Is the HMC still relevant?

[nyvz]

I shot plenty on the HMC back in the day but you couldn't pay me to shoot on one now... Can't think of any reason to bring back that ancient camera that wasn't great to begin with. So many better options now.

[Barry_Green]

Barry, are you saying that by using DUAL CODEC mode and recording on two cards - one UHD and the other 50mbps FHD - that the content on the card with the FHD will be sharper than just recording FHD without the DUAL CODEC?

Yes, notably sharper.

Not sure I grasp the reason.

It's because the dual codec recording is made from a direct resize of the UHD frame. Generally in 1080p mode, the camera scans the chip differently, using pixel mixing which lets it get a wider field of view and faster scan rates, at the expense of some picture softening and some aliasing; other bonuses include the ability to use i.Zoom and the hybrid optical image stabilizer. When using UHD in dual codec, the field of view is slightly narrower and the frame rate is limited to 29.97 maximum and the hybrid image stabilizer and i.Zoom are not available.

So there are reasons to use the native 1080p mode, but the bonuses it gives are offset by the fact that it's not quite as sharp and has some more aliasing. On the other hand, if you don't need 59.94p or 50p frame rates, and you're not going to use Hybrid OIS or the iZoom, then you can use the dual codec recording and the FHD that's recorded is pristine footage made from a scaled-down UHD sample off the sensor.

[Design Media Consultants]

Yes, notably sharper.


It's because the dual codec recording is made from a direct resize of the UHD frame. Generally in 1080p mode, the camera scans the chip differently, using pixel mixing which lets it get a wider field of view and faster scan rates, at the expense of some picture softening and some aliasing; other bonuses include the ability to use i.Zoom and the hybrid optical image stabilizer. When using UHD in dual codec, the field of view is slightly narrower and the frame rate is limited to 29.97 maximum and the hybrid image stabilizer and i.Zoom are not available.

So there are reasons to use the native 1080p mode, but the bonuses it gives are offset by the fact that it's not quite as sharp and has some more aliasing. On the other hand, if you don't need 59.94p or 50p frame rates, and you're not going to use Hybrid OIS or the iZoom, then you can use the dual codec recording and the FHD that's recorded is pristine footage made from a scaled-down UHD sample off the sensor.

That makes sense. Wow, some days my head gets overwhelmed. Good info. Thank you!

[Digital Frank]

I love my 150s, but after using the UX-180 for a few days, the 150s seem "toy like" to me.
Hmmm, I might do a comparison, just to see the progress of the 180 vs the 150.

[firehawk]

I love my 150s, but after using the UX-180 for a few days, the 150s seem "toy like" to me.
Hmmm, I might do a comparison, just to see the progress of the 180 vs the 150.

Could you possibly do a test to see if the latency of the LCD and also hdmi out are close between those two cameras? Over in another thread we've been trying to determine if the UX180 has more delay than the HMC150, making it harder to follow fast moving subjects. Many are complaining about the 180

[Digital Frank]

I should be able to... What would be the best method to measure the delay?
Simply shoot a video showing the scene and LCD?

From my observations so far, the 180s delay is greater than the 150s from scene to LCD.
(Maybe that is why the 150s LCD has such low in resolution, less processing, less delay)

[firehawk]

Some people were shooting a digital clock counter (even on a phone) with the camera and showing it on another camera so we could see how many frames it was delayed. Ill have to search for the thread again as I forgot exactly where it is. Barry and someone else I believe had some results from the 180 but no one so far had both the 150 and 180 to test together

[firehawk]

Here are a couple threads about the UX 180 lag (and HC-X1)
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...ight=UX180+lag

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...ag-vs-HDMI-lag

[Lars Gregersen]

But to put it in film terms, the HMC150 is like a good 16mm film camera, the DVX200 in comparison is more like a 35mm film camera.

Hi Barry,

where would you place the UX180 in that comparison? A bit in the middle?
I understand that it doesnt have as shallow DoF as the DVX200 but more than the HMC150, right?

Thanks

[Barry_Green]

Yes, the UX180 is an excellent upgrade to the HMC150 in all ways. It's the same basic size and weight, same excellent handling, but with shallower DOF and ultrasharp images. It's my favorite handheld camera they've made since the HMC150/HPX170 nine years ago.