JVC GY-HMQ10U (small 4K 60p camcorder)

That's brilliant! Don't be disappointed by f/2.8, in a 1/2'' camera that seems about right. It's easy to do f/1.8 with 1/4,'' but as you increase sensor size you need bigger lenses, which are naturally slower.

I want the same, but 1080p is enough, 50 Mbit/s is enough, and please no more than $2.5K.

Good point, another variable that can impact sharpness is zoom range, and they probably did not want a 3-5x zoom. If that's the case, they made the right compromise.

Very nice! What's the l x w on a 16:9 rectangle if the diagonal is 1.25''? (Trig is not one of my strong points).

Got it, using this calculator http://www.globalrph.com/screenwidth.htm

I got 1.09'' x 0.61'' (27.6mm x 15.6mm)

So it's about APS-C / Super 35mm size.

I want!!!

JVC introduced the GY-HMQ10U as an unnamed "concept" camera at CES a whole year ago. Evidently, the technology has been in development for several years, but remains too ahead of the market. 4k projectors and screens will exceed the content of most broadcast or entertainment media for several years, at least. Evidently, JVC is rolling out this device for that niche of people with an appetite to experiment ahead of the curve, but without the big bucks for a RED. Heck, the JVC cost barely more than what it takes to rent a RED. It costs less than some high-end DSLR systems (with lenses and extra mics).

It would not be worthwhile to shoot 4K video only to have to downsize it all to 1920x1080 resolution, or simply to stockpile 4K clips now as a hedge against obsolescence of "mere" HDTV, perhaps in 2020. Twenty years from now, people will not wimper that 1920x1080 looks blurry the way VHS, in retrospect, appears today.

Neither is it likely that 4k will become the bar for video display anywhere other than a theater, whether commercial or in the mansions of the well-to-do. Most of the 4k content will remain, at least for a while, upscaled 1920x1080 Blu-ray grade video.

That said, there are a number of things that make 4k video capture interesting, without any 4k display outlets at all. Most important, you could shoot action or stage subjects at wide angle, and then crop them to 1920x1080 and thus obtain close-ups or semi-close-ups without loss of quality and without need to pan or zoom. With key-framing, you could track erratic or unpredictable action and not need to jerk the camera frantically about in the quest to keep a player or raptor in the frame. Still photographers have this luxury all the time. Without 4k, a videographer can barely crop at all, no matter what the framerate or bitrate.

However, in order that the GY-HMQ10U fulfill this potential, realistically, the following conditions would have to be met:

1) Sufficient dynamic range so that details are not so muddled or blown out that the effective result is no better than usual HD.

2) At least some low light resilience. Will 4k with a 1/2.3" sensor be any good at all if shot in a dim gymnasium, natatorium, auditorium, or sanctuary?

3) Some tool to edit or crop 4k video that is compatible with the sort of i7 system a small pro or enthusiast is likely to have. If the hardware requirements are too high, or the workflow too complex, 4k just won't be worth the trouble, or just as marginal as 3D.

It would be ingenious for JVC to enable a buyer to employ the camera's own processors, in conjunction with a relatively ordinary computer, to perform some of the core editing tasks. Otherwise, my guess is that a buyer will have to wait for software that uses proxy files, or attempt daunting experiments with advanced graphics cards.

When AVCHD first appeared, it was frustrating to utilize on existing PCs or editing products. However, even in late 2006 or early 2007, one could already convert it to HDV MPEG2 and edit it comfortably on a 2 core machine.

If anyone obtains sample material shot by the forthcoming JVC machine, please confirm whether you are able to play, split, splice, key-frame, or crop the clips. Kindly confirm your computer specs, OS, and software.

If any JVC representative follows this forum, let me thank the company for introducing this innovation. However, may I cordially suggest that the firm develop more user guidance, encourage software publishers to roll out tools to work with the video files, and possibly develop firmware so that someone with a mere i7 system and 1920x1080 display might be able to employ the camera's chips as co-processors to allow for basic editing and file export functions. Alternatively, if the PAZ, crop, or conversion functions could be done with the camera itself, using an external HDTV as the display, and maybe a USB keyboard or mouse, that would be a great idea.

Not all potential buyers will have Dreamworks-grade workstations or a 55' LG 8k screen to work with. If the 4k camera delivers full value only under ideal light, that also constrains demand, unless the auxiliary costs are within reason.

Realistically, the best solution might be to employ the camera's own chips to perform edits or crops of the 4k footage, then export to a 1920x1080 format compatible with existing screens and editors. JVC could certainly embed such a tool in the camera, which could be used in conjunction with an HDTV monitor and mouse, in lieu of waiting 3 years for 4k-friendly software or graphics cards. I'd strongly urge JVC to include that sort of capacity in the camera itself. Otherwise, the camera will be like a plug-in auto without any plugs.

Meanwhile, I read that JVC will introduce an interchangeable lens 4k device by late 2012. Precisely what sensor size? A larger sensor might be nice, but not make it any more a "sure thing" than the GY-HMQ10U, unless there is an economical way to edit the output in a world where i7 computers or 1920x1080 displays are likely to remain the "high end" for the next few years.

BTW, has JVC (or anyone else) introduced a 1080 60p Blu-ray player? When, if ever, will there be a 4k player or disc media? Exactly what 4k playback driver did JVC use at its CES booth?

Yes, TVs will never get more than 1080p like we will never need more than a 5 GB hard drive on our computers. Technology is about to come to a standstill! Seriously though, I have seen a 4K TV and the quality blows 1080p away. Makes it look ordinary.
I predict that we will see 2160p TVs become available to consumers within 2 years.

With 12 Mbit/s broadcast, 9 Mbit/s satellite and 2-5 Mbit/s YouTube there is barely enough bandwidth to make 720p watchable. Netflix chokes on the evenings when I try to watch a 10 Mbit/s show, it can only pump about 3 Mbit/s in peak hours in my area when everyone is using the Net. Hence, I don't need 4K neither I care.

I've read on another forum that 4K may be actually quite useful for reporters for framegrabs. And, as pointed above, virtual panning. So, I don't think nor I wish for 4K to trickle down to consumer devices, but it will expand shooting options.

Well I mean Blu-ray/home theatre market will go 4K, not broadcast..... yet!

Looking forward to 4K myself. I bought a Sony HC3 HDV camcorder around 6 years ago. Glad I did, being able to finally get some HD of my family, events, etc, etc. 1080p looks good, but having used a projector for 7 years now, I am ready to step up to the higher resolution. Might have to film in 4k first, and then get a 4k display, but at least I'll have 4k material ready. Kudos to JVC for leading the way.

The HC3 is interlaced only. Get a newer Sony or Panasonic and you will get twice the resolution at 1080p60.

Editing original 4K files from the camera may be another thing, but playing 4K back while at the same time downconverting to 1080p doesn't seem to tax today's PCs much. Even my laptop can do it (2.8GHz T9600 Core 2 Duo). Mind you, I'm talking about the 4K files from YouTube at 30 fps, which are highly compressed (the best I've seen averaging only 19.7 Mbps). (BTW, downconverting to 1080p results in a much better looking image than you'd expect from such a bitrate because of pixel averaging.) Playing back 4K files direct from the camera, which are not as highly compessed (I'll say - 144Mbps!), probably takes more muscle, while editing would take even more.

Someone has to take the lead, thus creating demand for the processing power and efficient progams we'll need for a complete (and affordable) 4K workflow. Kudos to JVC.

Ungermann,

All that I know my friend, I have some of the newer camcorders. 4K is what I really want for the future.

Panning or cropping 4k clips with a computer might be nice, but what CPU, graphics, or RAM specs would be needed?

To edit the 4k h.265 MP4 files in native format may be simply impossible, even with a high-end i7 machine. Creative Suite or FCPX users probably decompress to some format that uses oceans of disc space. Until some sample clips appear in their native form, there is no way to know. People familiar with RED workflow may figure out a solution, but not eager to spill the trade secrets. By 2014, perhaps several software publishers will offer means to edit, without decompression to huge intermediate files, by means of proxy files, a bit the way Corel allows people with slower PCs to edit AVCHD.

Consequently, the best near-term means to edit 4k, without spending a fortune or waiting until 2014, would be if the JVC camera itself came fitted with some in-camera edit functions, or else a way to tether it to a PC to use the camera chips to boost the processing or graphics strength of an on-computer program.

Otherwise, I'd fear ending up with a "white elephant" camera that would be obsolete, or superseded by cheaper & better models, before I ever found a way to edit 4k.

Here is a better clip showing footage of the GY-HMQ10 at CES showing footage on a 4k Toshiba set. Around the 1:50 mark is some footage shot at night, which looks pretty good. Wish the camera filming the clip was a 4k cam, and our displays were 4k....... patience, patience.

I too, got an HC3 when they first came out, am glad I got so much family footage on HDV when everyone else was using DV or even hi8. At the time, I had a slow pc, no idea of how or when I'd ever be ever be able to edit the stuff- I simply filmed and stored, filmed and stored. Now, I have a few hundred hours of tapes, a six month old Sony Vaio laptop with a bluray burner- I got my work cutout for me! Am currently using a Canon HV40, yup, still clinging to HDV, despite those who say it is archaic.
A 4k camera? I'm listening- wonder if they'll come out with a 4k camera that does 3d, that could make my living room look like the holodeck on the Starship Enterprise!
I currently watch everything on what some would consider an archaic set- a Samsung 72" DLP. Hey, at least it is over 70" in size!

Question to "dclark' or anybody else familiar with HDV file format:

What is the process/workflow of creating Blu-ray discs from HDV format tapes/files?

My older friend who lives in Europe, bought himself a Blu-ray burner, but is struggling with the whole process.

I, myself went straight from SD miniDV camcorder to AVCHD (2/progressive/60p) camcorder and don't have any experience with the conversion/work flow from HDV (miniDV) to Blu-ray discs.

Any information and/or advice will be appreciated.

Ahead of which market? Obviously given that there have been 4K and 5K capable cameras out for some years now, the market is there, JVC is making it more affordable for both the Pro, Prosumer and average Joe so it's an all around win.


I'm not sure about the 'several' years, content manufacturers are already working on delivering 4K media within the next couple of years if not by 2013. Sony is a huge backer (Google it).


I wouldn't call it niche, I'd call it cutting edge if it delivers on the quality end, just as I wouldn't have called the Red One a niche product when it was introduced. Even the smartest shooter would go with the the less expensive option vs Red again if it delivers on the quality end.


Laughing at that one, believe it or not there are people who still deliver 480p content and shoot on Red or film or 1080p just to downsize. Obviously you don't shoot because you wouldn't have made that statement. Capturing @ 4K and delivering even down to 480p would produce better results than if you captured @ 1080p and downsampled @ 480p again as long as the quality end of the camera holds up and all else being equal.


I would love to peek into this crystal ball you have, you're making a lot of predictions based on what? Manufacturers are alwasy willing and ready to adopt the 'what's hot' next product for consumers to sink their money into with the marketing team hyping "4K it's 4 times better than your 1080p TV!" You think Joe Consumer won't jump on that if the price point is right? I know I would and am when it becomes affordable. The first 1080p sets introduced were ridiculously priced at $7-10K! Many people bought then and now the trend is 1080p. Same will happen to 4K, guaranteed, that's the tech track record.


Will never happen, that would give hackers and opportunity to tap into the JVCs Falconbrid processor directly. That idea has never happened in the history of product manufacturing for cameras as far as I know.


Primiere has been able to edit 4K proxy files for years as well as Avid and a few others and has been able to use GPU computing to accelerate that process for the past 3 generations.


Just as video tech is advancing so is CPU tech and it's actually advancing even faster. Intel already has roadmapped it's next level of processors and you have affordable hexacore I7s as well that you can do a double configuration on for either and 8 core or 12 core computer. Apple has a 12 core monster computer that should be able to handle 4K video.


Mentioned it before, they're in the works.


I'm not sure what you mean by 'driver' but they had live 4K and pre-recorded 4K playing straight from the camera to 4K displays via the HDMI outs.

Editing 4K is available now, obviously. Many indy directors and prosumers are shooting 4K and editing on relatively standard PCs and Macs all the time. The movie Monsters was shot on Red in 4K and edited on standard Mac, it's possible. This isn't the first 4K solution out there.

I'm not sure why you have so much negativity and angst for this camera or why you decided to post what you did, but you haven't done a lot of research or don't have an understanding of what is possible now or in the short term with cameras and computers et al.

I for one embrace all new advances in tech especially in the area of cameras and computers.

JVC set the world on fire when they introduced the GR-HD1 back in 2003 and they're doing it again with the GY-HMQ10. The world will catch up in relatively short order.


I second that. :-)


Waiting with baited breath myself!!

Cheers.

Hi


A rather sweeping statement! Panasonic camcorders do exactly the above so you can off load the processing of H264 to the camera from your PC to speed up conversions.

Regards

Phil

Luckily I ended my sentence with "as far as I know...".

The link you embeded in your post is a link to a remote control, not sure if you had the wrong URL, but that has nothing to do with anything.

As far as Panny cameras doing the offloading for conversion I don't think it's being applied like you think. The PC recognizes the camcorder as a drive not an external processor. I think that Panasonic has a feature embeded in the camcorder that allows the camcorder to downconvert the 60p footage to something more viable (MPEG-2, AVCHD @ 60i etc). Many camcorders also do this and have been able to for some time without the fancy labeling of Conversion Assist.

I don't think you have access to the camcorder processor via a USB 2.0 connection to help speed up processing for the PC, like for example Premiere Pro CS5 uses the GPU from NVIDIA graphics cards along with the CPU to help with conversions and processing, I don't think that's going on with the camcorder connected.

I'd love to be proven wrong because this may be the best thing since sliced bread for people with older PCs.

Thanks.

LOL, interesting. Things sure have changed. :-)

Thanks Paulo.