I’d like your opinion please

[Nate Stephens]

Carlos, Go with the 500 not the 300.. If you are starting with new gear get a camera you can shoot anywhere. The 300 and its’ CMOS sensors will make you look bad every time you have to shoot under old fluorescent lighting. The 300’s rolling shutter will limit your client list..

I purchased the 500 a year ago and no regrets and I didn’t spend 20k… Just buy the camera about $7,990 and put a very good 2/3″ lens on it for about $1,500.. I put my older Cannon lens from my Sony DXCwsl 35 on my 500 and it is perfect.. It was a good 16×9 lens to begin with.

I am very happy… and saved big money.. When the work picks back up and the clients get more savvy, I will save money for a true HD lens.

FCP, Mac Pro, Mac Book Pro, HPX500, HVX200, Betacam, Dvcam
Write for the Edit, Shoot for the Edit, Edit…..KISS Principle

[Carlos Castro]

Thanks Nate you bring up some great points. I’ll take a better look at the 500.
I felt that way but I tought their might be something out their that I was missing when comparing the two cameras. It will definitely put me in a different price range but It may not be worth going cheaper if I won’t be able to shoot the more profitable shoots due to my camera.

Thanks Nate.

[Matthew Romanis]

Hi Nate,
Are you able to post a link or load some footage with this artefact?
I have not seen this before, I’m in a 50hz zone and would like to know more about this one.
It may be something that is only occurring in 59.94hz.
I have seen a pulsing bars from fluorescent lights when run from a poorly cycling generator.

[Matthew Romanis]

Hi Nate,
Disregard my last post. I found some footage on line that shows what you have talked about.
I haven’t yet had to deal with that issue when I’ve used a CMOS chip camera.

[Nate Stephens]

Yep Matthew,, You have been lucky.. Under the fluorescents with the instant starts /digital ballast or what ever they have you will be ok with the CMOS chips… But if you happen to have the CEO of a major nation insurance company like Nationwide,on location, being interviewed by the local favorite anchor on the CBS affiliate and the lighting is strobing, rolling down the screen… What do you tell the Boss.. It is a new camera?? I spent 10k on the camera? It is all in your eyes. Go get your glasses fixed..

I am a poor boy. I can’t afford to explain other peoples bad engineering…

No excuse video is what I target..

FCP, Mac Pro, Mac Book Pro, HPX500, HVX200, Betacam, Dvcam
Write for the Edit, Shoot for the Edit, Edit…..KISS Principle

[David C jones]

Hi Carlos-

Something to think about before taking the plunge:

I recently read in TV Technology that NBC-Universal is offically adopting the P2 format for all ENG stuff at their O&O’s, CNBC, and Telemundo. AND, according to the article, CNBC is already shooting with the 2000, and that many of their O&O’s have put in orders for the 300, and HPX 170…the 500 was never mentioned.

Dave J

[Carlos Castro]

Thanks David. I did see that article on the Net. I don’t know what exactly to take from that though. I don’t work for NBC but the network I work for is using pretty good gear.

However they bought it prior to this model being released. It may be that NBC like more and more Tv News providers don’t care what the image looks like so long as they cover the story. The prime time shows like 60 minutes, 48 hrs etc… They tend to hire out crews with very good gear for those jobs.

I mean these are the same people who use cell phone footage, live web cams that don’t look good but cover a time slot. Anything goes just to keep cost down, the latest is the back pack journalist.

No offense to anyone.

TV news after all is where the one man band started, lol.

Look this may very well be a fine camera, I don’t know but I’ve heard plenty to make me question whether its going to be good enough to fit most clients and situations.

Which is why I posed the question in the 1st place to get peoples opinions on the cams. I have to say the only complaint I have heard about the 500 is that the view finder is average and that it is only available in black and white.

If you have an opinion please keep them coming.

Thanks david

[David C jones]

As with all cameras, there are always trade-offs. With the 300, it’s the 1/3″ chips in exchange for being full-raster 1920X1080 HD. The 500 is a 2/3″ chip, but, the chips are only 960X720, using pixel shifting. But as to which one actually gives a better picture, that’s a good question…

Dave J

[Carlos Castro]

“As with all cameras, there are always trade-offs. With the 300, it’s the 1/3″ chips in exchange for being full-raster 1920X1080 HD. The 500 is a 2/3″ chip, but, the chips are only 960X720, using pixel shifting.”

Good point Dave. That’s what makes it so hard to pick one. I’m assuming that the chip is equivalent to a cars motor. They all have different power and strength, I guess I need to figure out which is more reliable.

I’m not sure if theirs a way to prevent troubles with the cmos or in this case 3mos sensors?

If their isn’t then I guess the reliability swings over to the 500 side. If theirs and easy cure for the 3mos and rolling shutter problems I’d have to say the price of the 300 makes it a steal.

I’ve only heard that theirs a problem with these sensors, I’ve never heard or seen a fix. I also don’t know how often it happens.

If you know or you know a place I can read a little further on this matter let me know, thanks Dave.