Sony XDcam PDW-F350 or Panasonic HPX500

[John Sharaf]

Pete,

In either case you must understand that you’re buying a “compromised” camera vis-a-vis some of the other (more expensive) options. Of course both are non-linear which offers great advantage in importing quickly, but the Panasonic does use a better recording format, namely DVCPRO100 vs. MPEG2 in the Sony (100 Mb vs. 35/50). In addition you correctly note the distinction in the imager size which advantages the Panasonic again. Of course the 2/3″ lenses will cost you more, but they’re going to be better and will fit on subsequent cameras that you’re likely to grow into.

The only drawback to the HVX500 is that I don’t believe the imager is a full native HD resolution; it uses pixel-shifting (like it’s little brother the HVX200) to accomplish it’s sharpness and resolution, but what do you expect for the price?

So, ultimately the educated choice should be made by a good old fashioned “shoot-out” that takes the type of scene you’ll be typically shooting and carries it throough your normal post workflow and judged on a high quality HD monitor (like an eCinema or 20″ Sony CRT) by blind test. Anything short of this will leave you second guessing yourself forever!

JS

[Accountclosedduetopolicyviolations]

[john sharaf] “The only drawback to the HVX500 is that I don’t believe the imager is a full native HD resolution; it uses pixel-shifting (like it’s little brother the HVX200) to accomplish it’s sharpness and resolution, but what do you expect for the price?”

So why do Panasonic make Pana 2000 and 3000 series cameras??

[Nate Weaver]

[john sharaf] “The only drawback to the HVX500 is that I don’t believe the imager is a full native HD resolution; it uses pixel-shifting (like it’s little brother the HVX200) to accomplish it’s sharpness and resolution, but what do you expect for the price?
“

For the price, I expected a CCD block with higher resolution than 960×540. Pixel shifting helps luma res, but it doesn’t generate chroma res.

I’ve spent a few minutes with the camera and I was a little disappointed with the 1.5″ 4×3 finder, and how all-in-all, it feels like an HVX-200 made big. Resolution is about the same as the HVX as well, but the low-light sensitivity and the latitude is much better of course.

As an owner of the 350, and going on the record as being bummed with the light requirements of my 350, I’d still much rather have the 350 than an HPX500. But that’s just my 2 cents, and others milage will indeed vary.

New website, new work online:
https://www.nateweaver.net

[Steve Wargo]

An associate of mine walked into my office practically in tears last week and said that one of his P2 cards won’t show up in his reader or his computer slot. This error was going to cost him his pay for the day and most likely his client. He’ll be lucky if he doesn’y have to pay for a reshoot. Now, I know that sooner or later we’ll hear of the Blu-Ray gone bad too even though Sony says it won’t happen. (I guess they’ve never owned expensive electronics gear)

Or, you could buy a RED camera. They’re getting close.

Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It’s a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck

[Ray Palmer]

[Steve Wargo] “An associate of mine walked into my office practically in tears last week and said that one of his P2 cards won’t show up in his reader or his computer slot”

What a bummer!
Who did this happen to and which camera was he using?
If you don’t want to post his name, maybe just his initials.

Ray Palmer, Engineer
Salt River Project
Phoenix, AZ
602-236-8224 office
There are three types of people in this world, those that can count and those that can’t.

[Jan Crittenden livingston]

[Steve Wargo] “An associate of mine walked into my office practically in tears last week and said that one of his P2 cards won’t show up in his reader or his computer slot. This error was going to cost him his pay for the day and most likely his client. He’ll be lucky if he doesn’y have to pay for a reshoot.”

Steve you should have your friend contact me off line. I would bet we can get the data off that card or at least help him get the card to mount. We will try the last effort first. crittendenj at us.panasonic.com

Best,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, AG-DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems

[Jan Crittenden livingston]

[Nate Weaver] ” Resolution is about the same as the HVX as well,”

Hi Nate, this is not a correct assumption. There is more resolution on the HPX500. There are an additional 100,000 pixels on a 2/3″ CCD. And you are right about the better lowlight performance.

Best,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, AG-DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems

[Accountclosedduetopolicyviolations]

So why do Panasonic make megapixel camera like 2000 and 3000 series??

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] “There is more resolution on the HPX500. There are an additional 100,000 pixels on a 2/3″ CCD. And you are right about the better lowlight performance”
Last time i looked at f330 it had about 1,500 000 pixels.My understanding is:HPX500 is using an old SDX900 block which consists of about 600,000 pixels. And cameras with LESS pixels need LESS light.So where is this extra Panasonic resolution coming from??
Why do you think all serious camera produces are now making 1920×1080 chips? With new HD formats(jpeg2000,sony xdcam hd50,panasonic Intra) you need good resolution.
Why do you think Sony(and others) are using 1920 x 1080 sensors in their 1500 series studio cameras and HDCAMs??

HPX-500 and F330/50 is a great camera for todays television and corporate rates.

[Accountclosedduetopolicyviolations]

bad,bad luck.
Had problems twice with SP tapes long time ago.
Steve,this can happen to any camera and any format.
In 5 years from now we will not discuss the tape anymore.

[Jan Crittenden livingston]

[jiri vrozina] “Last time i looked at f330 it had about 1,500 000 pixels.My understanding is:HPX500 is using an old SDX900 block which consists of about 600,000 pixels. ??”

Actually the old SDX block was 525,000 pixels and the best it could do was 30 frames per second. This is a new vision. It is ab;es to samp;le at 60 frames per second, something that the SDX could not do.

[jiri vrozina] “And cameras with LESS pixels need LESS light.So where is this extra Panasonic resolution coming from??”

More pixels, 625,000 vs 525,000.

[jiri vrozina] “Why do you think all serious camera produces are now making 1920×1080 chips? With new HD formats(jpeg2000,sony xdcam hd50,panasonic Intra) you need good resolution.
Why do you think Sony(and others) are using 1920 x 1080 sensors in their 1500 series studio cameras and HDCAMs??”

Oh please, we are talking about a $14,000 camera, that is the HPX500. Do you really expect it to have 1.1 million pixels? The trade off is that it is a 2/3″ Imager. It really is about whether you have the budget. If you can do the 1.1, then the HPX2000 would fit in against the F350 price. But I find it odd that Pete can find the F350 at the HPX500 price. I wonder why?

Anyhow I hoe this helps,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, AG-DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems