That's pretty much what they did (all except the $500 part) - and named it HPX500. ;-)
Why bother with the HPX500?
- Thread starter Indyreel
- Start date
That's pretty much what they did (all except the $500 part) - and named it HPX500. ;-)
Barry_Green
Moderator
Clearly you haven't used an HPX500. It's sooo much better in so many ways...
cckid
Well-known member
Tim hi,
Could you explain a little bit the combo you're talking about
Qutote:
Im really thinking about dumping the HVX and getting a HPX w/ LetusEX b4 relay..... Soooooo drooling over that.
I have an hvx, I have also the letus ex and I was wandering where could it be possible to get a good. reiiable, b4 relay lense....and what does it really do in terms of light loss, and optical funucionality together with the pana 500?
cckid
www.honeymoonthemovie.net
Could you explain a little bit the combo you're talking about
Qutote:
Im really thinking about dumping the HVX and getting a HPX w/ LetusEX b4 relay..... Soooooo drooling over that.
I have an hvx, I have also the letus ex and I was wandering where could it be possible to get a good. reiiable, b4 relay lense....and what does it really do in terms of light loss, and optical funucionality together with the pana 500?
cckid
www.honeymoonthemovie.net
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
The HPX seems great, but it's not well priced in today's market. $10,000 for that camera? You gotta be kidding me -- the RED is $17,500 and it's like 25 times as good. I think for $6,500 the HPX would be good. For what it is now, no thanks.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
The market disagrees with you. But whatever floats your boat.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Jonathan:
We should clarify that the RED may be 25 times as good as the HPX is... for filmmaking. For BTS, event, documentary and broadcast production, the RED is not really as good of a tool as the HPX. RED is a digital cinema camera. HPX is a broadcast P2 camcorder. Two different animals with two different audiences with very different needs. For my work, I would rather have the HPX, if I had RED, I would be fighting it even while loving it.
I think at least a few RED owners will be unsatisfied with the awesome camera that they have purchased. It's like driving a Ferrari through four wheel drive terrain, wrong tool for the job unless you are shooting film or film-style with ACs and short takes.
Best,
Dan
We should clarify that the RED may be 25 times as good as the HPX is... for filmmaking. For BTS, event, documentary and broadcast production, the RED is not really as good of a tool as the HPX. RED is a digital cinema camera. HPX is a broadcast P2 camcorder. Two different animals with two different audiences with very different needs. For my work, I would rather have the HPX, if I had RED, I would be fighting it even while loving it.
I think at least a few RED owners will be unsatisfied with the awesome camera that they have purchased. It's like driving a Ferrari through four wheel drive terrain, wrong tool for the job unless you are shooting film or film-style with ACs and short takes.
Best,
Dan
Many people are thrown by the 17,500$ pricetag. To make a fully cinema function RED youre spending 50-60,000$.
The HPX500 is READY TO ROCK, at 22,000$ That includes, battery, lens, viewfinder, recording medium and tripod plate.
Throw on a Pro35/LetusEX-B4 adapter and you got yourself a mean little machine.....
Also, I could make a living off an HPX500. Shooting Films, Docs, ENG, EFP, and Corporate gigs. The RED is really only good for Bigger budget projects, and wouldnt be practical to use in the microbudget market. The HPX500 is perfect.
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
It depends what you consider microbudget, I mean we have a RED on order and we're working currently in the $5,000 to $15,000 music video range, although we wouldn't use the RED on less than a $10K shoot.
It's true, it costs more to get a fully operational RED package, about $50,000 to $80,000, it depends what you go with and what lenses you have, etc. But the point is the same for me, the HPX isn't enough better than the HVX to justify the difference for me. Maybe it is to many people, though. I'm just not sold on it for what we do.
I couldn't care less about ENG, I don't consider that filmmaking. That's an entirely different deal.
It's true, it costs more to get a fully operational RED package, about $50,000 to $80,000, it depends what you go with and what lenses you have, etc. But the point is the same for me, the HPX isn't enough better than the HVX to justify the difference for me. Maybe it is to many people, though. I'm just not sold on it for what we do.
I couldn't care less about ENG, I don't consider that filmmaking. That's an entirely different deal.
You see i make about 30% of my income off ENG, i need that ability. This is why i havent sold my DVX, i still get so much work off the sd 60i stuff, and with the DVX i get 3 stops light advantage over the HVX200 and better quality images. The HPX500 is just more flexible for my needs.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Yep, if I had the $$$, I would buy the HPX, it looks like a very nice tool that you could shoot a film on but it is also useful for run and gun as well as EFP. Yes, it would be like having HVX that is good in low light, shallower depth of field and PAL/NTSC ability? Sounds like the ticket.
Yes, the RED $17,500.00 number is a joke. Besides the RED package, you need an $8,000.00 t $10,000.00 tripod, probably a couple thousand for batteries and chargers, cases, etc. At $50,000.00, you have some okay glass but not all of the focal lengths you want and probably not at the speeds you want or in the brands you want. It's a killer machine but like I said, a few newbies with more money than sense will buy a RED and discover that they are in over their heads and will sell it quickly.
Best,
Dan
Yes, the RED $17,500.00 number is a joke. Besides the RED package, you need an $8,000.00 t $10,000.00 tripod, probably a couple thousand for batteries and chargers, cases, etc. At $50,000.00, you have some okay glass but not all of the focal lengths you want and probably not at the speeds you want or in the brands you want. It's a killer machine but like I said, a few newbies with more money than sense will buy a RED and discover that they are in over their heads and will sell it quickly.
Best,
Dan
yea i have a feeling 2nd hand RED cameras will be avialable in no time. once they start shipping in bulk.... Then its time to scoop em up! haha.
mikkowilson
Steadi-Guru
Saying RED costs $17,500 would be like saying the HPX500 costs $10,000 - without an editing or offload system in place either.
- Mikko
- Mikko
Barry_Green
Moderator
The DVX is better in low light than an HVX, yes. And the advantages in going with an HVX are a mile long.
Barry_Green
Moderator
He said he gets 3 stops better low light performance (and I believe that was a misstatement, I believe he meant 2 stops better). Regarding "better quality images", if shooting 4x3 in 60i, yes probably a DVX will deliver better images than an HVX.
An HVX in 24P or 30P will blow the DVX into the weeds, but in 60i the HVX has an excessive aliasing problem. HVX 60i doesn't look that great. So the DVX would still have an advantage (as well as having 2 stops better low light performance when comparing 60i to 60i).
So there is one circumstance, and only one circumstance, where a DVX will look better than an HVX, and that's when shooting standard-def 4x3 60i. In basically any other configuration the HVX will do better. And that 4x3 60i setting is exactly what Timur was talking about.
An HVX in 24P or 30P will blow the DVX into the weeds, but in 60i the HVX has an excessive aliasing problem. HVX 60i doesn't look that great. So the DVX would still have an advantage (as well as having 2 stops better low light performance when comparing 60i to 60i).
So there is one circumstance, and only one circumstance, where a DVX will look better than an HVX, and that's when shooting standard-def 4x3 60i. In basically any other configuration the HVX will do better. And that 4x3 60i setting is exactly what Timur was talking about.
Jared Meyer
Veteran
Barry, do you get the same low-light performance as the DVX if you shoot in one of the HVX's SD progressive modes? I'm sure that question belays a lack of understanding of why HD cams suffer in low light, but I'd love to know if this is the case...
I was only joking.
That was some of the talk when the 500 was first announced, that the 500 was just a shoulder-mount version of the 200.
I have 2 HPX500's and they are bloody amazing.
-Brad
Barry_Green
Moderator
Progressive to progressive, the DVX is one stop faster. Interlaced to interlaced, the DVX is two stops faster.