hpx500?’s and hpx2000 ?’s

[Barry Green]

Yes it’s 4:2:2. The two cameras have much in common, and each does some things that the other doesn’t. They’re both 2/3″, HD & SD, 1080 & 720, NTSC & PAL switchable, HD-SDI/TC in-out/Genlock, etc.

The 500 does variable frame rates, the 2000 doesn’t. The 500 does “pN” modes, the 2000 doesn’t yet do that, and won’t until around August or so.

The 2000 has several features that make it much more desirable for news broadcasts, such as the option to take the AVC-Intra codec card or MPEG proxy card, a digital doubler, digital super gain for see-in-the-dark low-light performance, and the ability to seamlessly play back a pre-cut set of broll shots right during a live broadcast.

The 2000 is a 1-million-pixel imager, the 500 is a 620k-pixel imager. The 2000 has five P2 slots, the 500 has four. The 2000 body costs twice what the 500 does. If you need a low-cost camera, the 500 is a raging steal. If you need a news/broadcast cam, the 2000’s unique features make it much more suitable to that environment.

—————–
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (https://www.fiftv.com/db)

[Brooks Moore]

What is the difference in picture quality between the 500 and the 2000? Would the 2000 make a better production camera, is it more sensitive and does the 2000 have cine gamma?
Thanks

[Barry Green]

The main benefits of the 2000 over the 500 are for news applications; it has a digital doubler for no-light-loss magnification, and it has digital super gain for see-in-the-dark sensitivity. It can use the AVC-Intra codec card, etc. Lots of features that would make it a better news camera.

The main thing the 500 has over the 2000 is the variable frame rates, and that it’s half the cost.

They deliver basically comparable pictures. Base sensitivity is about the same (although digital super gain means the 2000 can get pictures in a lot lower light than the 500 can deliver). The 500 has about a stop more dynamic range than the 2000.

2000 has much more extensive menu controls, you can paint the image more thoroughly in-camera on the 2000 than you can on the 500. The 500’s menus are largely identical to the HVX200’s.

—————–
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (https://www.fiftv.com/db)

[Brooks Moore]

Wouldn’t the AVC option be a huge advantage in picture quality with full raster 10 bit 422. It’s hard to tell at the show but the 2000 looked alot better at the camera demo. The 500 looked only slightly better than the HVX200.

[Barry Green]

Of course the AVC-Intra option holds a lot of promise for better-quality footage; having the option to go for that is one reason why the 2000 is twice the price of the 500.

I found the 500 and 2000 to deliver very comparable images, especially when outfitted with comparable lenses.

—————–
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (https://www.fiftv.com/db)

[Chris Baldwin]

I’m sold…I’ll take a HPX500 please with a side of fries!

Any way of jam syncing the HPX500 and the HDX200 for time code?

And what do we think about cross cutting the HPX500 and the HDX200?
Mostly I’m ready to move up from the 200 to the 500 for two reasons.

Fisrt for as amazed as I am with the 200, I am disgusted with how slow the ccd’s are. Its just nowhere as capable in low light as either 2/3″ cameras or even 1/3″ DV cameras. I’m constantly fighting this.

Second, for as happy as clients are with the final product I give them from the HDX200, I constantly face the fire from them that its a small unprofessional looking camera. They usually zip it when they see the product but I’m frustrated defending it.

I have two reservations.

First, I’m worried how quickly the AVC codec will put dvcproHD in fat camp.

And Secondly, am I going to wish I didn’t buy this discounted HD glass that comes with the package?

On a side note…for as silly of a product is the fs-100… I love giving my FCP clients QT DVCPRO HD footage. I wish I could record that codec onto the P2 cards. A salesman I talked to wasn’t sure if the fs-100 was going to have the same playback through camera problems that the hpc2000 has. Anyone know about that?

THanks for your input Barry!

Chris

Chris Baldwin
Shoulder High Productions
Media of the World; For the World!
https://www.shoulderhigh.com
newsletters@shoulderhigh.com

[Barry Green]

[Chris Baldwin] “Any way of jam syncing the HPX500 and the HDX200 for time code?”

Well, almost — you can sync an HVX200 (I assume you mean HVX when you say HDX, right?) to an HPX500 through the firewire sync. It’s not a 100% sync, it’s going to lose frames when you toggle between MCR and CAMERA mode, but it’s very close.

[Chris Baldwin] ”
And what do we think about cross cutting the HPX500 and the HDX200?”

They’ll intercut pretty well, assuming that you’re shooting in conditions where the 200 is going to get good results anyway. If you’re shooting in scenarios where the 200 gets great footage, then it’ll intercut pretty well with the 500. The main difference you’re going to notice is the extra two stops of dynamic range, it spreads the tonality of the image differently than the 8 stops of the 200 does (obviously) so it’ll be a bit of an issue when matching.

[Chris Baldwin] “Its just nowhere as capable in low light as either 2/3″ cameras or even 1/3″ DV cameras. I’m constantly fighting this.”
Well, this is true of all the 1/3″ HD camcorders. It will be much better on the HPX500, the 2/3″ chips mean it’s about 1.5 stops faster, putting it back in league with the PD170 and DVX100 for sensitivity terms. But also its gain is a tad cleaner than the HVX200’s so you can resort to using a bit of gain if need be without worrying that you’re making the image TOO grainy.

[Chris Baldwin] “I constantly face the fire from them that its a small unprofessional looking camera.”

That won’t be a problem with the 500. It looks exactly like the 2000 and HDX900.

[Chris Baldwin] “First, I’m worried how quickly the AVC codec will put dvcproHD in fat camp.”

Well, no real way to know for sure, but consider that AVC-Intra is only an option on the 2000 and P2 Mobile; it doesn’t come standard on anything but the $48,000 (body-only) HPX3000. They’re still introducing DVCPRO-HD-only camcorders; the HDX900 has become a darling of rental houses and stringers, and it’s DVCPRO-HD-only. Besides, the way I look at it, if you can’t pay off an HPX500 package in six months or less, you’re doing something wrong…

[Chris Baldwin] “And Secondly, am I going to wish I didn’t buy this discounted HD glass that comes with the package?”

Well… that’s up to you, obviously. Better glass = better images, less breathing, more reach, all that. Having a fixed lens frees you from having to make that decision; it’s an all-or-nothing proposition. With interchangeable lenses, now you have to pick and commit.

[Chris Baldwin] ” I love giving my FCP clients QT DVCPRO HD footage.”

That works for FCP clients, but if you ever get hired by someone who uses a PC, you’d be kind of hosing yourself there. Apple doesn’t make FCP QT DVCPRO-HD files compatible with the PC. Every editor can use the MXF files, but only FCP can use the QT DVCPRO-HD files (unless your clients use the http://www.dvfilm.com Quicktime Decoder program for $195).

—————–
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (https://www.fiftv.com/db)