Jvc Gy-ls300 Stop Latitude

Thanks Earl, he should have quoted your previous post then. He also posted this ad in two different additional threads as well. Thanks for getting it back on track.I also looked at the JVC to replace my AF100, bit it didn't add that much, still an 8-bit camera.

1. Jvc Gy-ls300 Stop Latitude And Cities

Earlier this year, Videomaker awarded the JVC GY-LS300 camera as the Best Camcorder at CES 2015. And for good reason. This interchangeable lens handheld camera has a 4K CMOS Super 35 image sensor and a Micro Four Thirds (MFT) mount that allows you to use a wide variety of full-frame, PL, C and EF mount lenses with optional adapters. JVC’s Craig Yanagi sneak-previewing the GY-LS300 4KCAM at the Sundance Film Festival in January. JVC Kenwood At NAB last year, JVC showcased a prototype GY-LSX1 4K (4096) S35 shoulder-mount camcorder with PL lens and IP for remote control and streaming.

But it can work as a run and gun camera for weddings, etc. Where 8-bitmismok for DVD delivery.

I went with a BM Micro Finema camera set up for hand-held work, and get 10-bit ProRes recordings, even if it is S16, it still works well, and can be cut into larger camera workflows easier.However, I think the UM is a great choice for someone like you, shooting a larger,variety of projects. You can 'grow' with the camera, and it should still be a great platform several years down the road. I would recommend the PLmount version, as you will get more lens selection with it, unless you already have a lot of Canon EF lenses that need an active mount. If not, FYI, HotRod cameras is also developing a dumb EF mount for the UM PL camera, to allow use of manual EF lenses.Cheers. Denny Smith wrote:However, I think the UM is a great choice for someone like you, shooting a larger,variety of projects. You can 'grow' with the camera, and it should still be a great platform several years down the road.I tend to agree.

Re: URSA MINI VERSUS JVC GY-LS300. I use Sony's too with Metabones (C/Y E) for the exact same reason: lenses first, camera second but the only reason I rejected the Pocket was that an FF lens original FoV is not completely restored on MFT as it is on S-35.

If the LS300 had 10-bit output on the SDI and HDMI, I'd be less reluctant to be 'saddled' with its less-robust recording formats.I've spent most of my time recently studying the low-light handling and noise issues of both cameras. Neither is perfect, but I think both are quite serviceable.I was fortunate to get my hands on a demo unit of the URSA Mini 4K a couple weeks ago. The first tests I did were in my media room downstairs, which has dark walls and limited lighting.

As expected, the images were quite noisy, but by running the DNG files through Adobe Camera Raw, I could clean them up quite nicely. The URSA Mini surprised me in that it handled the low light much better than I was lead to believe, reading some of the reports online. (This pays to show it's worthwhile to do your own tests if you're able.)Conversely, I'd downloaded a variety of sample footage from the GY-LS300. There's plenty of noise there as well. I even saw evidence of fixed pattern noise (FPN) hidden in the shadows.

But the main difference with the LS300 is that the H.264 encoding has a way of cleaning up the noise a bit automatically - it's there, but softer, which could be considered less objectionable.Which then raises another consideration for anyone considering these cameras - how do you want to handle the noise? With the URSA Mini, you pretty much have to do it all yourself - and you'll want to - but you have the benefit of choosing the technique and the amount to use.

Whereas with the LS300, most of it is done for you, so your workflow becomes faster, but with less control over what happens automatically. (And keep in mind some of that noise will be temporal encoding, too.).

Earl, the Roks are a good starting point. You never know what the future brings, a new Angie PL EZ zoom?Yes, if the JVC LS300 had 10-bit out the SDI, I would have got one. But alas, it does not, and its sensor is not a S35, but closer in size to a Standard35mm sensor (slightly larger), like the BM 4K cameras use (size wise). This is how they got a cut-a-way MFT mount on it, otherwise a full S35 size sensor would have been too large. MFT is very close to an Academy 35 film gate size, so,p a similar size sensor fits.

Note, the JVC does not publis the actual sensor size, not that I have been able to find anyway.Cheers. Earl, I was looking at the Rokinon Cine DS line as well, but there were some concerns with the operational characteristics, through the range they lack consistency for example in physical dimensions and filter sizes.

Also the 24mm appeared to be the weaker lens of the family at least in the copy some people owned. And the build quality was a concern. Still good value for the price.

Xeen addressed many of these concerns, and the new coatings significantly improved the lenses including the 24mm.But when SLR Magic announced the APO PL with interchangeable mounts and looked good on paper, I shifted focus to them and with John Brawley's review of the 50mm prototype, I was convinced APO PL would have a very long life and return very good performance. Yes, they are more costly, but well below their target competition's price and in some respects as good or better. For me, selecting the lens family first then determined which camera to buy.I also considered the JVC and decided to aim a little higher. Although there are no shortage of challenges with BMD's execution, the recipe BMD uses is too tempting to ignore. Just to chime in. I considered this JVC camera but it was the lack of 10-bit out that made me abandon it.

Otherwise it looked like a really flexible tool. I own 3 pockets with a speed booster for each, so I'm totally sold on the benefits of focal reducers now. Had the UM 4.6 had an MFT mount, I'm 99% sure Metabones would have made a speed booster for it, and that would've been my next camera (probably- the production fiasco has been brutal). Anyway, I went with an FS7 instead of the UM 4.6, and it all came down to not having a flexible (MFT) mount to make use of full frame glass and give that sensor the light it needs. Maybe BMD will come out with another mount in the future- and then I will consider the UM 4.6 again. The Sony is great, but I was used to the beautiful colors of the pocket.:/.

A little shortcut to Denny's comment. You can be shooting with the BM Viewfinder, say open gate, while you have the monitor with the menu up on the page where you select window shooting.

As soon as you change full sensor to window, the current clip ends and then you hit the record button to start a new clip. I do this in a couple of seconds when following action that's moving too close or too far away for my current lens.So no need to: stop recording, bring up the menu, go to the correct page, make the selection, end the menu, and then press record. Just already have the menu page on the monitor as you shoot, select window, and hit record.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

Would it be redundant to purchase the ls300 if you own an a6300? How does the a6300 compare to the ls300? Is it true that I can get similar results with the Sony? Also is the ls300 in the same league as an fs7/fs5? I have the budget for a 4k editing computer but after seeing the specs for this camera I'm considering holding off on the computer and purchasing the ls300, but I really would like to know if it is worth it being I own the a6300?

And from my understanding it's a true super 35 sensor and just uses a mft lense mount. What are the benefits of this? The LS300 is not in the same league as a Sony FS5/7. The LS 300 does not have a full size S35 sensor, it is somewhere between a STD 35 and Super 35'in size, closer to the STD 35.

A full S35 sensor is too big to fit behind a MFT Mount, so the LS300 sensor is just a little larger than MFT, and uses window modes to get its various recording settings. Also, it is still a 8-bit camera, recording to highly compressed video codecs.If you are interested in a larger size camera, For a few $ more, you should consider a Ursa Mini, which is still less $ than a Sony FS5. If you have an investment in MFT lenses, you could also consider the new Panasonic GS5 coming out soon. If 4K is not a requirement, also the BM Micro Cinema camera creates excellent images, is MFT and is a full 10-bit 4.2.2 full HD resolution camera, which I chose over the LS300.Cheers. Denny Smith wrote:The LS300 is not in the same league as a Sony FS5/7. The LS 300 does not have a full size S35 sensor, it is somewhere between a STD 35 and Super 35'in size, closer to the STD 35. A full S35 sensor is too big to fit behind a MFT Mount, so the LS300 sensor is just a little larger than MFT, and uses window modes to get its various recording settings.

Also, it is still a 8-bit camera, recording to highly compressed video codecs.If you are interested in a larger size camera, For a few $ more, you should consider a Ursa Mini, which is still less $ than a Sony FS5. If you have an investment in MFT lenses, you could also consider the new Panasonic GS5 coming out soon. If 4K is not a requirement, also the BM Micro Cinema camera creates excellent images, is MFT and is a full 10-bit 4.2.2 full HD resolution camera, which I chose over the LS300.CheersIs this the camera you're talking about?Also I saw a review of the ls300 and the rep said it is a true super 35 sensor. Well anyway, is the mini a true super 35 and would I be able to use sony emount lenses?

A full size Super 16 sensor/Gate size is 24.9x14 p-18mm (film, dependingmon aspect ratio), while S35 sensors in digital cameras are slightly smaller, withmthe Sony FS7/5 at 23.6x13.3, a BM4K sensor is a little smaller at 22x11.8mm (listed by BM as S35), while the Academy Std 35mm gate size is 21.2x11.9mm, with a 24/25mm diagonal. The LS 300 sensor size is unpublished by JVC, but it fits inside a MFT mount which will just about cover 21x12mm max sensor size. Super 35 has a 32mm image circle (diagonal measurement of a 24x14 sensor area), while the MFT mount diameter is 27mm to the lens contacts, so a 30mm image circle of s S35 is just not going to fit. But a 22x12mm sensor will just about fit, which is about what the JVC sensor is.A JVC rep is going to claim what ever t takes to sell his camera. BM also claims their 4K sensor is S35, while it is not, with its 25mm diagonal.

However the BM 4.6 sensor is larger than S35 at 25.34mm x 14.25mm, which BM also lists as S35. So S35 is a little ambiguous, and any sensor larger than Std. Academy 35 (21x11.9mm) is listed as Super 35 for marketing reasons. So their is not a hard and fast standard sensor size for Super 35, with each camera manufacturer having their own S35 size sensor, bit put, they all fit inside the 32mm image circle (except for the full gate of the BM 4.6 sensor, which can be widowed into various smaller sizes from Super 35 down to S16mm (2K and HD window).The LS300 also Windows its sensor, based in the lens mounted, so if you mount a MFT native lens on the LS300, you are going to get a MFT size window in the larger sensor.

So the actual size of the image area being used depends on the lens mounted on the camera. Here is a good review of the LS300:No, you cannot mount Sony E lenses on a MFT, PL or Canon EF mount cameras. The FFD is too short, like the MFT mount. You can adapt a MFT mount manual lens to a Sony E camera. Sony lens control commands are proprietary, and not shared, as is the camera E mount itself.Cheers. Good, it is best to be informed of the options, and the various shortcomings of the different cameras.

Each has its strengths and issues. For me, getting a nice clean good resolution image in the 10-12 bit, 4.2.2 level, with a good recoding minimal compressed codec like ProRes is what I look for. Convince of use is also an important consideration, and how the camera fits into your workflow. Had the LS300 had 10-bit video resolution, I,would have seriously considered in myself to replace my Panny AF100. But now I am looking at a BM Ursa Mini or? Will wait and see what the coming year brings.Happy Holidays. Yea, I'm really serious getting into movie production.

I'm already comfortable in the pro audio world, but now the technology is allowing budding film makers to express themselves with industry standard quality video. My issue is just knowing what to obtain without spending recklessly.

There are two items within this realm that I must acquire, a capable 4k editing computer and a really good affordable 4k cinema camera. I have the a6300 and I'm happy with it, but I'm the type of person that needs to get as close to the standards as possible. I know my posts looks like a wide eyed, wet behind the ears beginner, but I'm a fast learner and heard worker.

Once I familiarize myself with the jargon and technical components in this movie industry, nothing will stop me from becoming knowledgeable and capable of onset production! Denny Smith wrote:A full size Super 16 sensor/Gate size is 24.9x14 p-18mm (film, dependingmon aspect ratio), while S35 sensors in digital cameras are slightly smaller, withmthe Sony FS7/5 at 23.6x13.3, a BM4K sensor is a little smaller at 22x11.8mm (listed by BM as S35), while the Academy Std 35mm gate size is 21.2x11.9mm. The LS 300 sensor size is unpublished by JVC, but it fits inside a MFT mount which will just about cover 21x12mm max sensor size.

Super 35 has a 32mm image circle (diagonal measurement of a 24x14 sensor area), while the MFT mount diameter is 27mm to the lens contacts, so a 30mm image circle of s S35 is just not going to fit. But a 22x12mm sensor will just about fit, which is about what the JVC sensor is.A JVC rep is going to claim what ever t takes to sell his camera. BM also claims their 4K sensor is S35, while it is not. However the BM 4.6 sensor is larger than S35 at 25.34mm x 14.25mm, which BM also lists as S35. So S35 is a little ambiguous, and any sensor larger than Std. Academy 35 (21x11.9mm) is listed as Super 35 for marketing reasons. So their is not a hard and fast standard sensor size for Super 35, with each camera manufacturer having their own S35 size sensor, bit put, they all fit inside the 32mm image circle (except for the full gate of the BM 4.6 sensor, which can be widowed into various smaller sizes from Super 35 down to S16mm (2K and HD window).The LS300 also Windows its sensor, based in the lens mounted, so if you mount a MFT native lens on the LS300, you are going to get a MFT size window in the larger sensor.

So the actual size of the image area being used depends on the lens mounted on the camera. Here is a good review of the LS300:No, you cannot mount Sony E lenses on a MFT, PL or Canon EF mount cameras. The FFD is too short, like the MFT mount. You can adapt a MFT mount manual lens to a Sony E camera. Sony lens control commands are proprietary, and not shared, as is the camera E mount itself.CheersI was doing some research and in this review it shows the published specs of JVC's sensor.

It basically says that with the proper lens it is a true super 35 and that it can downscale to super 16 lenses. Pretty cool information, just wanted to share!Thanks again for your insight!

The user community never approved of BMD calling the BMPC4K and URSA/Mini 4K a Super 35 sensor. They should have said Academy 35 perhaps. Of course that never stopped their marketing team from exercising their privilege to attempt reality distortion. But given the previously described propensity of other camera manufacturers playing the same game, it suffices to point out the actual sensor dimensions and let the facts speak for themselves. Marketing does what it does.

Read the specs and form your own conclusions on any camera.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk. My point exactly Rick, but it is somewhat misleading calling a 'Spade at Club'. Same with calling UHD - 4K, causes confusion among the buyers, what do not look at the specs, but just go by the labels, and are disappointed when they discover it is not what they expected. How many posts have we seen from a new user with a 4K Video Assist, who complaines they can not record full 4096 4K, but only 3840 UHD.As for sensor sizes, this will determine the angle of view of a given lens also.

So,if you get a camera expecting full S35 sensor, and only to find your 30mm (S35) lens is more like a 35mm lens in coverage. And, in the case of the JVC LS300, it auto widdows the sensor size, based in the lens being used, so you are not always getting its full 'open gate' sensor size either.Cheers. I looked at it myself, but found it wasn't enough on spec. JVC is a solid competitor in the video industry, but they have to get serious again.

Jvc Gy-ls300 Stop Latitude And Cities

The sensor is 12 stop, less than the 4.6k, even the 4k isn't it? The codec is too.low end data rate and 8 bits instead if 12 bits ir a weak 10 bits, not a post grading freindly. In this new HDR world 12-14 bits will be needed (presuming you can set the fooatage up for it). It is a weaker but ptobably more responsive to active shooting where you set the look as you shoot and handoff, but the handoff will be lower grade as for the data rate and bit depth.If JVC only got seriouse with higher speed, frame rate, pixel format, bit depth and datarsre on a 14-16.5+ stop (then, but this year only 16.5 stop+) HDR, I would have lked to buy one. But, there is probably a new replacement camera coming.Now, let's look at the competition, 200-300mb/s h264 inter and 600 mb/s intra (going back a few years now).

So the game is that they give you a big sensor, but other parts of the camera suck. In this post SI, Red, BM, Kineinfinity world, they need to start offering everything in these models.

If the aforementioned companies wanted to seriouse target active shooting and hand off functionality of broadcast it would be progressively over for.companies like this. Instead they give us stuff like this hoping the gravy train continues, but how much have they expanded in recent years?