PDA

View Full Version : Hmc150 vs ex1



Retrospective
12-10-2008, 08:03 AM
Hey guys, I'm wondering if there was any previous comparison in terms of quality between the HMC150 and the Sony EX1? Which is better in low light, etc..?


Thanks!

shrigg
12-10-2008, 08:22 AM
Well you'll probably get a completely different answer if you go ask the same question on the EX1 forum, but here goes: I shot both cameras simultaneously on a darkened stage and there were some differences. Costing nearly twice as much DOES give the EX1 a few advantages, such as the 1/2" sensor and an f/1.6 lens all the way through. Also the far superior LCD made me think the EX1 was much better at the time I was shooting. But when we got home and looked at the footage, the EX1 was not any brighter. The two intercut well together with the Panasonic having nicer color (both cameras had optimized scene settings).

Hope this helps

Retrospective
12-10-2008, 08:57 AM
Thanks shrigg,

I also have conflicting information whether HMC150 is 24 mb/s or 21 mb/s?

KeithAndrews.TV
12-10-2008, 09:44 AM
Check out page 7:
ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasonic/Drivers/PBTS/manuals/AG-HMC150_brochure.pdf

In PH mode the HMC150 will record an average of 21Mbps, with a peak bit rate of 24Mbps. It's sort of like when you are compressing a video clip for the web and you set your bit rate to 400kbps. In the end, the file is going to try and stay around 400kbps, but may drift upward to 425, 450, etc...The same thing holds true with the HMC150. Use VLC to monitor the stream rate of a clip that was shot with the HMC150. It never stays right at the recorded bit rate.

manglerBMX
12-10-2008, 10:11 AM
i too was tossing around going with the 150 or the ex1. i chose to go with the 150. although the sony camera has a more professional codec, it may be more than my needs. i can easily justify the cost of a $3300 camera more than i can $6300. i have a full time job and use my 150 on my freelance projects(and a little with my work projects, i'd rather use my 150 than my works A1). it suits my needs 110%.

Hidef1080
12-10-2008, 10:54 AM
i too was tossing around going with the 150 or the ex1. i chose to go with the 150. although the sony camera has a more professional codec, it may be more than my needs. i can easily justify the cost of a $3300 camera more than i can $6300. ........

Same here.

Having an FX-1, I gave the EX-1 some real thought but the 150 just made far more financial sense to me.
I did want the 1/2 sensors I must say and this is my first 'Panny' but the 150 has done all that I've asked and I believe it could do a heck of a lot more.

Green Hornet
12-10-2008, 11:35 AM
If you have only $3,500, you can only get a 150.
If you have $6,500, you may get either. If you see the footage from the 150 and are happy with it, then no need to get the Sony.

If you look at the 150, and constantly are trying to figure out how to make it a little better,
then eventually, you will want the EX-1

There are two things here that will determine the outcome;

1. Which can you afford?
2. Are you happy with the image of the 150.

The 150 has an image you can be happy with, but do a couple outside wide shots,
a couple shots of moving water, trees that are blowing, and some low light interiors.

If you like the results, then that is all you need.

BobDiaz
12-10-2008, 11:51 AM
Both are good cameras, but because of the major price difference, any comparison becomes difficult.

COST: Well, the HMC-150 wins this, it's about 1/2 the cost of the EX-1.

SHARPNESS: The EX-1 wins here, it helps to have a 1/2" image sensor.

HAND HELD USE: The HMC-150 wins; not that you can't hand hold an EX-1, but it's not as easy as the HMC-150.

WORKFLOW: MPEG-2 is easier to edit than AVCHD, so the EX-1 wins here.

MEMORY CARD COST: The HMC-150 wins this one; SDHC is much cheaper than SxS on a per minute or per GB bases.

LOW LIGHT: In interlaced mode, the EX-1 is reported to have an ISO of 800, in progressive mode it's ISO is 400. The HMC-150 is reported to have an ISO of 500. This comparison is a bit of a wash, because it does NOT take into account the noise injected into the picture.

There's more that I could say, but there's bigger questions that should be answered first...


The bigger question is, "What do you want to do and what do you want in a camera?"

That could help everyone narrow down our answers.



Bob Diaz

shrigg
12-10-2008, 12:32 PM
Another thing to note is that adding gain really does not add noise with the HMC150. The EX1 adds noise when gained up.

Retrospective
12-10-2008, 12:52 PM
The HMC150 DOES sounds financially appealing to me, also the low light performance is awesome :) Unless Canon releases an AVCHD cam in January to match the HMC150 then we'll see.

Its for short films, I got used to the small form factor of HV30 and love the fact that I could just take it out of the bag and shoot with minimal or can be preconfigured. It's one of the things I hate about 35mm adapter is the initial setup time, weight, brittleness,etc.. when you don't have control over a lot of things when shooting outside or any "subway" like shots.

I'll be getting the HMC150 next month, this will be my camera before I will be even eligible to purchase Red's Scarlet, Red 1 owners have the first batch -_-

PerroneFord
12-10-2008, 12:57 PM
Another thing to note is that adding gain really does not add noise with the HMC150. The EX1 adds noise when gained up.

What?

some1shero
12-10-2008, 05:09 PM
Another thing to note is that adding gain really does not add noise with the HMC150. The EX1 adds noise when gained up.


What?


Very true. When you turn the gain up on the HMC150, the visible noise is much more smooth in appearance. It doesn't give that "graininess look" that many other cameras produce. The noise on the HMC150 is even less noticeable while the footage is moving.

seven.b
12-10-2008, 05:52 PM
MEMORY CARD COST: The HMC-150 wins this one; SDHC is much cheaper than SxS on a per minute or per GB bases.



I thought the EX1 had a pretty simple work around to where you can use cheap SDHC cards. The kensington adapter? Something like that?

Evro
12-10-2008, 08:23 PM
I thought the EX1 had a pretty simple work around to where you can use cheap SDHC cards. The kensington adapter? Something like that?

Yes that's right, it's called the KxS solution, however it is not endorsed by Sony and it is limited to shooting at the standard frame rates (no overcranking) because of the limited bandwidth the KxS solution offers.

shrigg
12-10-2008, 08:58 PM
We are very fortunate to be able to shoot our HMC's at 720p60 onto lowly SDHC cards!

PerroneFord
12-10-2008, 10:05 PM
We are very fortunate to be able to shoot our HMC's at 720p60 onto lowly SDHC cards!

The Sony's can do this all day. Even on SDHC cards.

PerroneFord
12-10-2008, 10:12 PM
Yes that's right, it's called the KxS solution, however it is not endorsed by Sony and it is limited to shooting at the standard frame rates (no overcranking) because of the limited bandwidth the KxS solution offers.

I'm sorry, this is incorrect. While the KxS solution is not endorsed by Sony, they absolutely CAN overcrank. However, they cannot overcrank to the same degree as the SxS cards.

It is also incorrect to say that the problem lies within the SDHC cards. The problem lies within the interface of the adapter card. This has been proven out which is why you can take a Sandisk Ultra2 card that overcranks reliably at 40fps and stick it into a different adapter card, and it won't overcrank at all. Or you can take a Kensington adapter, and put in a class 6 Transcend card and may not be able to overcrank it much.

The idea of using adapter cards for this functionality is wonderful for us cheapskates that couldn't get it done any other way. But they certainly do have their limitations in their current iteration. Help appears to be on the way though, so we'll see where we stand in 90 days or so.

Buck Forester
12-10-2008, 11:31 PM
Which one to choose would seem to depend a lot on whether you really need the full rez from the 1/2" chips of the EX1. If not, I'd go Panasonic and save some moolah. If I didn't have to have the minimum high-def specs that the EX1 hits, I would've probably gone Panasonic for the CCD chips. It all depends what your market is.

Evro
12-10-2008, 11:49 PM
I know Guy Barwood personally (one of the pioneers of the KxS system) and all of that considered, I too was at a crossroads 2 months ago when I was trying to decide if I should go for an EX1 or two HMCs. I decided to go for the two HMCs because I couldn't convince myself that I was getting double the value from the EX1. Although the EX1's image would have intercut better with our Canon XH-A1s, I really wanted to go tapeless while also trying to run a viable wedding video business.

I still think the EX1 is the better camera but then at almost double the cost of the HMC it bloody well should be. Panasonic's timing for the release of the HMC was a Godsend for my business. According to DVT in Sydney (my local Panasonic dealer) there will be no new HMC152 stocks in Australia until the new year with a possible price increase.

PerroneFord
12-11-2008, 04:58 AM
To me, the choice of the EX1 or the HMC comes down to one thing. And it's not really the CCDv CMOS for most, nor the media costs any more. But the SDI port on the EX1 is a game changer. Maybe not for most people today, but down the road for some of us.

In my case, the ability to plug into our broadcast gear was huge. More significant than the 1/2 imagers, more significant than the variable frame rates. I can now feed the broadcast gear just like the local TV guys do. And that was easily worth the price of admission. As boxes like the Convergent become as common as today's firestores, I'll be thrilled to have this capability.

shrigg
12-11-2008, 05:27 AM
Meanwhile us HMC folks will have to buy a $495 blackmagic convertor (http://blackmagic-design.com/products/miniconverters/) to get to SDI

Justyn
12-11-2008, 06:50 AM
Yes.. those converters are great! I'll also gladly take 2 150s over an EX1. That camera is horrible to do handheld stuff with... makes the XL1 feel like a dream. It's not all about the imagery.. but also how it handles and how light and easy it is for a variety of operators. With the 150, I can give the camera to my wife and she'll go and shoot the stuff I don't want to shoot, and I could never do that with the EX1... she'd complain after 5 minutes... I've never liked the ergonomics of Sony cameras... seems like they are designed to be on sticks and nothing else...


One vote here for 2x 150 over 1xEx1.

PerroneFord
12-11-2008, 06:59 AM
Yes.. those converters are great! I'll also gladly take 2 150s over an EX1. That camera is horrible to do handheld stuff with... makes the XL1 feel like a dream. It's not all about the imagery.. but also how it handles and how light and easy it is for a variety of operators. With the 150, I can give the camera to my wife and she'll go and shoot the stuff I don't want to shoot, and I could never do that with the EX1... she'd complain after 5 minutes... I've never liked the ergonomics of Sony cameras... seems like they are designed to be on sticks and nothing else...


See here's the thing...

Who buys a $3k-$7k camera to chase the kids around? I've seen a number of movies being made, and spent plenty of time in TV studios and out on shoots. And I have never seen anyone TRULY handholding a camera. I've seen cameras on tripods, dollies, cranes, stabilizers, shoulder mounts, sandbags, etc. But not once have I seen one simply being held bare in someone's hands.

So if we aren't actually handholding the camera to do filming, what is the point of worrying about what it feels like in the hand? I actually haven't handheld a camera since 2003 when I got my DVX.

My FigRig is my new handheld and man do I like that thing.

manglerBMX
12-11-2008, 07:06 AM
about 80% of my freelance work is filming bmx/action sports. and i'm almost always going handheld. so that plaid a huge role in my decision to go with the hmc150, which has been a godsend compared to the hvx, so i can't even imagine the pain i'd go through with the ex1.

shrigg
12-11-2008, 08:12 AM
I never shoot handheld either, in my case it's the Cinesaddle that I tend to use. But kudos to those that like handheld and can do it well. It's too tiring and inconsistent to get the results I need shooting handheld, take after take etc.

jeff9329
12-11-2008, 10:36 AM
I decided to go for the two HMCs because I couldn't convince myself that I was getting double the value from the EX1. Although the EX1's image would have intercut better with our Canon XH-A1s, I really wanted to go tapeless while also trying to run a viable wedding video business.

I still think the EX1 is the better camera but then at almost double the cost of the HMC it bloody well should be.

Evro:

I agree with and followed your line of reasoning on this. I ended up getting rid of the XH-A1s just to simplify and maintain consistency.

I really wanted the EX-1 but certainly couldn't afford two. Although it is the better camera, you still have to contend with a bunch of negatives with it.

I do look forward to the next 1/3" (or 1/2" upsize) sensor iteration on the Panasonics, but am very happy with the current 150. I shot my first HMC-150 low light play this last tuesday. It turned out great under pitiful lighting conditions. The A1s would have choked in that light.

jeff9329
12-11-2008, 10:40 AM
about 80% of my freelance work is filming bmx/action sports. and i'm almost always going handheld. so that plaid a huge role in my decision to go with the hmc150, which has been a godsend compared to the hvx, so i can't even imagine the pain i'd go through with the ex1.

I have been running deshaker scripts in the NLE on almost all of my HMC-150 handheld footage. It always helps and can sometimes perform pretty miraculous results.

It can even fix a botched pan, tilt or zoom.

Try it if you aren't already.

manglerBMX
12-11-2008, 11:04 AM
oh yeah, i use multiple tools for smoothing stuff out, usually shake or aftereffects and sometimes motion.

Justyn
12-11-2008, 11:19 AM
I buy cameras to do a variety of things including chasing the kids around. I don't want to miss those moment when they grow up because of a camera. I have to be mobile and all situations arise and being in the middle of the Florida everglades or shooting from a tube behind a boat require different applications. I wish I could say that things were black and white but they are not.


I do know that he who protest too much has something to hide. Do you have buyers remorse? I dont seem to have the time to check out the EX1 forums or some of these as I'm shooting with a cam that I like. I think you might want to shoot more EX1 stuff and then post it over there and prove how much better it is. I agree its a tight ass cam.. Just not one that I chose for a few reaons.

Lets be happy with a choice, post helpful stuff and move on.



See here's the thing...

Who buys a $3k-$7k camera to chase the kids around? I've seen a number of movies being made, and spent plenty of time in TV studios and out on shoots. And I have never seen anyone TRULY handholding a camera. I've seen cameras on tripods, dollies, cranes, stabilizers, shoulder mounts, sandbags, etc. But not once have I seen one simply being held bare in someone's hands.

So if we aren't actually handholding the camera to do filming, what is the point of worrying about what it feels like in the hand? I actually haven't handheld a camera since 2003 when I got my DVX.

My FigRig is my new handheld and man do I like that thing.

PerroneFord
12-11-2008, 11:42 AM
No buyers remorse here. My only remorse is that I can't shoot with the thing MORE! If I had the money, I'd buy another one today. The HMC seems like a great camera too, but wouldn't have worked for me because of some specific issues. I'd like to try one though, and a friend was supposed to get one but that seems to have fallen through.

Ah well, didn't mean to slam you. Sorry if it seemed that way.

Justyn
12-11-2008, 01:03 PM
Point taken and understood. You have been a good sport and bring valid points. I personally am the most fickle camera owner. Jumping brands and models when something new comes out. I don't think I'm like this with anything else, but seems like there's a need for a new cam about every 3 years.. like a leased car perhaps.


i think you'll dig the 150. The noise improvement alone is way better thann what i got from the original HVX.. .

Buck Forester
12-11-2008, 01:17 PM
Just a quick note for the record... I have two boys, one is 4 months which limits my chasing him with a camera, ha!, and the other is just under 3 years old, who is always on the go! I have at the very minimum 100 hours of footage of chasing him with my EX1, handheld, and following him around everywhere we go. And that little booger can run fast when he wants to, ha ha! I have dollies/track, tripods, stabilizers, jibs, shoulder supports, etc., but 90% of what I've been shooting with my EX1 is simply handheld.

I guess because I've never had a camcorder this size before (they all been little palm-sized ones in the past, as well as my still cameras), that I don't find handholding the EX1 any problem at all. In fact I like it and it feels good in my hand. I'm often shooting simply holding the handle while running at a low angle, using the flip-out lcd to compose on the go. Maybe if I had shot with an HVX or something else prior I would think the EX1 sucks handheld because most people say it sucks, but I have no problems whatsoever. It doesn't feel awkward or off center to me. My only complaint would be if I use two hands on the camera it's easy to unintentionally touch a button, but I've gotten to the point I'm aware of it so it's not a problem.

But I'm living proof that simply having an EX1 does not mean you'll miss any footage of your kids growing up, ha! I'm documenting nearly ever step they take! Granted my wife has no interest in my EX1, mostly because of the complexity (not sure I'd trust her with it anyway, ha ha!), but she gets great footage with our little Sony HC9 and/or her Canon Powershot, which allows for short clips for those precious spontaneous moments when you're not carrying a video camera.

Anyway, just my two cents. Don't let my "Senior Member" status here confuse anyone that I actually know what I'm talking about. :)

Evro
12-11-2008, 02:12 PM
Personally, being a person in their 40s and having been strictly a hand-held shooter over the years, I had grown used to hand holding heavy cameras like my old JVC HD200, however, the HMC's extreme light weight yet large size (which helps stability) is something you can only appreciate as your body starts to age ;)

There are many times during dancing at weddings for example, where to avoid shooting the back of people's heads you have no choice but to hold the camera up high shooting down on the action. The lighter camera always wins in this situation especially where having a tripod or monopod hampers fast angle changes. At twice the weight of the HMC I don't think I could hold an EX1 up above my head in that situation for long - perhaps you younger ones can :)

bobbigboote
12-12-2008, 10:32 AM
Ok, I'd like to semi-hijack this thread and I promise I'm not trying to be a troll :)

I'm going through the same decision making process btw the HMC and the EX1.

I will be making full length narrative films. No wedding/docs/kids/news/etc. type of shooting.

Cost of camera/media/ergonomics are not important to me. Image quality and flexibility are of primary importance to me.

This is the part that sounds trollish: Almost all of the HMC video I've seen looks pretty bad in comparison to the EX1 videos I've seen, which are generally a LOT better looking. I acknowledge that this may be subjective.

My sampling is limited to what I've seen on Vimeo or a few sample from Twighlight fest downloads. I'm doing simple searches on Vimeo for "hmc 150" and "ex1". I'm aware that the components of the camera are similar to HVX and I've seen a couple decent images posted from that camera. I've not touched either camera in person.

So part of my questions revolve around the reasons for this. It could be that:

A) The HMC is newer and capable of producing great pictures and people just haven't figured out how to work well with it yet
B) People have made great pictures and I haven't found them
C) What I've seen of the HMC/EX1 is representative of the capabilities and the EX1 just plain has a much better picture.
D) Many of the EX1 shots are using a Letus/35mm adapter and if you used a 35mm on the HMC you would get just as nice an image.

I've never had cameras from Panny or Sony, so I have no allegiance to either or an axe to grind. I just want to get the best looking footage I can for my budget, which at the high end can afford an EX1 (no Reds for me).

Thanks for your indulgence! :)

jeff9329
12-12-2008, 10:48 AM
Ok,
I will be making full length narrative films. No wedding/docs/kids/news/etc. type of shooting.

Cost of camera/media/ergonomics are not important to me. Image quality and flexibility are of primary importance to me.


Thanks for your indulgence! :)

I have the HMC-150 and the Canon XH-A1, both good cameras.

From what you say above, I think everyone will agree to go for the EX-1, at a minimum. It's a better camera at a higher price point. The negatives it has like rolling shutter just don't matter on non live-action realtime events. If something were to happen, you just re-shoot.

Could you get great results with the HMC-150? Of course, but I would go with the best tools you can afford.

Justyn
12-12-2008, 11:39 AM
I just shot this with the 150... perspective is off, but you get the idea.. and it looks really flipping good on an HD player..


I think that the EX1 does sound more like the camera for you.. especially if you are doing adapter stuff... but if you were doing run and gun or handheld stuff, then I'd say.. Yikes to that.

shrigg
12-12-2008, 01:47 PM
I just shot this with the 150... perspective is off, but you get the idea.. and it looks really flipping good on an HD player

Link???

Evro
12-12-2008, 01:49 PM
If cost of camera/media/ergonomics is not important to you and you are strictly making full length narratives then none of these prosumer cameras are going to be good enough for you, especially if your film is for theatre distribution.

If I was in your position I'd be renting a Red One or any of the other 2-4K cameras that everyone is using for serious narrative work, otherwise, you're no different to most of us here who shoot weddings/docs/kids/news/etc... :D

I have to say it again that the EX1 cannot be fairly compared to the HMC150 and it's ridiculous to make such comparisons. C'mon guys the glass (leica stamp or not) and the CCD block are nowhere near the league of the EX1's Fujinon glass or 1/2" CMOS block and were never intended to be so we gotta stop these silly comparisons.

The way I see it is that the HMC was never designed with feature film of broadcast work in mind because it lacks features important to those fields, it is however about to become one of the greatest & most affordable event work & indy fimmaker cameras since the DVX!!

Justyn
12-12-2008, 02:03 PM
http://www.electriccowtheater.com/NWC/danceb.mov


sorry

jeff9329
12-12-2008, 02:18 PM
If cost of camera/media/ergonomics is not important to you and you are strictly making full length narratives then none of these prosumer cameras are going to be good enough for you, especially if your film is for theatre distribution.


I agree too, that's why I included "at a minimum." in my post.

I work in a downtown area with all the shiny high-rise buildings and stuff. This makes me lucky enough to see commercials, spots and whatever else professionally shot on the sidewalks every now and then. I am constantly amazed at what they bring in to shoot a 30 second spot. Basically a huge 10-wheeler box truck, support vehicles, tow behind generator, etc.

In every case, they were shooting with a Panasonic camera. I couldn't identify exactly which one, but they appeared to be one of the HPXs, maybe even a HPX 500 once.

I do have to say, with the massive light manipulation they do through 4'X4' shade filters to block direct sun over the talent, and multiple $14K+ Arri lights for fill light set up, you could easily get a good shot on the HMC-150. And there is a group of people watching on a remote monitor to see if they approve of the shot.

Bottom line, this stuff is expensive.

Evro
12-12-2008, 03:35 PM
I agree with you Jeff, on a few occasions when we're doing bridal location shoots in the Sydney CBD we see whole production crews shooting commercials with huge ass Sony or Panasonic broadcast style cameras all decked out with matte boxes, cinema lenses and cranes, dolly tracks and an entourage of very bright lights. The only time I've seen HVX & EX1 cameras used by big TV studios is during live to air street interviews and trashy reality TV shows.

bobbigboote
12-12-2008, 06:19 PM
I know the EX1 is significantly more expensive, so I would expect it to have a better picture. I've been hoping (so I could save money) the response would be "Oh ya, you get just as good a pic on a HMC, you just have to [buy a Letus] or [insert wisdom here]. Here's a link to an example video that illustrates how good you can make it look".

Evro, I would humbly disagree that an EX1 isn't good enough for a feature. Here are a few EX1 narrative videos that have plenty good enough image quality for an independent feature in my opinion.

The Entity
http://www.vimeo.com/1198204
(No 35mm used, naked EX1)

Cold Feet
http://www.vimeo.com/1861333
(EX1 w/Letus w/primes used)

I haven't seen any HMC footage as good as those. The closest I've seen is this cam test:

http://www.vimeo.com/2067495
(Uses a Letus)

BTW Justyn, that dance clip isn't bad :)

I plan on renting lighting and sound equipment, but I'd like to own the camera since renting is so expensive. And if I really had to, I'd rent a Red, but since the EX1 clips I mention above seem good enough, I'm not sure I really need to.

Thanks for all the feedback so far! You guys are very helpful and this is a great forum!

Justyn
12-12-2008, 08:28 PM
It's highly compressed for sure... I think the argument for a RED is really also only valid in terms of people who are doing a feature and for a blow up. The RED looks just like EX1 footie when it's downconverted to 1080... that's why a buddy of mine didn't buy one. He was going to deliver 1080 footage and there's little to no difference on that smaller scale. The difference is noticable on a big screen... and I think that all of the heartache of the workflow might be worth it on a feature when y ou don't shoot a ton of footage. The Red would be a nightmare for anything that you'd be shooting tons of footage on.


Also to go back on the old tired tread.. it's true that a story and performances are what counts. If it's good then distributors will go for it. Clerks is one of the ugliest looking films ever but people laughed. The Celebration, which I love, was shot on a 900 dollar single chip SD cams. I think that too many times filmmakers hide behind their camera and have pissing matches over what is pixel shifted and whatever. Who gives a crap about that... just make your film with the tools that you have and concentrate on the hard part selling it. Everyone can make a film, but can you sell it.

On my next feature, I'm going to have a publicist, an attorney, and a producer's rep all pumping up the hype and selling the sizzle way before we even start shooting. That's the key.. getting the buzz out there and selling ya baby. No one cares what something is shot on.. and are willing to forgive imperfections if it's a good compelling story

Retrospective
12-13-2008, 07:50 AM
*The Entitiy*

Dang the EX1 does look very good without a 35mm adapter.

I hope someone can make a side by side footage comparison between the EX1 and HMC150, just to see how big the difference of quality between both cams.

Cheers,
John

Brady
12-13-2008, 08:39 AM
*The Entitiy*

I hope someone can make a side by side footage comparison between the EX1 and HMC150, just to see how big the difference of quality between both cams.

Cheers,
John


There's this link (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=150828), but it's comparing 1080i60 which isn't exactly the HMC150's strong point...

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=150828

(btw, these are just stills)

Evro
12-13-2008, 08:52 AM
Ha ha! John, that would be sheer torture for owners of the HMC ;-)

To put things back in context, I suggested renting a Red One etc... because the poster wasn't concerned about cost, media or ergonomics, now I don't doubt you can make a great narrative feature with an EX1, especially going out uncompressed via SDI, heck you could make a great feature using a Canon XH-A1, and no doubt you could also make one with an HMC & a 35mm adaptor. However in my opinion I don't think the HMC has the front end that could emulate the look of 35mm film or a 4K video camera (downscaled of course). What I find the most disappointing with the HMC is the yucky video looking way it handles strong highlights by adding that horrendous purple fringing on edges.

I'm still discovering what the HMC can do and certainly not under any illusion that this little $3200 camcorder is some kind of miracle machine. If Canon made a tapeless SDHC card version of the XH-A1 I would have probably gone for that - you can't beat Canon glass :)

Retrospective
12-13-2008, 10:51 AM
There's this link (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=150828), but it's comparing 1080i60 which isn't exactly the HMC150's strong point...

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=150828

(btw, these are just stills)

Thanks, I've seen this one but its hard to judge screen shots when its interlaced, it just looks awful. I hope the guy would post the footage :)



Ha ha! John, that would be sheer torture for owners of the HMC ;-)

To put things back in context, I suggested renting a Red One etc... because the poster wasn't concerned about cost, media or ergonomics, now I don't doubt you can make a great narrative feature with an EX1, especially going out uncompressed via SDI, heck you could make a great feature using a Canon XH-A1, and no doubt you could also make one with an HMC & a 35mm adaptor. However in my opinion I don't think the HMC has the front end that could emulate the look of 35mm film or a 4K video camera (downscaled of course). What I find the most disappointing with the HMC is the yucky video looking way it handles strong highlights by adding that horrendous purple fringing on edges.

I'm still discovering what the HMC can do and certainly not under any illusion that this little $3200 camcorder is some kind of miracle machine. If Canon made a tapeless SDHC card version of the XH-A1 I would have probably gone for that - you can't beat Canon glass :)

Well Im sure eevryone would like to see a convincing differences between the 2 cameras (HMC150/EX1), we all know EX1 is the better one but how much better? I'd like to know as well.

Im still not convince with the footage I see of HMC150 on Vimeo. I've seen good ones with CC like http://www.vimeo.com/2384547 I still do think the HMC150 can do a lot better with the Dynamic Range Settings, better colour adjustments so why not.

I do like Canon cameras, I mean the little Canon HV30 is a wonderful cam that offers great flexibility in post for CC, IMHO. But Im not looking for tape based cams anymore.

Evro
12-13-2008, 02:57 PM
I still do think the HMC150 can do a lot better with the Dynamic Range Settings, better colour adjustments so why not.

I hope so too! I bought two HMCs but I'm not quite ready to let go of my XH-A1 just yet ;-)

BobDiaz
12-13-2008, 05:34 PM
So the camera head is EXACTLY the same on the HMC and 170?

What are the differences in the DSP then?

Does the 170 capture at a higher bitdepth before downconverting to 8bit or what

Both cameras (HMC-150 and HPX-170) have the same CCDs and lens. They also capture at 14 bits and process at 19 bits; this is recorded at 8 bits.

The HPX-170 records to P2 using DVCPRO-HD and the HMC-150 records to SDHC using AVCHD. The difference is the CODEC used in the recording. The 170 has the higher bit rate and would be easier to edit.

The 170 has extra features like, overcranking, undercranking, time lapse, ...


Bob Diaz

Stevet
12-13-2008, 08:00 PM
Yes that's right, it's called the KxS solution, however it is not endorsed by Sony and it is limited to shooting at the standard frame rates (no overcranking) because of the limited bandwidth the KxS solution offers.

Actually,
that's not totally correct. Overcranking the EX1 at 60FPS (24P) needs around 12.5MB/s. The SanDisk Ultra II SDHC cards sustains 15MB/s.

The problem is that Sony intentionally limited the USB datarate over their expresscard interface. It's max is around 8.5MB/s. Their own PHU60K expresscard to USB 64GB video capture drive does not work for overcrank. For that matter, it barely works capturing HQ mode. It occasonally throws media restore errors.
The KxS works FAR better. I've been using four of these card for over three months with NO errors.

Also, the EX1 can run all of the HQ modes with the KxS (Expresscard to SDHC adaptor).

True, it can not overcrank at full 60FPS, but it can overcrank to 40FPS without any issues.
Also, it's no big deal. When you need to overcrank, just throw in your SxS card.
The camera has two card slots.

The KxS with the 16GB Ultra II SDHC cost around $115.
SanDisk is about to release their 32GB Ultra II which will sell for $150.
So for less than $200, you can shoot 100 minutes of HQ mode 1920x1080P.
That seems like a decent savings since their 32GB SxS cost around $1500.

Stevet
12-13-2008, 08:37 PM
http://www.electriccowtheater.com/NWC/danceb.mov


sorry


Can you offer a shorter sample at a higher datarate? It is hard to tell quality.
I'm sure it's the conversion, but there is bad compression near the blacks and banding.

There's no doubt the HMC is a great buy for many.

Evro
12-13-2008, 09:37 PM
As much as I think the EX1 is a superior camera with higher resolution & superior optics, for my line of work I can't see myself flying one on a hand-held Glidecam all day like I can with one of my HMCs ;-)

bobbigboote
12-14-2008, 05:51 PM
Justyn, I'd also vote to see a higher data rate version of that video, even if it was shorter. That would be a good sample of what I could expect from the HMC. And it would let me see the difference between the highly compressed stuff I've seen and the "best" quality you could get out of it. :)

Evro
12-14-2008, 07:38 PM
I do actually prefer the color rendition and gamma settings on the HMC to the EX1.

I find I can get a more filmic image.

But hey, dont want to start a fire here.

Everyone knows that Panasonic has the reputation for great filmic looking gamma & superb colours, otherwise people would not be making "PANALOOK" or "DVXMATCH" presets in Canon, JVC & Sony cameras :D I've never heard of a "CANONLOOK" or "SONYMATCH" preset for the Panasonic ;-)

shrigg
12-14-2008, 07:39 PM
I'm getting a Cinevate HD achromat for my 35mm lens adapter so soon I will be posting some HMC footage shot with Nikon AI-S primes (24mm f2.0, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8, 135mm f2.8).

Justyn
12-14-2008, 08:56 PM
I'd like to see that adapter work. I think this camera might be fast enough to do what I've been wanting to do.


i'll post a higher res version... or if you are in orlando, you can come and see it play next Sunday. cheers

jeff9329
12-15-2008, 10:40 AM
What I find the most disappointing with the HMC is the yucky video looking way it handles strong highlights by adding that horrendous purple fringing on edges.

Totally agreed. It dosen't do it often, but when it puple fringes, it really purple fringes.


I'm still discovering what the HMC can do and certainly not under any illusion that this little $3200 camcorder is some kind of miracle machine. If Canon made a tapeless SDHC card version of the XH-A1 I would have probably gone for that - you can't beat Canon glass :)

I agree here too. But the A1 "s" is out, and tapeless in not in the cards. By the time there is another A1 release, the HMC-150 & siblings will probably have another release too (hopefully native 1920X1080).



I still do think the HMC150 can do a lot better with the Dynamic Range Settings, better colour adjustments so why not.

Lately I have been making DRS or Knee adjustments (either low or auto) and master pedestal before my outside bright light shots when time permits. It really seems to be able to preserve more detail for some reason when you do this. I also hate blown highlights. However, it's a PITA to do this.

Does anyone else make adjustments to DRS/knee or master pedestal during shoots?

Hidef1080
12-15-2008, 10:56 AM
Does anyone else make adjustments to DRS/knee or master pedestal during shoots?

I do.

That's when I really started to see just how good this little camera was/is.

Barry_Green
12-15-2008, 03:49 PM
Lately I have been making DRS or Knee adjustments (either low or auto) and master pedestal before my outside bright light shots when time permits. It really seems to be able to preserve more detail for some reason when you do this. I also hate blown highlights. However, it's a PITA to do this.
That's what the scene file dial is for though. Set up two identical scene files, one for indoors and one for outdoors. Then just flip the dial from F1 to F2 or whatever. Instantaneous, no pain, and you get the best results in each environment.

Justyn
12-15-2008, 09:50 PM
I just shot something tonight that's going to blow your friggin socks off. I'll post a 10 second high res quicktime file tomorrow night when I get some of the footage posted. It looks sick.. and here's the funny thing.

My beloved HVX was too slow to get the visual effect we were going for so yet again it stayed in the bag.. No doubt it's an improvement over the original one.. now i'd like to see how it does against the 170.


I too agree that I am not the biggest fan of the overal EX1 image. Saw some more footage and it maybe sharper but that's not the end all be all of a moviing image.

shrigg
12-16-2008, 09:19 AM
I do.

That's when I really started to see just how good this little camera was/is.

Can you share your settings with a description, ie: "master ped scene to tame strong contrasty sunlight"

That would be awesome, thanks!

Evro
12-16-2008, 10:39 AM
Personally I'm getting a lot of joy out of the F4 "B-STR" preset because it's nice & bright for indoor shooting but I'm still experimenting. Although I haven't had the time to experiment with the DRS setting, it would be good to get some scene file recipes going on with explanation as to the best shooting environment for each setting - like in Barry G's DVX book.

jeff9329
12-16-2008, 12:09 PM
Personally I'm getting a lot of joy out of the F4 "B-STR" preset because it's nice & bright for indoor shooting but I'm still experimenting. Although I haven't had the time to experiment with the DRS setting, it would be good to get some scene file recipes going on with explanation as to the best shooting environment for each setting - like in Barry G's DVX book.

When you really get into using the settings, you will usually get quite a bit better results. In some lighting, the results are far better after tweaking. OTOH, some of the controls have very little effect at either end of the range.

IMO, all the factory presets were just more or less demonstration settings. I didn't like shooting with any of them at all. Part of that was coming from a Canon A1 which has a totally different look. All 6 of the factory settings are long ago edited from factory on my camera. I still end up tweaking master ped when my monitor is around. It's not possible to make adjustments without a monitor IMO, at least with my eyes.

Im hoping that Barry will put some scene file settings in the HMC-150 book.

If anyone has any good snow shooting scene files, please post.

drdimento
12-16-2008, 12:24 PM
. . . My FigRig is my new handheld and man do I like that thing.

I'll give a BIG 10-4 on that fig rig :) We love it and use it a lot along with our poor man's version of the shoulder mount for under 50 bux and between the two have almost tripod scenes . .certainly not steady cam . . but not far off that's for sure.

On the vote thing here, I'd go other options for a number of reasons:

- i like tape back up and neither has that
- both cameras are high priced for what they offer
- all of the current hd cameras in the hand of a good user make awesome video

on this last point about 90+% of the viewing public cannot tell the difference and won't until hd moves up to the next level but by then all the current cameras will be bye bye like sd 10 to 18 months.

BUT, if i HAD to take one over the other as the voting is going, then it would be the definately be the hmc150 strickly because of cost.

skipioafricanus
12-17-2008, 05:52 PM
Hi Justyn,

I saw your hmc150 footage. Can you post something with better optimized compression. The spot lights on the dancers seem to have macro blocks or noise. I am looking at the hmc150 for my new camera. Thanks!

Skipioafricanus

sewolla
12-17-2008, 11:43 PM
I got the HMC150 due to cost considerations. This cam was bought to earn me some money. I want it to have paid for itself pronto. So yes, cost was a factor.

But really, I was also concerned with the MPEG2 codec that EX-1 uses. In my humble estimation, for sports work, the HMC150's AVCHD codec seemed more advantageous.
Cost--of cam and MEDIA.... and codec. The cheap cost and high quality recordings made possible by gthe HMC150 were just too much to resist. And size, too, now that I think of it.

Justyn
12-21-2008, 05:48 PM
Here's the hi-res file I uploaded... some selects from my Christmas shoot:

http://www.electriccowtheater.com/NWC/NWC150t.mov

PerroneFord
12-21-2008, 06:23 PM
I got the HMC150 due to cost considerations. This cam was bought to earn me some money. I want it to have paid for itself pronto. So yes, cost was a factor.

But really, I was also concerned with the MPEG2 codec that EX-1 uses. In my humble estimation, for sports work, the HMC150's AVCHD codec seemed more advantageous.
Cost--of cam and MEDIA.... and codec. The cheap cost and high quality recordings made possible by gthe HMC150 were just too much to resist. And size, too, now that I think of it.

Media costs are a wash. The EX1 and HMC150 both can shoot to SDHC. The Mpeg2 codec of the EX1 can be problematic under some conditions. But there are many many factors that move the EX1 out of the HMC's league. Frame rates being one, SDI port being another.

For many shooters, I suspect this won't be much of a concern, and the HMC becomes the clear winner. Especially handheld.

I spent some time this weekend working with some AVCHD 1080p footage and MAN is that stuff painful on hte timeline. And I am running a dual core machine and 64bit OS. A quadcore would reduce the pain to tolerable levels, but dang.

Anyway, the HMC is a nice choice and a camera I was certainly interested in, but it came to market a bit too late for me to consider.

Evro
12-21-2008, 07:05 PM
Media costs aside, the EX1 is still almost double the price and you get what you pay for. Furthermore, if you don't like something you'll always faults with it or reasons not to like it ;-)

At the end of the day all that matters is that you're happy with your purchase :)

Justyn
12-21-2008, 07:56 PM
You are even seeing the 150 used on jobs that normally might have been HVX or EX1 domain. My buddy is working on one tomorrow that's using the 150.


After shooting with it for a while now. I see 10x more positives than negatives and at the pricepoint you can get two of them. Having two cameras gives so many more options than one higher priced one.

Retrospective
12-21-2008, 08:49 PM
Here's the hi-res file I uploaded... some selects from my Christmas shoot:

http://www.electriccowtheater.com/NWC/NWC150t.mov

Great video! 720p please?:)

Spdamf
12-21-2008, 10:43 PM
Wow! Justyn that looks really good!

skipioafricanus
12-22-2008, 06:27 PM
Here's the hi-res file I uploaded... some selects from my Christmas shoot:

http://www.electriccowtheater.com/NWC/NWC150t.mov
nice footage Justyn... I really like the vibrant colors in the fans that the dancers are waving. The lighting of the scene is great. I take this is a christmas theme with the thorns... It was tough looking at the beautiful dancers than having to look at those sharp thorns? OUCH! Is beauty suppose to be so painful? :)

Justyn
12-22-2008, 06:32 PM
Well it's theological and also supposed to show the great joy and the pain of JC himself... We kind of have an interesting church... I'll post some 720 stuff when I get the time...

cheers and just loving this camera.... for everything that the HVX is not

DaFireMedic
12-22-2008, 06:59 PM
Justyn: Very nice video

I am heading toward purchasing an HMC-150 after the first of the year. I don't think I'll be able to stretch my budget for the EX1, although I'd like to have it.

Anyone had any problems with drop outs occurring during long clips with the HMC-150? I've read a few posts stating that some have lost some frames over long clips or had gaps in their footage, although I'm hearing that it only tends to happen when using the very low end SDHC cards.

I'm shooting a lot of classroom stuff where I sometimes have 1 hr long clips and it needs to be somewhat reliable at capturing them. Any problems from the HMC-150 in this regard? Have any of you experienced this or have your long clips been just fine?

Evro
12-22-2008, 11:00 PM
Loved it Justyn, really nice work!!
Have a great Xmas :)

studio1972
12-23-2008, 03:51 AM
the hmc must do a whole lot of subsampling to reach full raster 1080p

Quite simple really. one of the CCDs is offset by half a pixel so I assume that that is processed to give the 1080p luminence info (presumably with some clever maths). The colour info is effectively 540p anyway as it is 1080p 420

Presumably, with the EX1 a lot of the sensor data must get lost when encoding into MPEG2. So I guess the end result from the 2 cams isn't as different as it would be if you were recording all the data from the sensors on each cam.

studio1972
12-23-2008, 04:01 AM
Justyn: Very nice video

I am heading toward purchasing an HMC-150 after the first of the year. I don't think I'll be able to stretch my budget for the EX1, although I'd like to have it.

Anyone had any problems with drop outs occurring during long clips with the HMC-150? I've read a few posts stating that some have lost some frames over long clips or had gaps in their footage, although I'm hearing that it only tends to happen when using the very low end SDHC cards.

I'm shooting a lot of classroom stuff where I sometimes have 1 hr long clips and it needs to be somewhat reliable at capturing them. Any problems from the HMC-150 in this regard? Have any of you experienced this or have your long clips been just fine?

Hi Justyn,

I have had problems with long clips. I use final cut express and when it joins the clips in PH mode it has a glitch for a few seconds after about 30 mins. This doesn't seem to be a problem with lower bitrate modes so far.

Final cut studio was recently updated and it seems this issue might be resolved on that software, but FCE isn't updated yet. I don't think this is a problem with the memory cards as mine are class 6, it seems to be a problem with how the NLE joins the clips together.

Stu

Stevet
12-23-2008, 04:48 AM
Presumably, with the EX1 a lot of the sensor data must get lost when encoding into MPEG2. So I guess the end result from the 2 cams isn't as different as it would be if you were recording all the data from the sensors on each cam.

That's news to me.
Shoot a rez chart and post samples.

Justyn
12-23-2008, 06:30 AM
I'm going to update the to the recent one too and see if it cures all of the probs.. the last one cured 99 percent of it, but there's still some problems at the the blends...

Justyn
12-23-2008, 06:49 AM
some asked for an HD size version. It's still 264 but at 720p size. Hope you enjoy and please download instead of streaming. It's a big file.

http://www.electriccowtheater.com/NWC/150HD.mov

studio1972
12-23-2008, 05:44 PM
That's news to me.
Shoot a rez chart and post samples.

Well, I don't own an EX1 so I cannot actually do that. However, it seems obvious that if you have 3 full 1080p sensors, one for each colour, and then compress the resulting data into an MPEG2 file (4:2:0), you are going to lose a lot of the colour data (3/4 of it by my reckoning).

This is surely a big hit for the EX1, but not for the HMC, as it doesn't have all that much chrominance data in the first place, due to lower rez sensors.

The point I was trying to make, is that by the time the sensor data from the 2 cameras has been compressed into their respective formats, some of the advantage that the EX1 has from its sensors has been lost, so the gap between the 2 cameras isn't so great.

PerroneFord
12-23-2008, 05:52 PM
The point I was trying to make, is that by the time the sensor data from the 2 cameras has been compressed into their respective formats, some of the advantage that the EX1 has from its sensors has been lost, so the gap between the 2 cameras isn't so great.

LOL!

So If I have a million dollars, and you have 1000, and we both toss away half, we're close?

The lovely thing about the EX1, is that you don't have to toss away anything. Same with the HPX-170. Not so on the 150. So no, I wouldn't say they're "close".

Justyn
12-23-2008, 06:43 PM
Not sure. but I'd rather take two 150s over 1xex1 and the same for the 170 too.

Stevet
12-23-2008, 07:12 PM
Nothing wrong with two cameras, that's for sure. ;)

For what it offers, the 150 is a decent camera.

ullanta
12-23-2008, 07:19 PM
The lovely thing about the EX1, is that you don't have to toss away anything. Same with the HPX-170. Not so on the 150. So no, I wouldn't say they're "close".

Hmmm... I can perhaps buy your argument regarding the EX1 (though in some way I'd say you're "tossing away" motion quality with rolling shutter issuses), but the 170? The optics and sensors are the same as the 150; the only difference is the codec, where the HMC doesn't seem to throw much away vs. the HPX... the HMC is full raster vs. the HPX non-square DVCProHD. The 4:2:0 vs. 4:2:2 is a trickier issue, involving the different horizontal res and the pixel shift utility - but I don't think they're that far off.

studio1972
12-24-2008, 06:39 AM
LOL!

So If I have a million dollars, and you have 1000, and we both toss away half, we're close?

The lovely thing about the EX1, is that you don't have to toss away anything. Same with the HPX-170. Not so on the 150. So no, I wouldn't say they're "close".

Either you are deliberately misrepresenting what I said, or you just didn't understand it?

Using your analogy, the EX1 has 2M pixels per colour, the HMC has 500k pixels, lets say $2m and $500k.

Lets say that the XDCAM EX or AVCCAM file is a briefcase into which you can put your money. It is 4:2:0 so it only contains $500 of colour info.

Therefore, with the EX1 you end up throwing away $1.5m, but the HMC only has $500k to begin with, so either way you end up with the same amount of money, $500k.

If you use the SDI output on the EX1 then you have a larger briefcase, which can carry $1m, but you have still lost the other $1m. You would need a 4:4:4 codec to store all the sensor data, I think that Red has this sort of codec.

It seems to me that the codec is the main limiting factor on the EX1, as the hardware is superior to the HMC, but the codec brings it down to a level similar to the HMC.

There are lots of other factors of course, such as lens quality, image processing, frame rates, rolling shutter, and ergonomics, but i terms of image quality, the cameras should be quite close unless you are using the SDI output from the EX1. The EX1 would have an advantage in terms of luminance data as this is recorded at full 1080p of course.

Stevet
12-24-2008, 07:02 AM
Let's face it.
No one on any of these forums is going to be sold or have their minds changed on what they feel is important to themselves.

It works both ways, some would take two 150 cameras over one EX, and some would not take the 150 cameras if they were handed to them.

Most could say they want the best camera possible that settles their needs for the least amount of money. If you like what you see, that's all that's important.

This is why is SO important to actually test drive before you buy.

Hidef1080
12-24-2008, 07:15 AM
Let's face it.
No one on any of these forums is going to be sold or have their minds changed on what they feel is important to themselves.

It works both ways, some would take two 150 cameras over one EX, and some would not take the 150 cameras if they were handed to them.

Most could say they want the best camera possible that settles their needs for the least amount of money. If you like what you see, that's all that's important.

This is why is SO important to actually test drive before you buy.

Agreed.

From all I've seen the EX-1 and 150 are close enough that the extra $$ for the EX-1 seems like tossing money into Sony's briefcase.

PerroneFord
12-24-2008, 08:37 AM
If you use the SDI output on the EX1 then you have a larger briefcase, which can carry $1m, but you have still lost the other $1m. You would need a 4:4:4 codec to store all the sensor data, I think that Red has this sort of codec.

It seems to me that the codec is the main limiting factor on the EX1, as the hardware is superior to the HMC, but the codec brings it down to a level similar to the HMC.

...the cameras should be quite close unless you are using the SDI output from the EX1. The EX1 would have an advantage in terms of luminance data as this is recorded at full 1080p of course.

And this is the argument that I've made every time these cameras are compared. I feel the glass on the EXx camera is a bit better, and the sensors are better (arguably with that CMOS/CCD argument notwithstanding). However, they are very close.

The difference, to me, really is that the EX1 can change the game with the SDI port, and the 150 cannot. For those that have no use for an SDI port, the HMC is probably a better buy. For those who NEED the SDI port, the 150 is a non-starter. But for those who are on the fence, those who MIGHT like to move up to a better recording level for their "pro" or "film" projects, the EX1 offers them a chance to step into that world as their pocket permits, while the 150 does not. Yes, you can use an HDMI to SDI converter box and get the signal, but that signal is not carrying everything an SDI signal is.

Again, I hate these silly arguments, both are great cameras, but both are rather large compromises away from truly pro cameras. So you pay your money, and you take your choice. I needed both SDI and component out as well as firewire. So my choice was clear.

Barry_Green
12-24-2008, 08:52 AM
The difference, to me, really is that the EX1 can change the game with the SDI port, and the 150 cannot.
Yes it can.


For those that have no use for an SDI port, the HMC is probably a better buy. For those who NEED the SDI port, the 150 is a non-starter.
Why? The 150 has a direct uncompressed digital 4:2:2 output, its HDMI port. Every bit as good a signal as HD-SDI. Many monitors and even capture boards will take that direct feed. For those who absolutely need HD-SDI, you can always get a $395 Convergent Designs NanoConnect HDMI->HD-SDI converter box.


But for those who are on the fence, those who MIGHT like to move up to a better recording level for their "pro" or "film" projects, the EX1 offers them a chance to step into that world as their pocket permits, while the 150 does not. Yes, you can use an HDMI to SDI converter box and get the signal, but that signal is not carrying everything an SDI signal is.
And what is missing? Timecode? The HMC150 has a true LTC timecode out jack. The EX1 doesn't even have that. Heck, when it comes to that, the counterargument could go that the HMC150 can sync to an external timecode slate or dual-system audio recorder, and the EX1 can't, so for those who NEED that, the EX1 is a non-starter. Right?

Tempest in a teapot. People are comparing a $6100 product against a $3100 product.


So you pay your money, and you take your choice. I needed both SDI and component out as well as firewire. So my choice was clear.
And that is exactly the way people should approach this. Who cares if some magazine reviewer is going to claim that an EX1 owner's penis is technically 1/4" longer than yours if you buy an HMC150? Instead look at what the product does, and what it costs, and if you find that one does what you need and the other doesn't, then your choice is made, regardless of what anyone else says.

PerroneFord
12-24-2008, 09:15 AM
For those who absolutely need HD-SDI, you can always get a $395 Convergent Designs NanoConnect HDMI->HD-SDI converter box.


Yep, and I mentioned that.



And what is missing? Timecode? The HMC150 has a true LTC timecode out jack. The EX1 doesn't even have that.


First I've heard of it. Good to know.




Heck, when it comes to that, the counterargument could go that the HMC150 can sync to an external timecode slate or dual-system audio recorder, and the EX1 can't, so for those who NEED that, the EX1 is a non-starter. Right?


Exactly. Now you need the EX3. So the HMC is an even better bargain.



And that is exactly the way people should approach this. Who cares if some magazine reviewer is going to claim that an EX1 owner's penis is technically 1/4" longer than yours if you buy an HMC150? Instead look at what the product does, and what it costs, and if you find that one does what you need and the other doesn't, then your choice is made, regardless of what anyone else says.

Yep. Neither the HMC150 or EX3 were shipping when I had to make my purchase decision. I might have chosen differently. I really wanted to try the HMC150 since I liked my DVX so much, but I just couldn't wait for it. It's a LOT of camera for the money.

bobbigboote
12-26-2008, 11:20 PM
Just,

Thanks for posting the hi-res 720 version!

Did your original footage have those pauses/glitches in it or did those appear after you encoded it as a MOV? (One at 2-3 sec, one at 6-7 sec)

Thanks!

Buck Forester
12-27-2008, 09:19 PM
From all I've seen the EX-1 and 150 are close enough that the extra $$ for the EX-1 seems like tossing money into Sony's briefcase.

This depends on what your markets are. If you are shooting for high-def channels, such as Discovery HD, "close-enough" doesn't cut it. You will not be able to use your 150 for anything but a small percentage of allowable footage. The EX1 apparently is rated at their "Silver" status level and is technically good enough for 100% program footage. So for many (such as myself) this is ALL the difference in the world for selecting a camera. If you're shooting weddings/corporate/indies/family vacations, etc. and there is no mandatory minimum specs required, I'm sure you're right that the 150 'close enough' and is a great value for the moolah. 1/3" chips, no matter what kind, ain't what the big boy high-def broadcasters want for a full HD program. You can only splice a small percentage of footage with those things. They would do me no good. And it would limit my market of stock footage as well.

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 10:12 PM
because of the 4:2:0 and the higher bit rate, the ex makes much better quality footage compared to hmc-150(maybe allot better in some situations), hmc has cine gamma that avoids clipping that the ex doesn't have an equivalent of, hmc doesn't have rolling shutter issues which is a big advantage over ex no matter what your shooting, they both are good in low light, i think ex might be a bit better but not by too much(maybe only one stop), but the hmc have a very distinct advantage over the ex, the price:
1-you can have two hmc-150 for the price of the ex and i think that goes for accesories as well
(you can make a film with two hmc were you would have trouble with one ex1)
2-you can have a deck and a small raid to capture uncompressed or lighty compressed footage in a closed set that would be better than the ex footage.

or it can pay for a steadicam or something, it's a huge gap in price.

not the biggest fan of rolling shutter, but the ex3 although pricier, at least it has some intriging options to allot of lens selections, so at least it's trying to make an effort.

i think the talk should be between hmc-150 and 5dmkii, that would be more interesting.

the next upgrade to either cameras would be interesting.

too much rambling, sorry about that.

PerroneFord
12-27-2008, 10:18 PM
hmc has cine gamma that avoids clipping that the ex doesn't have an equivalent of,

Clearly, you don't own one. I can think of several ways to do this, including in gamma settings. If you've never been through the CineAlta picture manipulation menu, you don't have a clue what you're missing.

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 10:34 PM
no it changes exposure to a specific part of the image without altering the rest, it detects the clipped part and adjust to the rest, that's not in the ex, the cine alta bigger brothers has some cine gamma equivalents, but not the ex1 or ex3.

PerroneFord
12-27-2008, 10:36 PM
What?

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 10:39 PM
changing any settings would change the whole image, in the hmc, you can have the best exposure settings for the foreground, and the camera would detect the clipped background and change that alone without altering the foreground, that's better than what you can do with the ex.

PerroneFord
12-27-2008, 10:48 PM
Ok. I'll take your word for it. What is that feature called? I'd like to read more about it?

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 11:12 PM
they have a few tricks with a few names,
you can find a pdf(specification sheet or brochure) with the hmc-150 features on panasonic site, they just mention the feature and show a picture or 2, they didn't talk too much about it, but it definitly adds allot to the camera and makes it have more dynamic range.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=274232&catGroupId=112502&surfModel=AG-HMC150&displayTab=O

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 11:15 PM
but it's different from adjusting some settings, no matter how you do it, you would never be able to retain foreground exposure untouched while adjusting the clipped part alone.

PerroneFord
12-27-2008, 11:16 PM
Are you talking about DRS?

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 11:16 PM
it was always a compromise no matter how small it might be.any adjustment to avoid clipping had some effect on the foreground.

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 11:19 PM
no, it has a couple more tricks, i think drs makes a slight change to the foreground while it's not much still good enough, they have another one that effects small clipped parts and underexposed parts as well.

Amr Rahmy
12-27-2008, 11:28 PM
i think it's cine-like gamma mode with drs. it's in the bigger hpx and has an equivalent in bigger cine alta but not in the ex

PerroneFord
12-27-2008, 11:54 PM
i think it's cine-like gamma mode with drs. it's in the bigger hpx and has an equivalent in bigger cine alta but not in the ex

Do you really think the ex1 doesnt have cine gamma? It has 4.

Amr Rahmy
12-28-2008, 12:13 AM
no it's the combinition of both that makes the hmc cooler,
yes but it only affects the clipped part which gives the hmc an advantage when in cine gamma.

daylight public places goes to hmc for that,
and ex can take on a set for the quality difference,

at the end after all the comparisons hmc beats ex1 when trying to make a film.

PerroneFord
12-28-2008, 12:52 AM
LOL! Ok, you teh winnar...

Amr Rahmy
12-28-2008, 01:05 AM
next round......
ex3 vs h1, ding ding

Hidef1080
12-28-2008, 02:21 AM
This depends on what your markets are. If you are shooting for high-def channels, such as Discovery HD, "close-enough" doesn't cut it. You will not be able to use your 150 for anything but a small percentage of allowable footage. The EX1 apparently is rated at their "Silver" status level and is technically good enough for 100% program footage. So for many (such as myself) this is ALL the difference in the world for selecting a camera. If you're shooting weddings/corporate/indies/family vacations, etc. and there is no mandatory minimum specs required, I'm sure you're right that the 150 'close enough' and is a great value for the moolah. 1/3" chips, no matter what kind, ain't what the big boy high-def broadcasters want for a full HD program. You can only splice a small percentage of footage with those things. They would do me no good. And it would limit my market of stock footage as well.


Corporate and Independent - That would be me.


I do remember seeing how much HDV content you could use for the Discovery channel about 2 years ago but they never said anything about chip size only HD format type.
I've been trying to find that info again but I haven't.
I would like to see their requirements on AVCHD and it would be interesting if it's the same as HDV.


Does anyone have a link?


...big boy high-def broadcasters....
That's rich.:beer:

Stevet
12-28-2008, 07:52 AM
Now click your heels together 3 times and repeat after me... ..
lol !

Buck Forester
12-28-2008, 12:06 PM
“...big boy high-def broadcasters....”
That's rich.:beer:

Ha! You like that one, do ya? :) Actually even the little boy high-def broadcasters, such as Outdoor Channel, have a minimum of tri-1/2" chips. They have a minimum of tri-1/3" chips just for their SD stuff.

The 'specs' is the ONLY reason I went with the EX1. I was set on an HVX200, about ready to buy, when the EX1 was announced. I knew the HVX200 was a great camera and Nat'l Geo used them, but I then learned they weren't allowed for 100% acquisition. The EX1 for the money, in my humble opinion, rules the true high-def spec world because it allows me to create footage as an independent shooter that can compete with the big boys with big budgets. I'm talking wilderness adventure/travel type stuff, and not 'making movies' stuff. I just got back from Six Flags Discovery Kingdom with my wife and kids a couple of days ago and the footage of the killer whale jumping and splashing (at dusk even) shivers me timbers, it's so crisp... I'da thunk it was shot with a $100 grand camera if I hadn't shot it myself. Now I have to see if I can start editing this stuff into something worthwhile, ha! I've always loved still photography and hated post-processing in Photoshop. The magic for me is being there and shooting, not the computer editing stuff. But I gotsta learn it and do it and get 'er done.

Hidef1080
12-28-2008, 12:54 PM
I hear ya...


I remember back in my FX-1 days there was a lot upheaval over those requirements and there was some compelling reasons given by some Z1 owners as to why HDV could hold up well enough and some even said that if you gave HDV to program directors in a format they wanted you could make it.
I think JVC GY's are 1/3 chips.....


I don't shoot for any stations but I do like to keep up with what's what and the EX-1 is a good camera but 3k over the 150? Not me.


Buck, can you point me to a link for those HD requirements?

Buck Forester
12-28-2008, 06:42 PM
Buck, can you point me to a link for those HD requirements?

Hola Hidef1080, I don't have the various sites saved, I just found them through Google or other people's links/experiences. I basically go to each HD broadcaster, such as Discovery, Nat'l Geo, HDNet, Outdoor Channel, Travel Channel, etc., and try to find their spec sheets/submission pages. Some of them aren't posted or accessed easily, it takes some digging. I need to keep them all in a "Faves" folder for easy access, I apologize for not having immediate links.

Amr Rahmy
12-28-2008, 09:43 PM
ex1 image quality is far Superior to the hmc-150, but the hmc has a slight advantage in low light, and in non localized large public areas in daylight, and no rolling shutter problems and costs half as much. so for film hmc is better than ex1.or 2hmc is better than one ex1.and some dark sarcastic tones of humor were thrown in there for the understanding of the combination of settings that makes hmc slightly better than the ex1 in daylight.

Buck Forester
12-28-2008, 10:22 PM
...but the hmc has a slight advantage in low light, and in non localized large public areas in daylight...


So the EX1 might have a slight advantage when shooting in daylight on private property (both localized and non-localized)... whereas the HMC really shines in the public areas (assuming the public area is large and, of course, non-localized).

I got ya. :)

Amr Rahmy
12-28-2008, 10:39 PM
another piece of very bad humor,

yes, what i meant was exactly that, if it's prescriptively large area of viewing like in a large public place for example, on a daylight shoot, with different light sensitivity measurements throughout the image recorded, hmc would provide a wider latitude compared to ex1, but if it's the exact same frame or location privately labeled it would be a different story.....

or a daylight shoot indoor with a significant exterior light source

Amr Rahmy
12-28-2008, 10:53 PM
it's not controlled light environment with multiple different light intensity for the geek head.

Buck Forester
12-28-2008, 11:36 PM
Not to sound like a doubting Thomas, but where are you specifically getting your information that the HMC has this extra latitude compared to other cameras? This would be a wonderful technological breakthrough in both still cameras and video cameras... I may have missed it? Being able to save highlites from being blown while retaining 'foreground' shadow detail on an image with a wide range of lighting is beyond most current chip manufacturers.

Amr Rahmy
12-28-2008, 11:59 PM
there is a limit obviously to maintaining the clipped areas, it's not magical, but it's significantly better than anything i have seen, and it's very fast at doing it, you can see some examples, i think i saw car headlamps going on an afternoon shot that would have been impossible to get with ex1 without clipping, and it did it flawlessly, so not only that it would correct the clipped part to merge nicely with the rest of the picture, it's also very fast.

at the end it's just better than the ex1, it's not like the image can achieve something that film can get easily, it's just better compared to the ex1.

Amr Rahmy
12-29-2008, 12:04 AM
new nikon and canon dslr have a similar features by the way, although not as intrusive just because the sensor is already too sensitive in those cameras.

Amr Rahmy
12-29-2008, 12:17 AM
not to confuse you the dslrs use it differently, not for the scene i described, they smooth one part only, so they smooth only the shadow area while in high iso for example, they use while trying to lower the noise in low light.

godspeedprojects
12-30-2008, 12:10 AM
This HMC150 is exciting. Curious on SPECUALTIONS here. In a word: RENT-ABILITY.

I have had clients request the EX1. It's an established acquisition platform to producers. The HMC on the other hand is maybe less known and maybe more cumbersome to edit with (because of perceptions of AVCHD)? Now I cannot afford the Sony and personally don't care for its ergonomics. So I've got my eyes on the HMC. Plus I'm a touch loyal to Panasonic ever since they brought the DVX to all of us guerrilla types. Not to say one can't pitch the HMC to a turnkey client but for freightrain shows these days the EX1 has more promise as a rental. Yes? No? I believe this echoes Buck's point.

But do you think with time the "big boys" may make room for the HMC. I think Justyn mentioned seeing the HMC getting rentals in place of HVXs and such. Interesting. What sorts of projects were those?

I wonder how the specs will adapt to the exploding use of internet distribution (HULU and such).

Also, someone mentioned the advantages of the extra coin after purchase of the HMC and I wanted to add another to the list besides camera support gear - a DOF adapter kit for example could diversify your system significantly. Which brings up a question. I believe the EX1 has a flip option but does the HMC? I'm researching DOF also but don't want to stray discussion to that on this thread. Just wondering about the flip option.

Another factor that is significant for a shooter that wants flexibility is the record times available with the HMC. It opens that shooter to a lot more types of marketplaces such as legal video and weddings and at times certain situations in docs need this as well (specially with solid state where downloads become prohibitive). This, from what I understand is a difference even though the EX1 can use SDHC cards, because of the AVCHD (is this a codec? don't know how to refer to that). With all the turmoil in the American marketplace these days - options are good to have.

I've been a DP on a feature doc this year shooting with the EX1 and it does make a pretty picture but even more than that, the stock lens on this camera is so sweet, nice action with the focus and zoom rings and the LCD is spectacular! So no dis to the EX 1.

Another question: can anyone confirm or deny that the aesthetics of 720p in the HMC are more pleasing than 1080p? Because I have read this several times on other forums and a client mentioned it as well and I'm just wondering if there is any reason this could be the case.

I have to say - when I saw a thread comparing these two cameras I was pleasantly surprised considering the price difference. Almost astonished actually because on paper these two cameras are apples and oranges. The chips (CMOS vs CCD, 1/3 vs 1/2), the glass (fujinon vs leica), the codecs and the price alone. Then there is the results and the judge of those results.

I'd say that the fact that this thread exists at all and has been going on for so long may be a good case that the HMC 150 is by far the winner if you are judging ONLY on BANG FOR YOUR BUCK.

One last thing. I've been a member for a while and have used my access just as a voyeour. My apologies - I'll make an effort to contribute to discussion as much as I feel worthy to do because these threads have been invaluable to me and mine over the years. Thanks to all of you and hope you have an awesome turn of the year!!

Amr Rahmy
12-30-2008, 01:52 AM
for tv, ex would be a far better choice, xdcam is known and acknowledged as a hd standard.

Dafilman21
12-30-2008, 07:57 AM
I agree with amrrahmy that xdcam is an accepted HD standard, however if you get the results you want from the hmc then go for that. Also you can convert the footage from the 150 to DVCPRO which is also an HD standard.

ilauzirika
12-30-2008, 12:34 PM
DVCpro HD is interesting, would a broadcaster accept the footage from the hmc, even if they don't accept avchd if you convert it to dvchd pro?

PerroneFord
12-30-2008, 12:39 PM
DVCpro HD is interesting, would a broadcaster accept the footage from the hmc, even if they don't accept avchd if you convert it to dvchd pro?


You can convert it to RED or film, but it's still no better than when it started. If it's good enough when it starts, then it is no matter what you convert it to.

ilauzirika
12-30-2008, 12:48 PM
You can convert it to RED or film, but it's still no better than when it started. If it's good enough when it starts, then it is no matter what you convert it to.
true true, but if you can get he same results with a hpx170 and a hmc150, but they only accept the footage from the hpx because it is dvcpro hd, would they accept the footage from the hmc if you converted it?

I'm not talking about quality but the container of the video....

PerroneFord
12-30-2008, 02:04 PM
Why saddle it with a 1280x1080 downconvert when it stated life at 1920x1080 (or 960x540x2). Hand them a disk with the footage with a 4:2:2, i-frame, full raster file of your choosing. I'm liking the Avid DNxHD more and more every day. But there are plenty others out there.

lirany
01-07-2009, 05:53 PM
I think what switched me over completely to Panasonic HVX/HPX/HMC cams is this film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwoIv3pMo-g&fmt=22

Done with an HVX200/Redrock rig (probably the noisiest rig ever).
And even with these conditions with the proper lighting he managed to produce a beautiful film.
Image is stunning!
I watched tons of EX1 footage and shot with it myself and have yet to find a video that achieved this kind of look.
Sure, the EX1 is A LOT sharper and MUCH CLEANER and WAY BETTER in low light, but for some reason it still has that video-look and the HVX/HPX/HMC has something a lot more like film.
EX1 is a versatile camera fit for almost anything and would be far better than any panasonic for HD TV work.
But if features, shorts or SD video is my main goal than the panasonic is a better choice for making it look a lot more like film.

I would really like it if someone could explain why is it this way, what makes the panasonic image look that much different?

BTW: if I had the budget for an HPX170 P2 workflow, I would choose the EX1... simply because I believe that a good Film-Like image can be produced with this camera but not really sure how... It is a better camera overall...

godspeedprojects
01-07-2009, 06:52 PM
...it look a lot more like film.

I would really like it if someone could explain why is it this way, what makes the panasonic image look that much different?

I don't know but this could be a factor (certainly not the only one)
My friend told me that he has to boost the reds a lot in post with his EX1. He suspects it has something to do with the way that CMOS sees color different than CCD. Panasonic is warmer Sony is greener?

But there's more to it than that. Panasonic started the 24P and got it right the first time. And there's more to it than that. I just don't know what it is. Shutter technology is important for aesthetics. No accounting for taste.