-
HPX 300 Can’t decide to pull the trigger.
HPX 300
Pros: shoulder mount, true aperture, true focus, interchangeable lenses, sharp viewfinder AVC Intra 100
Cons: 1/3″ CMOS chips= noise and skew/jellocamObservations on noise: Have shot tons of stuff with the HPX 200, know noise is inherent to 1/3″ chips. Why didn’t panasonic put at least a 1/2″ chip in this system? Is there a big jump in cost going from 1/3 to 1/2″ chips?
Observations on skew: Barry Green’s article on shooting in Africa recommended locking down all really long telephoto shots, not panning or tilting. One of Panasonic’s videos suggests dutching the tripod to overcome skew while following race cars. Can you imaging spending time figuring out work arounds in the heat of action?
Non-contenders:
HPX 500 =low resolution and Non AVC 100 Intra
EX3= Sony long GOP non 422 formats, no shoulder mount
7000 out the door is a killer price for all of the camera’s features. Even if I got a used 2000 or 3000, with lens, I would be looking at a minimum of $30000. Used tape Varicam 15-20000 with lens, 30000 with deck.
My primary clients are docs, corporate and web based.
James Mulryan
Sunset Park Media, LLC
Santa Monica, CA
in**@**********an.com -
15 Replies
-
The HPX-500 is a better camera, doesn’t do AVC, full raster is nice but don’t get taught up in the numbers games.
That being said it is hard to bet the 300 for the price but you are not getting more for less. Either one would most likely serve your needs the 300 keeps a lot more dough in your pocket.
-
Good points Michael. Thanks.
Think full raster is pretty important moving forward. 1080p is in the sweet spot.
“Keeps a lot more dough in your pocket” — very smart
James Mulryan
Sunset Park Media, LLC
Santa Monica, CA
info@jamesmulryan.com -
I had the similar concerns, I was waiting and still am waiting for a CMOS camera that I want to take home.
One with a global shutter in my price range. My clientele is the same as yours. Gov’t, corporate, educational, etc…
What cured me of the cmos with the rolling shutter was a video documentary on our big local TV station talking about the reconstruction and beautification in a down trodden neighborhood. It was very well done, audio, camera work and editing… But they couldn’t edit out the big interview of the big money guy in town talking about the project. This clip was shot in one of the rehabbed buildings. And there behind him on a blank wall you had a perfect example of a rolling shutter effect caused by a flickering florescent bulb.. It ruined the show, the interview, the reason for the video..
You can’t guarantee the lighting you will be getting involved in. I am not Hollywood, with the big grip truck so I don’t pretend to be.
I love my HPX500 (with my Betacam Lens) and my HVX200.. a great, affordable 2 camera set up.
FCP, Mac Pro, Mac Book Pro, HPX500, HVX200, Betacam, Dvcam
Write for the Edit, Shoot for the Edit, Edit…..KISS Principle -
I would go with the 300 over the 500 BUT, my understanding is that the bigger the chip, the better it is in low light. The 500 is a 2/3″ chip. I’ve read complaints about the 200 (only 1/3″) being bad in very low light conditions.
You should still consider the EX-3 (with 1/2″ chips) and add a NanoFlash. That way, you can record at 100bps or more and audio at 24bit.
Best,
Dave J
-
At the end of the day there is not a bad choice here. You do want to get something you can afford and meets your shooting style. Best thing to do is rent them a couple of times if at all possible.
The Panasonic has firmware that is suppose to address the flash problem with rolling shutter, I really want to get my hands on the 200 for a couple of days and check it out. I do concerts so the rolling shutter is a concern of mine. But as with everything we need to know the shortcomings of our equipment and avoid that causes the problems (I know easier said then done)
-
Hi James:
The 300 is cheap enough in my mind as to be a no brainer. We are talking about a full raster AVC INTRA camera with a decent industrial level lens for around $7k.
I own the HPX170 and really love it but no question that the 300 is a better camera. 1/3″ imagers are only a problem if you don’t know how to light. Yes, obviously a 2/3″ camera is better in low light but I have been shooting with the 5D MKII also, which is great in ultra low light. But you know what? You still have to light it to make it look good. Just because you can shoot in ultra low light levels doesn’t mean things look good. You do shoot with lighting, don’t you? I shoot very little available light these days, unless it is outdoors. But I don’t know what you shoot, do you shoot in a lot of dark envrionments that you are not permitted to light?
Same with Jello and artifacts. Will they crop up occasionally? Yes. Will your audience care about them or even notice them? My experience says no. The only people who care about or notice that stuff are video geeks like us, audiences care about very different things. The Panasonic clip on YouTube that Jan put up does show some good and valid strategies to reduce or eliminate artifacting. I would like to own my 170 because of the small size and weight and the fact that I occasionally shoot red carpets where a billion flashes are going off. But for the lions share of my shooting, I would be in heaven with the 300.
It is up to you to decide if you can live with the limitations of a 1/3″ sensor. I can and the payoff on other features is too great to not want the 300. The 500 has very little going for it that is better other than the 2/3″ imagers. The VF and LCD on the 500 make it a no go for me, I care more about being in focus than having a larger yet thinner raster imager.
The 300 is superior to the EX1/EX3 from a feature and ergonomic standpoint. I like the picture quality better overall and the AVC INTRA100 codec makes XDCAM EX look pretty sad. Yes, a 1/2″ imager set in the 300 would have been nicer but Panasonic doesn’t do 1/2″ sensors and from what I hear will not do them anytime soon.
300 is a great tool. Not perfect but an amazing value nonetheless.
Dan
Providing value added material to all of your favorite DVDs
-
Don’t pull the trigger on the 300. It is noisy even OUTDOORS in bright sunlight, and Panasonic’s answer to this issue is shoot it @ -3db. I would wait for the new Sony 2/3 inch XDCAM, the PMW-350K that is card based coming out next year. $20K list with lens, but it too is CMOS based.
-
Do what most camera operators are doing at this time, since no one knows what the next format will be, and it will never be just one again, Rent the gear there are plenty of rental companies that have the gear, no out of pocket money and you can haggle with the rental houses for deals. No risk from you. All the cameras you mentioned make nice pictures , but it all depends on where the producer is doing the post.
-
Dan “The 500 has very little going for it that is better other than the 2/3″ imagers. The VF and LCD on the 500 make it a no go for me, I care more about being in focus than having a larger yet thinner raster imager. ”
I love my 500 and I have just an old Cannon 16×9 lens on it. No fancy CAC. I guess being an old fart who learned to focus some really awful cameras, I should expect you youngens to have trouble with the 500LCD… For me, I have never had trouble getting a great hard edge focus with the 500 LCD… but then again I know how to focus. I like the 500 a lot. For the money invested it is one hell of a camera. I am currently looking to trade my Sony DXCwsl35-PVV3/DSR-1/Studio back for another HPX500 anybody interested??? I will sweeten the deal and throw in my Sony 4″ studio viewfinder.
FCP, Mac Pro, Mac Book Pro, HPX500, HVX200, Betacam, Dvcam
Write for the Edit, Shoot for the Edit, Edit…..KISS Principle -
I just shot a corporate event using the 300 and everything looked great. I shot ballrooms, a concert, hotel interiors, night parties and outdoor golf. The camera performed well, colors looked great and was overwhelmingly better then my 200 and Sony Z1 in low light.
The viewfinder and LCD is pretty good, the camera was quiet, quick to respond and it felt comfortable on my shoulder for 4 days.
I don’t think it records any variable frame rates
I did shoot in DVCPROHD and didn’t get to try out the new codecs.I’ve shot with the 500 as well and was impressed with it also but I think the 300 makes a great corporate camera.
email me with any questions if you like.
-ChrisChris Anderson
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up