HVX200 vs HMC150 - Whats best for me?

[Stevo H]

Ok I can't decide between a used HVX200 or a new HMC150. I would prefer to buy a new camera, but there seems to be a difference of about $700 between the two.

Since I heard about the HMC150 I've been leaning towards that. Mainly because of the initial cost of the camera (compared to a new 200 or 170) and the high cost of P2.

Right now I've got two DVX100As. I've used them both to shoot a few weddings and a couple events, but mostly single camera shoots. I've decided that for what I do, a single HD camera would be more valuable than two SD cameras, not to mention a tapeless workflow. The problem is, video production isn't my primary source of income, so with money invested in two DVXs I would prefer to not spend any additional monies on acquiring a new camera. Right now, it looks as though I'd be lucky to get $1300 or $1400 for each DVX, which means I'd have to throw in $400 - $600 (or more) just to get an HMC150 (plus batteries). But with a used HVX200 I would have to put up alot less (depending on how used). The problem I have with the HVX is the super expensive P2 cards.

I've tried to weigh the pros and cons of each camera for what I would use them for. The super long recording times with the 150 on dirt cheap media is definitely a huge plus. The DVCPRO recording of the 200 would be valuable if I ever collaborated on a project with someone using another HVX or a higher end camera. I also like the ability to shoot SD with the HVX.

So what do you guys think? Would I be better off with a used HVX200? Or a new HMC150?

[Ducatimark]

Probably keep the DVX's! I've got an HVX and HPX500. Unless you are making real money with the camera, I'd keep shooting with what you have. You'd be giving up the second camera for just one. You can't deliver much in HD yet (unless this is more for your own viewing). However with the HVX you gain HD, under/over crank, professional format, lots of know-how, accessories galore, and maybe, just maybe, you'll see more used stuff available as those HVX shooters get the next great thing. Or you could get the HMC with its less expensive cards, nice HD picture, and have a shiny new camera.

I don't have the 150 and I'm sure it's probably a great cam. But tapeless workflow with DVCPro HD is really easy to use and I have used my HDV camera once for a shoot in two years since I got the HVX. Haven't used the AVCHD format so I don't know how fast it is to work with. As for P2 cards, there's not much hope. But just think, cards you invest in today can be used in your Varicam when the time comes...

Oh well, I'm not much help tonight. Long week! I'm shooting tomorrow, mabe I'll think of something useful for you. Either way, it's great to be in a position to get a new camera!

Mark

[Justyn]

Having owned both.... I sold my HVX and cancelled the order on the 170... after shooting for a week with the 150. IT's simply a major breakthrough with near IDENTICAL footage to the 170 without the proprietary expensive media. Multicam HVX shoots were a real pain in terms of data wrangling and rentals and such.. and with the 150, to my eyes, I have a better image than the original HVX without all the pandering and workarounds in the field where it's most important. I'll gladly take a bit longer in post to make sure I NEVEr miss something in the field like you are prone to happen with a P2 camera.


I loved my HVX but its time had come and I'm onto a new cam with plenty of upside and without a bloated pricetage and overpriced media. Besides when it comes down to it, I don't think anyone can tell the real difference between the final outputted image...... and shoot who cares when I can get 99 minutes of HD on an 38 dollar card that's been rock solid for months and months.

[Nektonic]

The big thing with the HMC150 is the current state of support from the various NLE companies. With FCP you pretty much have to transcode to ProRes, which takes up more hard drive space. Premiere I don't know about but I've heard of a few issues, same with Vegas. I'd research the post side of AVC-HD first to see where you stand with your current editing setup.

In another year or two and the DVX will probably depreciate substantially compared to now. If I were in your position I'd sell the two DVX's and get either an HMC150 or a Canon XH-A1. I assume you're looking to stay with Panasonic though (nothing wrong with that). Unless you absolutely have to have DVCPRO HD and the variable frame rates, I'd say the HMC150 is a better deal in the long run, especially with the great low light ability it seems to have. And you've still got 60p which can be tweaked some more in post with programs like Twixtor.

[reem12]

I can tell a difference in the hvx200a/170 footage compared to the 150. the 150 is nice in color rendition but to me lacks the more organic look of the 200a.

[Jan_Crittenden]

I loved my HVX but its time had come and I'm onto a new cam with plenty of upside and without a bloated pricetage and overpriced media. Besides when it comes down to it, I don't think anyone can tell the real difference between the final outputted image......

Well it really depends on what you are going to do with the footage, but you can very definitely tell the difference between the HVX200A footage and the HMC150 footage, especially in post. The video has a very different texture to it.

And as far as the overpriced media statement, I can only imagine that you didn't use it a lot because every time you use the P2 card the price would average in price downward. As an example if I paid a $1000 for a card and used it once, that would be expensive, if I used it 1000 times it would be $1 per use, if I used it 10,000 times then it would be .10 per use.

To our original poster, I would hang out for a little while longer and save a little more money and try to go for the HVX. The reason I say that is you say you might want to do some SD work, that is not possible on the HMC, and you say you might want to work with others that may have an HVX. While you could do this last by using a conversion program to make the AVCHD into DVCPRO HD, you have to remember a cardinal rule of compression, once you have given away the ranch, you don't get to go back and ask for your ranch back. That is to say once you have given your color to a 4:2:0 long gop codec at 21mbs, and you transfer it to DVCPRO HD at 100Mbs and 4:2:2 doesn't make it DVPROHD quality, it just makes it compatible and easy to edit.

The HMC150 is not a step up from the HVX200, it is a step down. Although it is a nice step down and a nice step up from the DVX100 for the guy that only has that budget, then it is a nice step up. But the professional DVCPRO HD codec is tried and true and well if its good enough for Planet Earth well its good enough for a lot of things.

Best,

Jan

[golf_bht]

I think AVCHD have a bit of problem. it look like the background is detached from the action. it sometime look like placing some green screened actor on static background picture. Do anyone face this problem

[NorthernFilmMaker]

Hi Jan, I don't know if you are at liberty to say but do you see a price drop in P2 cards soon?

[Stevo H]

I suppose for me, it all depends on what I can get a used HVX package for. What do you guys think? It would definitely need to have P2 card(s) with it. I would pay a few hundred for a good size card, but a few thousand? Oh never mind, I don't want to start ranting about P2 prices...

Basically, I would like for video production to become my primary, or at least a good chunk of my income. I would like whatever camera I get next to be the last camera I buy (or have to think about buying) for a long time. I feel like while the HMC150 would be a better fit for what I do right now, while the HVX200 would be less limiting.

Also, I've read that you can dub footage from a P2 card to a USB hard drive on the HVX. Does the hard drive need an external power source?

Thanks for all your input guys!

[Nektonic]

Also, I've read that you can dub footage from a P2 card to a USB hard drive on the HVX. Does the hard drive need an external power source?

I would imagine it depends on the actual external drive you are using. But then again, when you are in the field you might need power for lights and and external monitor anyways.

As for which camera to use for making money, decide what areas you want to try to get jobs for. If you want to do some DP work or shoot music videos, then an HVX might be more popular and would help you gain more work. On the other hand, if you are planning on covering any long form events like weddings or dance recitals, then the HMC would fit that better because of the cheap media and long record times.

Another consideration is warranty. Hopefully Jan will correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the HMC150 comes with an automatic 3 year warranty when you buy it new. If you are buying a used HVX then there is a little more risk involved.

[Carlos Corral]

The HPX170 has a 5-year warranty when you register it. The HVX200 not so much because of the tape drive (moving parts).

[ChipG]

The HPX170 has a 5-year warranty when you register it. The HVX200 not so much because of the tape drive (moving parts).

Read the warranty for the 170 that say's whats not covered.

[Justyn]

Jan,

I appreciate you on this board and everything you have brought to it and our knowledge of the cameras, but I wholeheartedly disagree. TO my eyes, there wasn't enough of a difference in the cameras to keep the HVX around for so many reasons even before considering price. I have them both for 8 weeks working on a broadcast TV show... and the 150 held up both in terms of seemless editing, but also in terms of reproducing the panny mo-jo, and then exceeding it. The original HVX was not great in low-light, had some smear with lights, and is a heavier more wieldly camera in comparison. I used the cards 1000's of times, but already I've used the SD cards hundreds of times without a single problem. The HVX after a while became my Bcamera... staying in the bag more and more. Initially I was going to use the 150, flip it and then buy a 170 instead. However, the HVX got flipped and the 150 is now my main cam with a 2nd one due at the beginning of my next project.

And yes the media is overpriced. To get a comperable run time on P2 I'm spending 50 or 60 times the price. I was shooting multicam concerts and P2 card costs and rentals became a major line item. Now that's not the case and my video hasn't suffered, except on the greenscreen side of things, but with a studio capture via an intensity card, then I think the difference would be minimal.


I'd totally applaud you in producing such a great cam and I know that there is a built in industry and comfort with the P2 cams, but to my eyes and a growing number of my friends, their HVXs and 170's are being sold rapidly. You see this migration on the Sony side and others and proprietary media might be a bit antiquated.


In everything I applauded the original HVX for, I now do with the 150. It's just an all round more joyful cam and I think that over time there will others by both manufacturers that warrant a more accessible pricetage and therefore I can own 4 of them. I will spend the same amount of money, but end up with more value.





Well it really depends on what you are going to do with the footage, but you can very definitely tell the difference between the HVX200A footage and the HMC150 footage, especially in post. The video has a very different texture to it.

And as far as the overpriced media statement, I can only imagine that you didn't use it a lot because every time you use the P2 card the price would average in price downward. As an example if I paid a $1000 for a card and used it once, that would be expensive, if I used it 1000 times it would be $1 per use, if I used it 10,000 times then it would be .10 per use.

To our original poster, I would hang out for a little while longer and save a little more money and try to go for the HVX. The reason I say that is you say you might want to do some SD work, that is not possible on the HMC, and you say you might want to work with others that may have an HVX. While you could do this last by using a conversion program to make the AVCHD into DVCPRO HD, you have to remember a cardinal rule of compression, once you have given away the ranch, you don't get to go back and ask for your ranch back. That is to say once you have given your color to a 4:2:0 long gop codec at 21mbs, and you transfer it to DVCPRO HD at 100Mbs and 4:2:2 doesn't make it DVPROHD quality, it just makes it compatible and easy to edit.

The HMC150 is not a step up from the HVX200, it is a step down. Although it is a nice step down and a nice step up from the DVX100 for the guy that only has that budget, then it is a nice step up. But the professional DVCPRO HD codec is tried and true and well if its good enough for Planet Earth well its good enough for a lot of things.

Best,

Jan

[Justyn]

no more comments? I shot again the other day with the HVX and the footage was glaringing in favor of the 150. The client actually thought that the footage from the 150 was the HVX stuff and said to put the new cheap camera away. He was shoked when I told him the footage that he liked was the 150.. so after that the HVX stayed in the bag the entire remainder of the shoot.


To my eyes, it produces a nicer image than the original HVX, and has such a nicer LCD than the 200a and just feels better to shoot. I'm not looking to flame this out, but the 150 wasn't a choice that was made by just economic considerations... as it was done more for the final aethetics. It's a kickass cam and for longform shooting, it really rocks. I'm on another shoot in two weeks that's a 150 shoot because it's 10 hours of shooting per day. That would require quite a bit of work with the HVX.. but with the 150, it's 3 or 4 cards that total out to be about 250 bucks. 250 bucks in P2 would get you one used 4 gig card....

[Jan_Crittenden]

no more comments?

Why should anyone make more comments when you have already made your decision?


To my eyes, it produces a nicer image than the original HVX, and has such a nicer LCD than the 200a and just feels better to shoot. I'm not looking to flame this out, but the 150 wasn't a choice that was made by just economic considerations... as it was done more for the final aethetics. It's a kickass cam and for longform shooting, it really rocks.

The original HVX and the HMX150 would indeed be different, heck the difference between the HVX200 and the HVX200A is dramatic. If you were comparing the HMC150 with the HVX200A it would be the same sensor, same front end of the camera. There it may have turned out differently but the P2 equation would remain. From your set of priorities it sounds like P2 doesn't work for you. I am glad that the AVCHD is working for you.

Best,

Jan

[David Saraceno]

We have both a 150 and 170.

Most of what Justyn says I concur with. I don't think that p2 cards are overpriced, but I do believe they are expensive. No way around it but the price of p2s is a major buying obstacle for many of us here.

I've been with p2 technology for three years now and never would go back to tape. But they are expensive. I almost wish Panasonic would treat p2 cards as a loss leader.

In any case, we are delighted with the low light capabilities and low noise of the HMC150.

We find that we keep the 170 in the bag alot more than we thought at first.

SDHC cards at 24 mbps and 720 anything produce fantastic video.

Give me native REAL TIME support on a Mac, and it would be pretty darn good.

Give me Mac versions of the AVCHD viewer and AVCHD to p2 converter, and it's Christmas all over again.

[GordoVideo]

I am not 100% up to spec on the new codec of the HMC150, but isn't it full raster? Even though both cameras have the same imagers, DVCPRO-HD squeezes the image to 720x960 whereas the new AVC-HD codec keeps the image in 720x1280, right?

If that is the case, that is why its images may be actually better.

[Barry_Green]

Yes the AVCHD codec (in PH mode) is full raster. And for 720, I do believe it makes a difference, as the imagers are plenty robust enough to fill out a full 720p image. I like the 720p image from the HMC150 a lot; even though it's 4:2:0 it's still full-raster and fully fleshed out.

The 1080p/1080i mode is also full raster, but the imagers don't have quite enough oomph to fully take advantage of it. The 1080 on the HPX170 is probably retaining as much detail as the 1080 on the HMC150; I'm not 100% sure on that and would have to run some side-by-sides to be sure.

But with the 720 on the HMC150, you're getting about all the image the cam will produce, fitted into the least-compressed mode (well, assuming 720/24p). You get all 24 megabits to handle 1280x720x24. But in 1080 mode, you have to spread those same megabits across a lot more data, so it ends up being more compressed by ratio. That's why I think the sweet spot for the HMC150 is 720/24p, whereas with the HPX170 I still shoot 1080/24pA whenever I can afford the space. In the HPX170/HVX200, 1080/24pA holds all the detail you can get from the camera, in the least-compressed mode.

[Stevo H]

How is everyone editing their AVCHD footage? Are you guys transcoding, or editing natively?


Oh, and not that it matters, but I feel like I have to get this out. P2 is HELLA overpriced! There is no way 64GB in any form of memory costs $2500 bucks. Ok, I feel better now.

[Justyn]

Transoding through FCP but initially captured via HDMI through intensit card.


That's what's cool about this forum, we can agree to have different opinions and share them and encourage an open exchange. To me, I needed more of what the 150 has in strenghts since I do lots of long days of shooting and lots of multicam shooting. It has enabled me to cut down on crew and rental costs.. along with allowing me to concentrate more on what's happening at the event than what's happening with all the media.. Shooting concerts like I did with 2x4 gig cards and the P2store took quite a lot of will and determination... Now it's one card and done.

[pietro jona]

Jan,

what you say about the media price is true for any media so I don't see your point. Whay if I use 10000 times a sd card? P2 cards seem to me shamefully overpriced, especially for cameras which don't even give a full hd resolution image.

[Barry_Green]

especially for cameras which don't even give a full hd resolution image.
Like the HPX3000 and HPX3700?

P2 is not overpriced for what it is, and it's having great success in the marketplace. It may be overpriced for what you want, which is why there's such a thing as an HMC150.

[pietro jona]

Right Barry i didn't explain myself. But the thread is about the HVX200 (and the HMC150)..
I find hard to accept the costs of shooting with a 200 considered that THAT camera doesn't offer full hd resolution and decent low light performances. Of course Panasonic has better cameras but not everyone has the money to afford them and many people just want to shoot with a small hand held camera.
The whole problem from my point of view is to see if at Panasonic they have the capabilities of giving us a full resolution hd hand held camera. I suspect they have, but the lack of real competition in the market makes them lazy.

[pietro jona]

I might have some problems in writing in a good english, but now that i re-read my post i can see that I wrote "especially for cameras which don't even give a full hd resolution image". I should probably have written "especially for THOSE cameras which don't even give a full hd resolution image". The ones everyone was talking about in this thread..

[Barry_Green]

The whole problem from my point of view is to see if at Panasonic they have the capabilities of giving us a full resolution hd hand held camera. I suspect they have, but the lack of real competition in the market makes them lazy.
Or, it could be that the only way to do "full resolution" HD in a handheld camera is to go CMOS, and not everyone is satisfied that that's the best solution... you can't do "full res" with CCD in a small form factor. It's not possible. In fact, it looks like JVC is now taking the same tactic as Panasonic, using 960x540 sensors. And Sony's been using 960x1080 sensors for years. And Canon uses 1440x1080 sensors.

If you want "full res", that means CMOS, no two ways about it. And that also means that you get all the CMOS issues that come with CMOS.

[pietro jona]

I agree with you here Barry.
I don't want cmos, better a bigger sensor..

[Carlos Corral]

Or, it could be that the only way to do "full resolution" HD in a handheld camera is to go CMOS, and not everyone is satisfied that that's the best solution... you can't do "full res" with CCD in a small form factor. It's not possible. In fact, it looks like JVC is now taking the same tactic as Panasonic, using 960x540 sensors. And Sony's been using 960x1080 sensors for years. And Canon uses 1440x1080 sensors.

If you want "full res", that means CMOS, no two ways about it. And that also means that you get all the CMOS issues that come with CMOS.

Hey Barry,

I remember reading your article of CMOS vs CCD. The rolling shutter problem can be solved if that camera has a global shutter correct? I'm gonna read it again to just make sure.

[Barry_Green]

A global shutter eliminates the rolling shutter problems, yes, but it introduces its own. It drives up the cost, and it cuts sensitivity.

There is, once again, no free lunch.

[skipioafricanus]

no more comments? I shot again the other day with the HVX and the footage was glaringing in favor of the 150. The client actually thought that the footage from the 150 was the HVX stuff and said to put the new cheap camera away. He was shoked when I told him the footage that he liked was the 150.. so after that the HVX stayed in the bag the entire remainder of the shoot.


To my eyes, it produces a nicer image than the original HVX, and has such a nicer LCD than the 200a and just feels better to shoot. I'm not looking to flame this out, but the 150 wasn't a choice that was made by just economic considerations... as it was done more for the final aethetics. It's a kickass cam and for longform shooting, it really rocks. I'm on another shoot in two weeks that's a 150 shoot because it's 10 hours of shooting per day. That would require quite a bit of work with the HVX.. but with the 150, it's 3 or 4 cards that total out to be about 250 bucks. 250 bucks in P2 would get you one used 4 gig card....
Justyn,

PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ROLLING... I appreciate all comments on the thread but more importantly appreciate inputs based upon people actual working in real productions and making money. We can "slice" and "dice" all day long about the pros and cons of different cameras but its the business side that actually factors in the buying decision of those in business.

Even though your decision is complete we appreciate you sharing your combined business and technical experiences.

-- Skip

[Jan_Crittenden]

Hi,

The problem here is that we are comparing the HVX200 to the HMC150. If it were the HVX200A to the HMC150, it would help in a today situation, unless you are buying a used HVX200. So kee that in the framework of the commentary here.

Best,

Jan

[Stevo H]

Ok, so I was set on the HMC150. Overall, it would work out better for most of what I do and you can't beat having a shiny new product and a fancy warranty to go along with it.

But now with the recent hike in price of the HMC150, coupled with the fact I just watched an (what looked like good condition) HVX go on ebay for $2500 (without cards), I'm having second thoughts.

What I've been wanting to do is "trade" my two DVXs in for one good camera that will last me for the next few years. I believe that HMC150 would easily do this, but It's looking like I would have to put up an extra $1,000 to get one. On the other hand, I could get an HVX for $2500 (or so) but it's doubtful that I would have any P2 cards to record to.

So, here I am again. Sell two DVXs for (I'm estimating) $2500 (any input on what I could get for two DVXs would be appriciated) and get a used HVX200 and shoot tape until I could afford P2 cards

OR

Sell two DVXs and drop an extra grand (that I don't have) on an HMC150, shoot hi-def and do away with tape once and for all (I hate that phrase, I always yell at my TV when someone says it in a show).

Thanks everyone! I've got alot of great information from this thread already.