HPX-500 Pros and Cons

[Richard Harrington]

We’ve been VERY happy with ours

Shoots NTSC and PAL

SD and HD (All flavors)

Interhchangeable lenses… full size batteries…

Its worked well for all sorts of shoots and scenarios.

[Brad Neal]

David,
I have 2 500’s and I absolutely love them. I just don’t think one can find more bang for the buck, at least at this stage of the game.

But if you have never worked with a tapeless workflow, do your homework as it is vastly different than tape – some of it is much better, some is not.

If you can rent or borrow a P2 camera before you buy, I would recommend it. Shoot a couple of jobs with it, especially if you are doing the post work, as I found that to have been the most challenging part of the tapeless transition.

-Brad

[Paul Colin]

So far I’ve been impressed with my 500. Good investment.
However I might say I also invested in a really good HD lens which makes a big difference in image quality. The lens cost almost twice as much as the camera; but I’ll always have the lens even if I trade up to a higher level camera.
I suggest, if you can; find a dealer where you can compare the 200, 500 and 2000, side by side. Also try different lens combos while you’re at it.

Best
Paul Colin,
Cezanne Studio, NYC

[Nate Stephens]

Paul, what lens did you get? Was it a CAC lens or a true HD native lens?

[David C jones]

One thing I was wondering about: what’s the deal with the filter wheel? It has 1 marked as “clear” and the rest as ND’s. What about color temp? Or is filter 1 3200, and the rest 5600?

And I agree about getting a good lens. In fact, that was the same idea I had; spending more (twice as much, even) on better glass.

[Paul Colin]

Nate,

The Canon HJ17X7.6 w/2x extender.

Thanks,
PC

[Nate Stephens]

Your Canon HJ17X7.6 w/2x extender.
is not the “packaged” lens for the 500, is it CAC?

The packaged lens for the camera is a CAC 16x __ with 2x extender which was about $9-10K, if I remember right. (can’t find my notes)

Why not go with the CAC lens? What was the ticket price for your upgrade.

I have read where the 16 and 17x lens are to long for close-up work. Does yours do a waist to head high image from 6 feet?

We are currently trying to get the 500 finaced thru our client (done it before) So we will have the 500 as primary and the 200 as our B camera.. This is why I am asking. No camera demos in this area..

This thread is encouraging. Has anyone used the 500 and the 200 on the same interview/job/edit… does it work?

[Brad Neal]

I will absolutely agree that a $20,000 or $30,000 lens will make a noticeable difference, and greatly reduce that nasty ol’ breathing issue found on the less expensive lenses. But I must say that the stock lenses are really not that bad – especially with the CAC feature.

If you can afford the more expensive glass, then you won’t be sorry. But that kind of money would have been a deal breaker for me. I went for the standard issue Fuji glass with the 2X extender and have been thrilled with what I am getting out of it. If I do haul in a job that requires a better lens, I can rent for $500 or $600 per day.

-Brad

[David C jones]

That’s interesting about the cac lenses. I think I’m still living in the ’80’s/early ’90’s where there was a clear difference between the high-end and low-end lenses. And you didn’t have that many choices, ether. I will probably have to go with a less expensive lens for now but I am interested as to how much of a difference there is.

[Dan Brockett]

To me, the appeal of the HPX is that it is an amazing camera for not a lot of money. Figuring the body alone is $10,400.00, if you bought a $22,000.00 lens, while I am sure that it looks amazing, to me it undermines the whole reason for purchasing a low cost camera like the HPX.

I could live with the breathing on the lower end CAC lenses. I own the HVX-200, but I rent and shoot with the 500, 2000 and HDX-900 regularly. The HPX is very good and the footage intercuts with the HVX very nicely. Same chips, similar electronics, gamma and codec are identical. HPX is better in low light, cleaner because of 2/3″ chips but you really only notice it on interiors or low light. Of course, HPX has shallower depth of field and better lenses, but as far as colorimetry and look and feel, the two cut close to seamlessly in my experience. I have the Letus Extreme for the HVX so I can actually get shallower depth of field but I am told that Letus is coming out with a relay adapter for the HPX as well.

While the HPX is good, you are approaching a price point where you should consider a RED if you are a filmmaker. But of course, the HPX is superior to RED as an ENG/EFP tool. So it depends on what kind of production you are in.

Best,

Dan