Thread: HPX500 in 2020?

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41
  1. Collapse Details
    #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,066
    Default
    Here is an example of a channel I'm really into right now.

    And this is one out of thousands of channels - not hundreds but thousands of channels - that are out there with talented people producing all kinds of content.

    I have bounced around YouTube for the last decade and witnessed the industry right in front of my eyes drastically change overnight because of the practically nonexistent barrier to entry that now exists, and the immediate access to various equipment (particularly gimbals, drones and low-cost high-resolution motion picture systems).

    I know you may look at this and say, "Well, this is film-like content and not everyone does film."

    And that is very true but this kind of quality has actually transitioned over to being considered normal in everyday production by young and old online content creators for almost everything you can imagine.

    Corporate, commercials, interviews, product shots, documentaries, even keynote speeches, lol...all kinds of freelance work looks like this if you spend time browsing YouTube.

    Does it all need to look like this? No, of course not.

    But when a general conversation dips into evaluating standards then it needs to be known that the bar is set extremely high for what most people today think looks really good.

    ___

    I like this account's videos because of the lighting breakdowns and the use of a $1300 camera.



    ___

    This is from a different channel...a random test showing what some higher-resolution footage may look like from a newer camera.

    It is subject to the same compression everything else receives. And you can choose to playback in its highest-quality or 720p.

    Do you see a difference in IQ?

    Last edited by NorBro; 01-05-2021 at 07:18 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #32
    Senior Member Peter C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    466
    Default
    Paul the second Vimeo link looks much better than the first YT. Although if I full screen it I notice something about the details, colors and highlights. So what camera and lens were they filmed with?

    I still feel that if you're going to spend more than 5k on these older style cameras you should only do so if you need an eng camera. Whether a camera is good enough for Youtube or whatever you using it for is a more subjective question. For my type of shooting (event) I need servo lenses but would rather have multiple lighter cameras to get the unmanned coverage I need. Those big eng where built for local news where you have one camera and that needs to work in all outdoor conditions, often on a shoulder.


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #33
    Senior Member paulears's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lowestoft - UK
    Posts
    1,872
    Default
    I think I know the clips you mean and those would be very soft, Iím cool with this. I liked those channels in UHD and above, but I would never get a return on the equipment costs, so Iíve no interest at all in production of that kind. Itís quite funny actually. When I first started we used to smile at 525 line NTSC as being so inferior to our PAL system. My own broadcast experience started with natural history on Beta SP, but my only broadcast experience in HD is game shows, and that image quality is my ceiling. My industrial work needs no more than that microphone video quality, which was shot after a day shooting industrial washing machine presenter stuff.

    Iím just positive that Iím at the crossing point. Until clients want their washing machine promos and show videos in UHD and above, Iím content where I am, but one of the reasons Iím sticking with my Jvc GY-HD750 cameras is because of the depth of field . Shallow DoF is unacceptable for me, I need to be able to see everything. First looks at the material on the channels you suggested look stunning, but shallow seems to be the main feature of much of the content. Not something Iíll be going for. Thanks for the advice though. It does strike me that Netflix is a driving force for mainstream cinematic style TV, it certainly isnít the BBC or ITV here.

    EDIT

    Here's a clip of where my work might be - as far from cinema as you can get. There's a vimeo link to a bit of it, with a still from Premiere so maybe what Vimeo does to it can be seen. In a warts and all - there's what looks like a little blue fringing - and errant light in the rig that I couldn't find to fix.
    Video link https://vimeo.com/497585021
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by paulears; 01-06-2021 at 03:37 AM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #34
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,232
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter C. View Post
    Those big eng where built for local news where you have one camera and that needs to work in all outdoor conditions, often on a shoulder.
    Very shortsighted view on "ENG" cameras.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #35
    Senior Member paulears's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lowestoft - UK
    Posts
    1,872
    Default
    For me - the best bit about ENG cameras was the trend to keep the controls in the same place and work the same way. You could put down your Sony, pick up a P2 and most things were exactly where you expected them - plus the lenses were also controlled the same way - most lenses having auto/manual iris switch with a prod button, so you could be on manual, and if you got lost, a prod with your little finger would get you somewhere useful. Most stuck the white balance in the same place and tended to make them work the same way. Menus were always radically different - but the basics were the same. I injured my shoulder quite badly while working in a theatre and I cannot hold the weight off even a modest ENG camera now, but my 750s are light enough to give mje a few minutes. The old ones I'd manage on my shoulder for the 45 minutes of a football game on the touchline. I love the balance of ENG cameras - even on a tripod, with perhaps batteries and other gizmos attached balance is easy. The Black Magic camera I was given to use for one live show was really front heavy - not at all nice to use.

    POSTSCRIPT - there are some slightly bent ENG cameras in Washington I saw on our news where those crazy people rioted and smashed up the TV folks kit. ENG might well be tough, but not that tough.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #36
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,232
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by paulears View Post
    For me - the best bit about ENG cameras was the trend to keep the controls in the same place and work the same way. You could put down your Sony, pick up a P2 and most things were exactly where you expected them - plus the lenses were also controlled the same way - most lenses having auto/manual iris switch with a prod button, so you could be on manual, and if you got lost, a prod with your little finger would get you somewhere useful. Most stuck the white balance in the same place and tended to make them work the same way. Menus were always radically different - but the basics were the same. I injured my shoulder quite badly while working in a theatre and I cannot hold the weight off even a modest ENG camera now, but my 750s are light enough to give mje a few minutes. The old ones I'd manage on my shoulder for the 45 minutes of a football game on the touchline. I love the balance of ENG cameras - even on a tripod, with perhaps batteries and other gizmos attached balance is easy. The Black Magic camera I was given to use for one live show was really front heavy - not at all nice to use.

    POSTSCRIPT - there are some slightly bent ENG cameras in Washington I saw on our news where those crazy people rioted and smashed up the TV folks kit. ENG might well be tough, but not that tough.
    From a BVW-300 made back in the 90's to an Ike DVCPro to a P2 VariCam to the latest 4K true ENG cams from Sony all have about 99% of the same buttons, dials and switches in the same place. WB, BB, WB Memory, gain, power, ND, etc. If you shot on a one-piece back in the 90's, you can pick up the newest one today and know where everything is.

    And yes, Paul, it's crazy and crazy that this is happening here in the USA and that it happened SO EASILY. The pictures I've seen were of the AP's gear being trashed.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #37
    Senior Member paulears's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lowestoft - UK
    Posts
    1,872
    Default
    Yes - The Guild of TV Camera Professionals (we aren't allowed to say Cameraman any more) here are very keen on monitoring the safety of news and video crews worldwide, and ignoring the hyped up stuff on the mainstream media, the news crews appear to be specifically targeted, which is very worrying. Getting in the way in a war zone is bad enough, but actually being a 'legitimate' target is just crazy.


    Hope it all settles soon.

    I still have a BVW-300 I cannot bear to throw away. I cannot believe I ever used to have that thing on my shoulder, and it makes me smile a bit when we are complaining about the cost of equipment now - when it was new the cost was phenomenal. I tried to work it out, but it means a camera and lens now would be over $200,000 - that surely cannot be right, converting for inflation. Mind you a 22" monitor I bought back then was £359 - which works out at about four grand on today's money. Our new kit now is pocket money by comparison.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #38
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,232
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by paulears View Post
    Yes - The Guild of TV Camera Professionals (we aren't allowed to say Cameraman any more) here are very keen on monitoring the safety of news and video crews worldwide, and ignoring the hyped up stuff on the mainstream media, the news crews appear to be specifically targeted, which is very worrying. Getting in the way in a war zone is bad enough, but actually being a 'legitimate' target is just crazy.


    Hope it all settles soon.

    I still have a BVW-300 I cannot bear to throw away. I cannot believe I ever used to have that thing on my shoulder, and it makes me smile a bit when we are complaining about the cost of equipment now - when it was new the cost was phenomenal. I tried to work it out, but it means a camera and lens now would be over $200,000 - that surely cannot be right, converting for inflation. Mind you a 22" monitor I bought back then was £359 - which works out at about four grand on today's money. Our new kit now is pocket money by comparison.
    Yes. Largely, the media has always been off-limits, in the past, but in recent years that has changed. And even though I largely cover sports, I have been on shoots where security was brought in for for us, because of events that were going on surrounding the events we were doing. I did two shoots, as recent as this past summer, where security was brought in to protect us specifically because of the “sensitive” nature of the events unfolding. And one of those was with the addition of a uniformed Sheriff’s deputy.

    And yes, again. So many today don’t realize just how good they have it with the cost and capabilities of equipment. I guess that’s why us “old timers” don’t bat an eyelash at the cost of so much of the stuff when prices are talked about, while others seem almost incensed that a manufacturer charges more than $500 for a camera and it doesn’t do 8K/1000fps to a $3 SD card.

    Technology progresses and prices lower, but too many in this business now have no grounding in the not-so-distant past and are only used to consumer pricing, because they came in through the door opened by the DSLR revolution.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #39
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    27
    Default
    I used the HPX500 for 10 years. I am now using the EVA-1.
    The HPX500 had SD chips, and I used a high quality SD broadcast lens. It really had good color, was quick and easy to use.
    It was a little soft around the edges (lens) but no one ever complained about the commercials. Really good for faces and closeups.

    https://vimeo.com/94796388

    I also had the HPX 250 - zoom control of lens not quite as good. And with HPX500 I could power 2 wireless mics off the camera. And shoulder mounting was great.
    But image wise HPX 250 was probably better since it has HD chips and lens.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,066
    Default
    That's pretty good for that camera!

    Commercial would fit in perfectly even today with the ones I see on my local TV from car dealerships.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •