HPX500 in 2020?

[NorBro]

Close-up shots still hold up quite well but wide shots not so good. Apart from that, this clip has heavy color correction... Hard to decide!

You could probably paint something similar in the camera with its saturation & company settings, but yeah...color is not good; I was mostly posting for resolution and artifacts and potential shallow depth-of-field (if desired).

[Peter C.]

This is a type of thing people periodically ask on forums. A once desirable professional camera that you couldn't afford in now for sale... I think I saw a similar thread about the old Canon XL2 camera. No one truly knows what the actual image will be like but it's old tech I can't imagine it comparing well today's cameras. But if you really want it...

[robmneilson]

Strangely enough I regularly used the HPX500 and HPX3100 for broadcast sports (prior to the pandemic). Really if you're looking for an older camera that shoots great footage why not just go for an Alexa Classic?

[boo]

Cons for Alexa Classic has no built in ND filters or XLR inputs and can be heavy.

[robmneilson]

Yeah, but I think the tradeoff would be Oscar winning image quality. The HPX is great if you need it on your shoulder all day with no breaks and only own a couple of batteries...but it's images are not even close.

[Run&Gun]

I may be making big presumptions here, but if the OP was asking about the viability of these older ENG cameras, then I’d also presume that some, many or all of their features and benefits of these cameras, like internal audio/XLR inputs, internal ND, long record times, long battery life and even(hugely important) lens selection may be (more)necessary or prioritized higher than ‘absolute image quality’.

[robmneilson]

For sure. A nice Fujinon is going to be the most expensive part of this buy in anyway. I was just thinking since he mentioned a nice sensor, why not upgrade to something that has image quality that will not look out of place on the web today. These camera's can't handle the highlight rolloff.

[boo]

How's the 3.5" monitor on your HPX2700? Do you use an external one? Looking for an external monitor for my HDC27H.

*Disclaimer: I've never used an HPX-500, so I have no idea what the image is like.*


Depends... Depends on what you're doing, who your clients are, what their expectations/requirements are, what your expectations/requirements are, etc.

For reference, I do a lot of network TV and I still own and use two 2700 P2 VariCam's. Even thought they are "only" native 720P and released about 12 years ago, they still look great. And I have a friend who just bought a used one from one of their friends a few weeks ago.

Do I even need to get into the CCD aspect?

Even though these cameras are "old", it kind of breaks my heart how they are looked down upon, today. I'm honestly hoping to still get many more years out of my 2700's.

[Run&Gun]

How's the 3.5" monitor on your HPX2700? Do you use an external one? Looking for an external monitor for my HDC27H.

The built-in flip-out monitor is complete garbage, even for the time period in which it was built and was new. In all seriousness, DSLR’s of the day had VASTLY superior LCD monitors. Which made it all the more irritating, because a consumer DSLR that cost a few grand had a monitor that was orders of magnitude better than what was built into a professional camera that was $40K. Honestly, that has always been my biggest gripe with the 2700’s, even back then, and today, still.

I mean, it’s better than nothing, but just barely. It’s so bad/low rez, that you cannot, sometimes, even clearly read the text of the menu on it. The only time I really use it is for selecting clips for playback and formatting cards. And if I do watch something on it, I know it doesn’t look that bad.

I have the large Panasonic 3.5” color LCD VF’s with flip away diopters on both of my 2700’s. And I carry a smallHD DP7 Pro OLED and Focus 5 OLED in the camera bag if I need to put a real monitor on for some reason.

[paulears]

I've used a 500, and if one came up for the right money - I'd buy one still. For me the thing really is the lack of recording formats - so it will do 1080i/60, or other versions at the usual 30/29.97/25 and 24 frame rates - so it's not quite a standard HD camera, being DVCHDPro - but the image quality is really good, it has loads of facilities and is P2 which is a solid data medium. It lets you use proper broadcast lenses and has all the usual broadcast facilities. It'd damn heavy though, when batteried up. If I saw one for 800 UKP, and probably buy it. Like Run and gun says, 720p has it's own look and if you want this kind of camera format (which I do - I hate DSLRs and square boxes) they're good. They are old, of course, but this kind of kit still has a home. For YouTube distribution, 720 is still transparent in most cases. There is so much rubbish quality 1080, 720 sharp focus can often look better.