<!-- Rating:</B> 1<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Thsi is the kind of review I would like to see more often. The reviews of all the Sony cams are pretty cookie cutter and generic. This tells us something. Bravo to JVC for doing something different that matters ratrher than allowing us to surf the web on out videocams.

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Thsi is the kind of review I would like to see more often. The reviews of all the Sony cams are pretty cookie cutter and generic. This tells us something. Bravo to JVC for doing something different that matters ratrher than allowing us to surf the web on out videocams.

<!-- Rating:</B> 4<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>This a really insightful article and shed a lot of light on this new technology. The interesting part will be how this plays out with the other camcorder makers.

<!-- Rating:</B> 3<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>From prerelease information I am aware of, the resolution maximum was to be 720i (not P). Is this true? If so, we really are entering into a consumer HD camera. I can\'t wait to see the 3 chip versions later released now that JVC has gotten the ball rolling. Only downside is, all of our SD cameras are going to look terrible in comparison and need to be replaced, oh well, it will be a little while before second generation cameras are out anyway.

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>ccbatson,

You are right... All of our DV cameras will pale in comparison! That is for sure. What a fun camera this this was to review because of that. The clarity of this thing is great.

720p is generally considered to be better than 720i because it is progressive, but if the camera could do 720i, footage could go through a Bob filter to get squished 1280x360 at 60fps, then be de-interlaced with the excellent Smooth Deinterlace by Gunnar Thalin (see http://home.bip.net/gunnart/video/#deinterlacesmooth). You would then end up with pretty good 720p 60fps footage. You can do this procedure now with DV at 480i, and end up with pretty good 480p. Unfortunately, that isn\'t an option here though. Oh well, we will have to wait for the 720p 60fps camcorders for that...

-Lorin

<!-- Rating:</B> 3<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Good effort on the sample frames, but not a worthwhile effort as there are too many uncontrolled variables (monitor, software, etc) for this to be an accurate representation. Having opened these files with my setup, without a comparison, to my eye, this was not a high definition image (I have seen a lot of high definition images and footage as I am very well equipped in this regard.....50 inch Panasonic plasma monitor, 34 inch Sony direct view HDTV, JVC DVHS.....you get the point). Best to leave this out as it detracts from the point being made (IMO).

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Go to supervideo.com and select dv news. Then select March 2003 colum and scroll down. Behold you will see a picture of the worlds first High Definition DVD Camcorder from Panasonic itself. It will be released in 2004. I think this will be a three chip and possibly 1080i/ or p. All tape information is stored on a DVD or HD DVD. Unclear but details coming soon.........

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Frank -- You mention the Supervideo site! Now that is an interesting one. Run by the old Chuckmeister. Unfortunately I think he needs to check his sources because his picture of a "Blu-Ray DVD HD camera" on that page you mention is nothing more than a side shot of the Japanese version of the VDR-M30 DVD RAM/R SD Digital Palmcorder, which was at the the PMA show. I built a quick page with photos of that camera at http://thwaits.net/jvc/dvd.html if you want to check it out. Of all the camcorder-related websites out there, his is definitely the most colorful, in more ways than one!

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Just wanted to say this was a great, informative piece. Job well done.
-Rick

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Thanks for those stills of what the camcorder actually is, it\'s still cool because the VDR-M30 DVD RAM/R is meant for SD, does that mean Panasonic can easily upgrade it to HD? Also, Pixelmonger.com, Scott Billups site, refers to Panasonic releasing an HD camcorder in 2004. Sony will shortly after. Now I definately want to know what panasonic is up to because they do have the stepping stone AG-DVX100, i\'m coming to the conclusion that it wouldn\'t be hard at all for panasonic to do this new HD camera.

<!-- Rating:</B> 1<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>The Panasonic VDR-M30 DVD RAM/R SD (what a name!) only has SD in the name because it can snap still images to an SD memory card. I don\'t expect Panasonic to build an HD camcorder on this platform. If blu-ray DVD were wedged in, offering 6 GB of storage on that size disc, it would require high compression to keep up with the bandwidth required by HD. Also the continuous power available from the battery would limit how much processing and compression you could do. Hard to get enough horsepower to do justice to HD content in this small cam. With the AG-DVX100 on the other hand, you\'re right. This excellent brick of a camera offers a great platform to built an HD offering. And I expect great things from Pana and Sony in 2004. I checked out the pixelmonger.com site and only found the year-old article about the AJ-HDC27 VariCam. Where is this info about next year\'s killer affordable HD cam?

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Go to Hot Gear, Camcorders, and scroll down until you come to the Ag-dvx100 or the GR-HD1. Billups mentions that Panasonic won\'t release theres until 2004 and then sony will follow suit. The XL-2 is also supposed to have 24-, and 30p. Rumors only.

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>Pixelmonger is a cool site, but a few of the statements on http://pixelmonger.com/hg_cam.html need correction. Regarding the GR-HD1 it doesn\'t actually have an SDI connection, and it won`t directly do 24p. Also the Panavision HD system mentioned is not a camcorder per se, and not at all related to Panasonic, but rather the conversion of the excellent Sony CineAlta HD camera to do 24p, first used by Lucas for Episode II. Panavision HD definitely can`t be recorded to DV. On his page I think he may be trying to refer to the AJ-HDC24A camera that was released at NAB two years ago. That 15-pound shoulder cam records at 24p, as well as 12, 25, 30, 60 and other speeds so you can "overcrank" and "undercrank" it. The cam uses DVCPRO-50 HD cassettes (also called D7) which is 4:2:2 sampling and 3:3:1 compression, the same quality as JVC`s Digital-S (D9), or Sony`s DigiBeta. DVCPRO-50 is a very high quality 50Mbps format that records 46 minutes of high def content on metal particle tape rather than DV`s evaporated metal tape. Anyway, no manufacturer other than JVC has yet made a camera that records high def to standard DV tapes.

<!-- Rating:</B> 3<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>While your (sending) computer and monitor are not at issue, the receiving end very much is the problem. It is inconsistent from one viewer\'s equipment to the next. More crudely put, when I look at the samples they do not impress me as HD (with good comparisons available). So, either what I am seeing is not accurate, or the samples are, in fact unimpressive (and therefore the camera must logically be considered unimpressive). I suspect the former, but have no way of knowing. This is why I suggest refraining from posting still samples and deferring the reader to see for themselves when they get a chance.

<!-- Rating:</B> 5<img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><img src="http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/icons/star.gif" width=22 height=18><BR> --><BR>ccbatson - OK, I see. This is true that many folks don`t regularly play back their video on the PC. I think It`s still fun to see as close as we can get to the real thing. Plus with other sites posting straight screen grabs from cameras then there`s some degree of comparison that can be drawn from these images.