-
I am looking at getting a new camera
Hi Everyone,
I am looking at getting a new camera after my hvx 200 was stolen. I am interested in getting the hvx 200a or the AG-HPX170. I am also interested in the Sony ex1 or ex3 and the Canon XL h1 or Canon XL h1a.
I like the panasonic and have been with them for years. I have also been shooting with my friends sony ex 1 camera and really like the overall picture I think even better then the panasonic. It seems to shoot better in low light. But at the same time I heard that the AG-HPX170 shoots better in low light situations then the HVX 200 did. But how how does the 170 compare with the low light of the Sony ex1 or ex 3.
I also heard that sony does not handle fast movement well with its cmos ships. I do not know if that is true. I film interviews hand held style and want a reliable camera.
Also is panasonic coming out with a new camera soon.Thanks,
Wildmangoose
-
5 Replies
-
Well, the EX1 and EX3 are sharper…no denying that. And the 170 is much better in low light, I shot in a night club with existing light and it did VERY well.
HANDHELD? The EX series are ergonomic nightmares hand held. They kill the wrist. And holding it while trying to adjust focus…lordy. With that camera I want sticks.
Mainly I can speak as an editor….as that is what I do. DVCPRO HD is much easier to deal with in post. Imports fast, or if you use MXF4MAC or P2 Flow, it can edit MXF natively and gather all that great metadata that the camera makes, that the EX series cannot. And the 170 can shoot SD and HD, so if you have some SD clients, you can appease them. EX series is only HD. But that is a minor point. The EX footage only comes in as XDCAM EX. But you can edit on a ProRes timeline and render to ProRes. But if you shoot footage that you need to reverse telecine, or convert to slow motion, you need to convert to ProRes…takes time.
Personally I like the 170. It is light, great for hand held situations, nice in low light…and not SO SHARP that it exposes my subject’s facial blemishes, or show the makeup that they piled on to hide it!
EX series has better glass (lens)…HPX series has a better codec for post, and tons of metadata that you can add during the shoot, or after (with P2 Flow), or really organize your footage. And I am HUGE on organization. Big trade offs.
Shane
GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
I own both a HPX3000 and a HPX170 which I use as a B Camera. If I were buying something today I would get the new Canon EOS 1D MarkIV which is coming out in the next few weeks. Amazing image quality for the same price as the 170. Smartcard media is cheaper than the P2 cards as well. Panasonic needs to step up to this new challenge – they are a bit behind…
-
It would probably have a nice image, but unless they do something with the 12 minutes limit and lack of sound control it would probably be of not mush use as a main video camera.
Douglas Villalba
https://www.advertising-villa.com
G5 QUAD 4.5 GB RAM, Decklink HD Extreme, HVX200, FX1, A1 & HV20. Letus Extreme 35 mm adaptor, Rails, GlideCam
-
Stephen:
I own the 170 and regularly shoot the EX1. They are both great cameras and if you are talented, you can make superb images with either. At this point, it really becomes a priority game.
EX1
Better lens
Higher resolution/sharper
Full raster
Horrible, horrible ergonomics
Obtuse menu structure
4:2:0 long GOP MPEG 2 codecHPX170
Not as good lens
Not as sharp but many feel more filmic colors/contrast
Abbreviated raster (1440 x 1080 for 1080 and 960 x 720 for 720)
Outstanding ergonomics, great for handheld
Simple and straightforward menu structure
Built-in waveforme/vectorscope
4:2:2 intraframe codec, much easier to deal with in postAt this point, neither camera is perfect, both have compromises. but in different areas. For me personally, when I shoot footage that needs to have that Discovery Channel 60i super crisp and sharp “video” look, the Sony is much better. When I shoot footage that I need to look more “filmic” and lush, even a bit less “analytical” looking, I much prefer the 170.
Shooting handheld? The 170 knocks it out of the park, the EX1 is a nightmare. Shooting red carpets, weddings or anywhere else with flashes going off? 170 is much better. Shooting fast action sports on long lens? The 170 blows the EX1 away, the EX1 skews a lot when shooting on the longest lens setting with fast pans. Shooting subjects where ultimate sharpness is most important? EX1 all of the way. Shooting with other Sony cameras and intercutting them? EX1 all of the way.
I could be happy with either camera. They are both awesome but in their own way.
Dan
Providing value added material to all of your favorite DVDs
-
Hi Doug – I read somewhere in an HPX3000 thread that you own this camera and are in the SF Bay Area. I just bought an HPX3000 and am blown away by the imagery this camera produces. I am looking to connect with other 3000 owners in the area to possibly offer a multi-camera option with the 3000’s and the HD flypack we’re assembling. Let’s connect.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up