is the hpx 500 really a hd camera ?

[Ron Shook]

Mitch,

[Mitch Ives] “the EX-1 has a far superior camera head and lens, but records to a far inferior format…”

A darned fine post of suggestions, be methinks you exaggerate a bit with the 2 “far”s, at least in terms of practical application. (g)

[Mitch Ives] “Comparing the EX-1 to the 500 is even more difficult.”

Ain’t it the truth, particularly since Ryan hasn’t told us what sorts of things he typically shoots.

A few other considerations:

–In run and gun situations the 500 will be just that much quicker with more quick switches as apposed to a few fiddly switches and the menu mess on the EX.

–With time and deliberation, I’m not certain, but expect the EX Image to be certainly sharper, and probably somewhat more paintable than the 500.

–The EX cannot be handycam held for extended periods of time (as in over 5 minutes) with any success, necessitating 3rd party quasi shoulder mount rigs that can increase the time to go to and from tripod or other support options.

–Camcorders of the EX stripe, don’t have the same quality control or ruggedness of a camcorder like the 500.

–No SD recording with the EX. Could be a major problem depending on how you work and who you work for.

–You could purchase 3 EX’s for the cost of a 500 plus lens, or 2 EX’s well outfitted.

–Because of its small size and weight the EX can ride on an under $5k steadycam rig rather than one costing $15-20k. The same goes for jib rigs, i.e. the EX’s much lower starting costs and size makes it possible to turn it into an overall system with more flexibility than the 500 for the same $$$, but sometimes more flexibility equals less speed in specific circumstances.

–With HDSDI output, either camcorder could benefit from a camera mounted Flash XDR drive and record to much better quality than either’s native recording format, but because of it’s better camera head the EX would benefit the most.

Ron Shook
Shoulder-High Eye Productions
CreativeCOW Forum Host for Discreet edit*

[Ryan Early]

Thanks for your post Ron, most of my work is corporate and training dvd’s for national companies and government departments, we tend to light and stage everything so not a lot of run and gun. I think xdcamex would be difficult in an ENG environment. Being an older cameraman I much prefer the form factor of the 500 because it is what I am used to but what I am really after is an indication of image quality differences between the cameras. If I can get a camera for under 10k that produces images of a higher quality than one that costs 3 times more (fully kitted out) then the ergonomics of the higher priced camera are harder to justify. Especially if the camera that costs 3 times more is closer to SD than HD in resolution which means I might as well keep shooting with 2/3inch broadcast cams in SD.

I am planning to hire both and do my own test and compare the workflows but I would like to see a resolution chart comparison between the two, has any one seen a resolution chart for the 500 ?

[Ron Shook]

Ryan,

[ryan early] “Especially if the camera that costs 3 times more is closer to SD than HD in resolution which means I might as well keep shooting with 2/3inch broadcast cams in SD.

I am planning to hire both and do my own test and compare the workflows”

No, the 500 isn’t closer to SD than HD. It’s just not the tackest sharp HD in the world, so if you’re wondering whether you should do the tests and compare, yes, you definitely should. I doubt if you’ll find direct comparison tests between the two cameras.

Ron Shook
Shoulder-High Eye Productions
CreativeCOW Forum Host for Discreet edit*

[Nate Stephens]

Ryan,

I have been concerned about the same issues. But I read Barrys article on the CMOS chips rolling shutter and I will not get close to a Sony CMOS now. I saw a “Black History” special on local broadcast (big Local Station) I felt sorry for the anchors who put the show together and the Nationwide Insurance CEO who sponsored it. It was shot HD and you could tell it was CMOS rolling shutter camera. ANd how did I tell, in Barrys article he describes how the rolling shutter will show it’s hand every time you shoot that camera under old flourescent lights. The flicker in the old light ballast makes for bars to roll thru the image. And yep there it was thru most of the show… Every time they interviewed somebody in an old building. The sponsor CEO was standing there against a white wall with bars rolling down the screen. You have to be blind not to see it. It looks just like old 3/4 inch banding after tooo many edit passes. This was our major local broadcaster, doing their major yearly community service sponsored by their major advertiser…. I would be out of business, sued, bankrupted and probably laughed out of town if I tried to put that on local broadcast TV.

CMOS, rolling shutter, might be a pretty girl to look at…… but I gotta dance, give me the HPX500….

[Brad Neal]

Hi Ryan,
I shoot pretty much the same gig as you – corporate, training, etc. We have 2-500’s and I can assure you that they are true HD cameras.

For our type of work, they are truly the camera that we have been waiting for, and our clients, most of which are fortune 500 companies, love the output. Not to mention that we have the option to shoot DVCPRO 25, 50, and 100… and variable frame rates, SDI out, Gen lock in and out, and the list goes on.

One other thing to consider – their is a growing number of folks shooting with their existing SD lenses and forgoing the HD starter lenses all together. I have seen side by side stills compared, and I honestly can’t pick the one shot with the HD lens.

So if you already have SD lenses to test, rent yourself a 500 with a HD lens and do your own comparison – you may be surprised, and save yourself 8-10g’s to boot.

That said, the 500’s can’t be compared to the HPX2000 or 3000, as the more expensive cams clearly shoot superior images. But I’m not shooting for National Geographic channel anyway (not yet at least). And I am not convinced that one couldn’t satisfy even their stringent requirements with 500.

Best,
Brad

[Dean Sensui]

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] “And then there is the wierd issue that it won’t allow you to go into record from the playback mode. You have to switch the camera off and have it reboot to get to the recording side. This will take over 10 seconds.”

Sorry Jan. That’s not correct.

… it takes 13 seconds. 🙂

And another 10 to switch back. So flipping from shooting to review and back to shooting will eat up 23 seconds unless you use the “last clip” review button on the handle.

Another drawback is that you can’t go immediately from any of the review modes to record mode. If you hit the clip review button you have to wait until the clip finishes the playback before you can continue shooting. So if the clip review is programmed for 10 seconds of playback, you’re stuck for 10 seconds.

The EX1 has a lot of pros and cons. Anyone interested in it really should give it a try and see if it fits their workflow and shooting style.

That said, I have both cameras. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Both can do some very nice work in the right hands.

Dean Sensui — Imagination Media Hawaii