JVC's trio of AVCHD 1080i Everio hard disk camcorders

JVC's disk-based Everio lineup of HD camcorders are being met by a trio of newcomers this morning. The 120GB GD-HD40 ($1,300) and 80GB GZ-HD30 ($1,000) offer 10- and 6-hours of full 1,920 x 1,080 / 17Mbps AVCHD recordings, respectively, from a 1/3-inch, 2.68 megapixel CMOS sensor -- a first for the previously all-CCD based family. They can also record in an editing software-friendly 27Mbps MPEG-2 TS format if desired. The AVCHD-only GZ-HD10 ($800) model scales back the disk to 40GB, the lens, LCD, and sensor to achieve the lower price tag. All three offer 10x, Konica Minolta HD optical zoom lenses, an accessory shoe, up-converted 1080/60p HDMI out, and a microSDHC slot. Available in August, that's when.

[PEZ @ Jun 16th 2008 6:57AM]

So the y replavced a 3-ccd system with a cheaper 1chip cmos tech. Genius! I cant wait to see how lousy it looks.

[BritishGas @ Jun 16th 2008 7:30AM]

I totally agree -- I don't understand why HD seems to have taken priority over 3CCD technology....

If I had to choose I'd muchj rather be appreciating realistic, subtle skin tones than every pimple on someones face

[Rob @ Jun 16th 2008 9:09AM]

The 3-CCD consumer JVCs that came out a year ago had mediocre image quality and terrible low-light performance. Those cameras were blown away by single CMOS Canons and Sonys (to name a few -- just look at the in-depth reviews on camcorder websites if you don't already know this). But JVC realized if they put "3-CCD" on the label that people would assume it's gotta be a great camcorder (and you guys proved my point). Sure, the best pro cameras in the world have 3 (big) chips, but just because a camera has 3-CCDs (which were tiny on the previous generation of JVCs), it doesn't automatically mean a good quality image. One big CMOS chip seems to do better than 3 tiny CCDs.

[GhostDoggy @ Jun 16th 2008 7:41AM]

Um, why 1080i? Are half the rows on the CMOS sensor shut off during a frame-capture? Does this product deliberate capture all 1080 rows and then introduce interlacing (as9)?

[neofolklore @ Jun 16th 2008 7:59AM]

perhaps it has something to do with the high definition video standard so you don't have to conform (or stretch) a video to a particular aspect ratio later on.

JUST A HUNCH

[David Hildreth @ Jun 16th 2008 8:11AM]

You have a flawed understanding of how most CCDs capture an image. Not to mention that the CCD isn't 1920x1080 and that 1080i isn't half the resolution of 1080p as you suggest.

It's 1080i because you can't tell the difference between i and p on a camera this cheap.


Also, MPEG-2 is hardly editor friendly, any decent editor is going to transcode it on capture just like AVCHD. They are both long GOP.

[tomo @ Jun 16th 2008 9:11AM]

finally i can get back onto engadget.... whats happening guys???

[SlackerFiend @ Jun 16th 2008 11:43AM]

Yes, I agree with bad low-light performance comment of the 3 CCD models.

But the frequent hard drive failures will keep me from considering future versions.

Purchased 3 cameras and the 4GB disks have all failed. Want to put in a larger 8 or 16GB CF card? No can do... firmware in these units is limited to 4GB.

No more thank you.... I'm full.

[sam @ Jun 16th 2008 12:19PM]

meh, bring on 10mp sensors, 20mbps bitrate 1080p camcorders. 2.68mp sensor sucks!

oh how i love the RED One camera!