet the original International Telecommunications Union specifications for high definition a format must have both better spatial and temporal resolution than standard definition. Interlace 1080i60 and progressive 1080p30 fails to deliver better temporal resolution than standard definiton therefore these formats are not true high definition but had to be grandfathered into the ITU specifications. 720p60 barely meets the ITU specifications for high definition because the 720p60 format has both better spatial and temporal resolution than standard definition so no grandfather clause was necessary for 720p60.

For those that insist on using 1080p, the 1080p60 format is the only 1080 format that can meet the original unadulterated ITU specifications which existed before the ITU modified their specifications with grandfather clauses.
  • 0

#10 David Williams

David Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 04 April 2010 - 05:48 AM

So you can support neither assertion then. Thanks.
  • 0

#11 Steve Phillipps

Steve Phillipps
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 04 April 2010 - 04:23 PM

To meet the original International Telecommunications Union specifications for high definition a format must have both better spatial and temporal resolution than standard definition. Interlace 1080i60 and progressive 1080p30 fails to deliver better temporal resolution than standard definiton therefore these formats are not true high definition but had to be grandfathered into the ITU specifications. 720p60 barely meets the ITU specifications for high definition because the 720p60 format has both better spatial and temporal resolution than standard definition so no grandfather clause was necessary for 720p60.

For those that insist on using 1080p, the 1080p60 format is the only 1080 format that can meet the original unadulterated ITU specifications which existed before the ITU modified their specifications with grandfather clauses.


Whether or not that's theoretically correct I don't know, but it's pedantic for sure. We all accept 1080/25P or 30P as full HD.
I take your point about downscaling 1080 to 720 though, I know engineers would point out that theoretically it's not ideal - they will always point to the best 720 being from dedicated 720 chips.
Like David says though, I don't think there has been much if any complaint about 720 from the EX cams. I'd still go for the JVC though due to the lack of CMOS issues (I shoot wildlife).
Steve
  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Visual Products

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

CineTape

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC