Panasonic Drops the Ball with AG-HPX600

[Glen Vandermolen]

The reviewer gave the camera a “SOLID” rating. How’d you get a bad rating out of that? He had a few nitpicks, but all cameras have a few faults. Plus, his was an early production camera.
He said it had nice images, balanced well, lightweight and the wifi was useful. Overall, it was positive.

[Tom Matthies]

Also, what do you find bad about the 370 for the price of the camera?

E=MC2+/-2db

[John Stephens]

My comments were based on both the Studio Daily story and also the picture posted. Look at the picture shown below. The build quality makes the 600 look more like a toy mockup than a professional piece of video gear that ends up costing $25,000 with lens and viewfinder. Panasonic exposes so many controls on the 600 that are fully protected in the 370, 500 and all cameras above. Why did they add so much plastic ? I guess the real goal was to protect the AJ-HPX3100GJ. Which now looks like a much better buy for $5K more than the 600.

I will admit I am a little upset by all the problems I am having with our year old 370. I have been waiting for the 600 with my checkbook all ready. But the last thing I want to do is buy a new camera that looks to be designed to dominate the low-end vs. redefining the high-end.

https://cdn.studiodaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Fig-1-HPX600_Lside3.jpg

[John Stephens]

We started off being very happy with the 370 and thought it was great for the job we bought it for, basically an broadcast ENG camera used out in the field. And it WAS a great buy for the money. But then our problems began, primarily with the lens. Back focus and focus in general is basically a crap shoot. I have come to the conclusion that the new cheaper versions of once serious cameras are not the way to go.

[John Stephens]

I look forward to getting my hands on the 600 to investigate myself. But the picture in the magazine as well as the picture used by B&H on-line generates some real concern about build quality. The 370 and the 3100 had very similar bodies that protected seldom used controls behind doors, which I liked. The “chiclet” style buttons on the 600 also concern me. But my desire to get back to a 2/3 imager is very high, so I will be looking carefully.

I would also like to know more about the new imager in the 600. Can you provide ?

[Jan Crittenden livingston]

Hi,

The HPX600 VF is made of Magnesium so that it is light, and this may cause people to assume that the VF is plastic. The extender that comes out to the eye is plastic, but those have been plastic for years.

The camera itself is a very ruggedly built that is probably the best bang for the buck in its category. I believe the reviewer should have qualified his statement about what he was reviewing which from the description I know that he was looking at a non-serial numbered unit. These are not perfect units and he should have said as much.

The HPX600 stands ready for a good number of upgrades but with VF, Lens and camcorder you will spend at list price 21,950. The HPX3100 without lens and VF is 21,110. At the HPX price point it should dominate its price range for cameras considering its features, build quality and expansion capabilities.

Hope this helps,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, AVCCAM, AG-3DA1, AG-AF100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems

[Shawn Bockoven]

We purchased five 370’s to be used on our remote truck. The 370 is the worst camera I have ever worked with. I went round and round with Panasonic about the focus issues in a variable lighting environment. Camera is pretty good in a studio environment, but don’t dare leave the F4 -5.6 range and expect to hold focus. If you use the last third of the lens there is no detail in the image. As we can afford it, we will replace the 370’s with other cameras. My crew is very frustrated–Just a miserable experience.

[John Stephens]

Shawn,

Our problems started when a shooter used to better cameras, tried to control DOF by adding ND and opening the lens all the way. The result was VHS. I am going to try better glass on the 370 in hopes that the real issue is just a very poor quality promo lens. At times I think there is a back focus issue, but now I think it is just a super narrow sweet spot that includes 5.6 or less and keeping your subject very close. I would much rather get my money back and buy a real camera, than spend more money on 1/3 inch glass.

[Shawn Bockoven]

We have tried top end glass. The results are a little better, but not worth the $$$. Images are pretty good if the subject is less than 20″ from the camera in stable light.

The image below is at max zoom with the stock glass and an upgraded 20x. Same shrub on the left and right. Left is the upgraded lens.

https://www.metv.ws/bb/370Lens_test.png

[Ken Zukin]

If there isn’t much of a price difference btw the 3100 and the 600 — go with the 3100 — the extra five grand or so you’ll spend factors out to roughly only a thousand a year — for the 5 years it’ll be in service.

I own a 3100 and have been very happy with it — a major upgrade from the 2000 I owned previously.

The 600 is supposedly lighter — that’s never a bad thing. The 2000/3000 series were boat-anchors — surprising for “tapeless” cameras — the 3100 is a manageable weight — (just barely).