-
hpx 300 help!
-
Defective camera is most likely. Standard def. DV25? What a waste of an HPX2000!
I received the December issue of ICG magazine today. It has a very informal review by two indie filmmakers of the HPX300, EX3, GY-HM700 and Canon 5D Mark II. They didn’t get into codec quality.
They liked the ergonomics of the HPX300 and viewfinder best of the cameras. Said it had good resolution and latitude, refined color space, but not as good in low light as the other cameras.
EX3 had poor ergonomics, didn’t like the viewfinder, low light very good, sensor clean and sharp, good color, fairly good latitude. Not crazy about the lens. Image wise very good camera.
GY-HM700 they stated that they struggled to find a lot of positives about. It had the most controlled skew, which makes sense, being a CCD camera, not CMOS. Lens is mediocre low-end model with lots of breathing and barrel distortion. Low light was noisy, latitude mediocre.
5D Mark II had very shallow DOF, good and bad. 30P a problem, if looking for 24P film look. Bad audio, ergonomics, monitoring. Image skew, resolution good, latitude fair, aliasing on vertical and horizontal lines, best camera for low light.
Just interesting to see a real world comparison of these inexpensive cameras, albeit not very technical.
Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video
http://www.ssv.com -
Posted interior video shot with the new JVC HM700.
Regardless of whether my HPX300 was defective or not, the JVC produces a much sharper, crisp image.
I am very happy with this camera and will post exterior video tommorow.
https://www.vimeo.com/wvmJohn
-
John,
I’m glad you are happy with the look of the JVC camera. Here’s what I see on the latest interior test:
A very sharp, over enhanced, videoish image–not filmic at all.
Every light to dark transition and highlight has color fringing from that lousy Canon lens. The low to high frequency transitions that don’t have color fringing(chromatic aberration) have detail circuit ringing and overshoot with thick black edges.
I’m sure this is the preferred look for news, but it is as far from filmic as I can imagine.
Having said that, the camera looked clean, I didn’t see obvious noise, color looked good.
Just not my cup of tea. I wish you would have reported on tweaks to detail circuit, gamma, chroma, black level and matrix that I recommended for the HPX300, which looked nice on the exterior test, if a bit videoish/overly sharp.
I’m guessing you’re one of those camera people that just wants to turn on the camera and shoot vs. developing scene files for different styles of shooting. Nothing wrong with that, you’re just not getting the most out of the capabilities of whatever camera you end up choosing.
God, that lens is pitiful. Really horrid. JVC needs a CAC type of circuit badly if they’re going to put that junk glass on their cameras.
Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video
http://www.ssv.com -
“A very sharp, over enhanced, videoish image”
This is what I was trying to refer to in a early post. I think a lot of people expect this very sharp, very detailed, over enhanced videoish image when viewing HD (i.e news, disco., travel ch, speed, espn sports.)
I had a client that was “stoked” that a shooter was going to shoot a few pick up shots with and EX1, the footage was overly detailed and almost to videoishly sharp.
I like the “filmic” look that Jeff refers to.
John, good luck and good shooting with your new camera in the coming new year.PHIL YUNKER
Yunker Video Production Services
https://www.philyunker.com -
Agreed. This is all subjective. The JVC clip was 1080/60i, so the detail level is appropriate for the high temporal resolution. I avoid 60i as much as possible, but I have clients that request it from time to time, ditto 720/60P. Both have that “live” look that screams video.
The great thing is that most digital HD cameras can be made to look whichever way is preferred for the style of shoot on a given day.
At Varicamp I learned that choosing a gamma curve is akin to choosing a film stock, selected on the basis of the look and style. The same can be said of resolution, frame rate, detail level, matrix settings, etc.
I find that 720P is kinder to talent vs. 1080i or P, as far as not showing as much skin flaws, ditto detail level. Too much detail is very unflattering to talent.
If it were up to me, I’d rather shoot with detail off on higher end HD cameras. It is redundant, just as 35mm motion picture cameras don’t depend on artificial enhancement due to real resolution.
As a rental facility, I can’t turn off the detail unless requested.
Anyway, it’s cool that these camera offer so many image options, even if many don’t know how to use them.Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video
http://www.ssv.com -
Anyway, it’s cool that these camera offer so many image options, even if many don’t know how to use them.
Besides for VariCamp, where can one learn how to use the various settings or learn what each does?
PHIL YUNKER
Yunker Video Production Services
https://www.philyunker.com -
LOL I know how to use them, I choose not to obsess over them…and If factory settings get my bills paid… well thats the cam for me. I’d rather spend my time shooting and editing than drilling down into a camera to get that specific look that most clients cant even tell or care about…
-
This has turned out to be an enlighting discussion. I had no idea the really crisp “videolike” images discussed were considered gauché. It is surprising and maybe that is the disconnect here; different expectations.
Jason Smith
-
Yes, all this is subjective. Different projects/types of productions require different looks. News and sports require 60i or 60p temporal resolution, very sharp, good saturation, neutral color balance for the most part.
Docs, commercials, shorts, corporate, features often have lower frame rates, reduced detail, stylized color, shallow depth of field when possible.
The OP started a thread stating that he needed “help” with a camera that he didn’t like the look of. Rather than take any suggestions on camera setup, and for some reason couldn’t tell the difference between different downloaded scene files, he chose a different brand camera that he liked the out of the box look better. Nothing wrong with that, it’s his hard earned dollars. Most camera people don’t know, don’t want to know how to be camera engineers.
However, a high-end DP can communicate to their DIT how they want the image to look in terms that a DIT can understand.
Bottom line is the HPX300 is capable of looking like whatever the client, DP/owner wants. One hour with a DIT/engineer could have transformed the 300 into the wanted look and the OP would have had the advantage of the best resolution due to full raster CMOS sensors vs. pixel shifted CCD’s, best ergonomics, viewfinder, color and codec options available at the price point. That doesn’t mean that the camera wouldn’t have some disadvantages(CMOS artifacts) over the other brand/s. No perfect cameras exist.
There are some great books written for a few Panasonic cameras by Robert Goodman-“Goodman Guide”(Varicam, HDX900) and Barry Green(HVX200, 200A, HPX170) that offer a good understanding of what each menu item does in terms that are understandable by non-engineers.
I happen to believe that a DP should know what his or her camera is capable of, even if it’s just providing a neutral setup that can be manipulated in post. Obviously, news production doesn’t allow the time for this, so an in-camera look is essential. Many DP’s want to “bake in” the look on-set, but that doesn’t mean images aren’t tweaked in post. All approaches are valid–as long as the client is happy!
Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video
http://www.ssv.com -
—“Rather than take any suggestions on camera setup, and for some reason couldn’t tell the difference between different downloaded scene files, he chose a different brand camera that he liked the out of the box look better”——
THE CAMERA WAS DEFECTIVE AND I ULTIMATELY HAD NO CONFIDENCE IN THE PRODUCT…PERIOD. SCENE FILES MY A**
GOOD LUCK TO YOU
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up