ugh deciding between HVX200 and Sony EX

[David Jimerson]

More on the EX because of the larger chips

For clarification, "more" depth of field would mean that more of the field -- i.e., what the camera's point at -- is in focus.

"Less" depth of field would mean that less of the field is in focus.

I know it's common for people to think of shallow depth of field, with more blurry parts, AS "depth of field," so it's a common mistake to say that the greater ability to select one spot as in focus and the rest blurry as having "more depth of field." But the opposite is actually correct.

 

[David Saraceno]

Just to clarify, the EX-1 has shallower depth of field possible than the HVX because of the larger imager size.

Dan

That's what I though he was inquiring about.

Larger chips would provide a shallower depth of field or mimic one aspect of film like footage

 

[Davthedvdman]

Seriously! If I had 13k Ready I would go to the bank and ask for additional 13k and buy the 500 and stop messing around. You can have that paid off sooner than you think.

 

[filmguy123]

The HPX500 solves all of the world's problems...

RANDOM QUESTION: Can you use the Redrock Micro or another 35mm adaptor with the hpx500?

 

[Barry_Green]

The Letus team and the Brevis team are both working on relay lenses that would allow you to use those types of adapters.

You may not need it, however. You can get some lovely shallow DOF with the stock lens; watch our Hallows Fest film "Unawakening" to see what an HPX500 can do without needing an adapter.

 

[barnapkins]

HVX200
thread closed.

 

[Justyn]

certainly don't buy that Kit From Band H... a lot of that is not necessary and better to put things together yourself anyway .