View Full Version : ALL: Low light performance compared with HMC150
10-30-2011, 02:13 AM
99% of my weddings are at night and therefore low-light performance is at the top of my list of things to think about. I currently have 3 HMC150's and a couple of DSLRs. Has anyone done any low light tests in direct comparison with the HMC150? Anyone offer an opinion on the degree of difference?
10-30-2011, 11:25 PM
Yes i can say that ac 160 is better in low light than hmc 150 which i have both. But i have issue with the ac 160 in fully wide it get soft the video i use manual or auto focus still the same in low light .
10-31-2011, 04:11 AM
dhardjono, when you mean soft at wide angle, is this just in low light, or all the time? Do you have an example of a video you could put up to show your results?
10-31-2011, 06:10 PM
http://vimeo.com/31404748yes compare to hmc 150 wide angle seem a bit soft but overall i like the camera .
list of what i like about this ac 160 -
great low light
color look nice
lcd view finder much much better than hmc 150 also the eyecup view finder
2 slot card ( it was the number 1 that i got this camera)
what i dont like about ac 160-
auto focus get fool easily hmc 150 better in that ( yes i do use manual focus too)
video is soft a little compare with hmc 150 and wash out too if it little over expose
heavy camera and using the old battery from 150 will stick out of the battery compartment the new battery is shorter
I THINK UNDER EXPOSING THE VIDEO WILL GIVE A BETTER RESULT FOR ME I USE CINE THAT SCENE FILE 5 . AND USE MANUAL FOCUS
I do like this camera a lot i must compare with the demo at b&h to see if i get the same result.
here is a link to video footage of what i call soft video , it could just be me expecting a way better video than hmc 150.