EX1 or HPX500

S

STORMDAVE

Active member
I know we can't compare an ENG camera to a smaller scale camera that has 1/2" imagers, but what do you guys think?

The EX1 has true 1920 imagers and the HPX500 has pixel shifted 960x540 imagers.

I've seen footage from both, EX1 is really sharp.

I searched but couldn't find a similar post, but opinions are welcome.

Thanks
 
I haven't used either, but you should take into consideration that the EX1 has a rolling shutter CMOS sensor while the HPX500 has 3ccds. So the HPX500 may have problems with smearing while the EX1 will have rolling shutter artifacts and problems with strobing under certain light sources.

davide
 
You also have 2/3" ccd's on the 500 which will give you better depth of field and better low light conditions. Interchangeable lenses are a huge advantage. It's just a matter of preference though. What kind of cameras are you used to?

BTW, I will have to check later but I believe there have been some comparisons on this before..
 
Thanks guys. I understand that the EX1 and similar cams have rolling shutters and the EX1 is CMOS while HPX500 is based on CCD's.

We use ENG style cameras with Anton Bauer battery packs etc and have all the accessories needed...so going with the HPX500 would be perfect. But we were having second thoughts about it after seeing the EX1 footage. We don't like the small cameras, but still thinking about our choices. A decision needs to be made by next week.

The HPX500 seems to be a little "soft" but has a much higher color range (obviously due to the 4:2:2 DVCPRO50/HD codecs)...I wish it had native 720p imagers, but then there wouldn't be an HPX2000 :)

I've looked through the screengrabs forum for the HPX500. Can anyone provide some well shot RAW MXF footage from the HPX500 by any chance? A small clip would do fine. I haven't been 'wowed' by the HPX500 yet.
 
Stormdave,

I have come to the point that I want to try and get both of them.

That is if they can color matched.

Barry Green said he was able to match the EX-1 to the HVX-200, so there is hope.

To me this is the only solution.

The HPX-500 is the form factor I want, but the EX-1 is quite a package for $6500.

I think they both have a place in my tool kit.

My main reason for not going EX-1 all of the way is I need at least one camera with a long lens. The HPX-500 will fufill that role nicely.

I need to find a place in D/FW where I can see both together. I have not found that place yet...
 
EX1 or HPX500 depends on what you are using it for, but it sounds to me that you need the EX3. What will you be shooting? Tell us that and then we can help you find the best tool for the job.
Also you can turn up the sharpness on the HPX500.
 
Bassman2003, we were looking for 2 exact same cameras, and ENG fits us perfectly, but I like the EX1 quality as well.

Nik, we'll be shooting a variety of projects, from commercials to documentaries. I've seen lots of HPX500 footage from this forum, most of the good ones were in SD, but I've yet to see footage that takes me in awe. By the way, the EX3 is pretty expensive if you ask me, and it has that Canon body, which I really dislike. I'm leaning towards the HPX500 (due to the recent price drop & rebate) but if anyone has access to a few clips from the HPX500 I'd really appreciate it.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Barry Green said he was able to match the EX-1 to the HVX-200, so there is hope.
Click to expand...
You can make those two look extremely close in color and gamma and latitude, yes, by using the HD NORM gamma on the HVX and the STD3 gamma on the EX1. But they won't match in terms of resolution. Noise was different, but that shouldn't be an issue anymore with the HVX200A.
 
The HPX500 picture is quite similar to the HVX200's, but with more dynamic range and a certain degree sharper. There's a little less noise, but frankly I think the new 200A/170 is probably lower noise than the 500 (I haven't put those side-by-side so I can't be sure on that).

When you put the 500 into a video-look scene file, it's easy to get the EX1 to match it (hence HD NORM and STD3 gammas). When you start painting the HPX/HVX for a film look, matching may become more challenging. One very nice aspect of the EX1 is its incredibly in-depth menu settings for image control. With enough time and a good set of charts you could probably make a very good match between them.
 
Barry are you saying that the 200A is noticeably sharper than the 500?
I've been a bit disappointed since day 1 about the 500s inability to give that window on the world look that HD can provide but was willing to put up with it.

I wasn't expecting HDX900 clarity but I felt it could be a bit better.

I'll be very unhappy if a 5000 dollar camera is sharper then my 10000 dollar camera especially if they don't deal with the white balance issue soon.
 
So let me get this straight. The 200A is less noisy? Is that correct? In the muddy areas there's lees noise or in the overall picture?

But the 500 is sharper but noisier. Right.

Even though noise will tend to decrease apparent sharpness. Plus making it much harder to key.

So where does this leave the 500?
 
The 500 is more sensitive, with more dynamic range, and sharper.

The 200A may be less noisy than the 500, I haven't compared them side by side. The 200A's main noise improvements are in the whites down to the medium grays. It's better overall than the 200 was.

So where does this leave the 500?
Click to expand...
That's an odd question. It leaves the 500 as a 2/3", shallow-depth-of-field, variable-frame-rate, 4-XLR-input, HD-SDI-output, genlockable, timecode-sync'able, low-cost professional interchangeable-lens shoulder-mount camcorder, right where it always was.
 
HPX500 is really low cost considering how it's packed with features...so it's true that they say it's the big brother of the HVX200, but doesn't come close to the HPX2000 or HPX3000, respectively.

I think I need to rent one and mess with it to see if I like it. Anyone know of any rental places in L.A. for cheap? Just need it for a day.
 
I just thought they might make their more expensive camera sharper and less noisy. Silly me.
 
I would say you should really maybe test the cameras out. Perhaps download some footage to test(not sure from where) or maybe go to your local rental house and check the cameras out, maybe even rent one for a day and see if it does the job your looking for it to do.
 
Reactor88 said:
I would say you should really maybe test the cameras out. Perhaps download some footage to test(not sure from where) or maybe go to your local rental house and check the cameras out, maybe even rent one for a day and see if it does the job your looking for it to do.
Click to expand...

I checked out the camera at NAB08, I liked the body and the features, just didn't have the chance to test out nicely shot footage.

mcgeedigital said:
Yup, I used a rented 500 for quite a few shoots lately, liked it so much that I just bought one.

Beautiful images.....
Click to expand...

Anyway you can send me a tiny tiny MXF footage to test out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top