EX1 or HPX500

[Flintstone]

Hi,

The signal coming out of the VF connector is an SD signal and so the HD VFs will not do anything for you, you could spend more on the VF15 or VF20 and basically you would get maybe a smidge more resolution adn a nicer gamma curve. My suggestion would be, learn how to use the Histagram display, you will hit focus every time, and spend the money on say a BT-LH80W.

Hope this helps,

Jan

Really? SD signal?... Hmmm that's too bad... oh well. Then I'll adapt and use the histogram tool. Does the VF series provide better peeking? Or is it similar to the stock VF? And what would be the difference with the VF20W and VF20WB?

 

[Cees Mutsaers]

I think a nice update for the 500 would be all the improvements the170 got over the 200 (like last clip delete, playing clips without having to dig into the menu to find the corresponding recording format, waveform/vectorscope etc. etc.) + a HD signal out of the VF connector (the latter is probably complicated to incorporate (expensive) while the 170 improvements are only software based).

Hi,

The signal coming out of the VF connector is an SD signal and so the HD VFs will not do anything for you, you could spend more on the VF15 or VF20 and basically you would get maybe a smidge more resolution adn a nicer gamma curve. My suggestion would be, learn how to use the Histagram display, you will hit focus every time, and spend the money on say a BT-LH80W.

Hope this helps,

Jan

 

[Flintstone]

I think a nice update for the 500 would be all the improvements the170 got over the 200 (like last clip delete, playing clips without having to dig into the menu to find the corresponding recording format, waveform/vectorscope etc. etc.) + a HD signal out of the VF connector (the latter is probably complicated to incorporate (expensive) while the 170 improvements are only software based).

I do agree that adding stuff such as the exposure histogram (as on the HPX170) to the HPX500 (hopefully a firmware upgrade) would be an added bonus.

 

[k2director]

Hi,

The signal coming out of the VF connector is an SD signal and so the HD VFs will not do anything for you, you could spend more on the VF15 or VF20 and basically you would get maybe a smidge more resolution adn a nicer gamma curve. My suggestion would be, learn how to use the Histagram display, you will hit focus every time, and spend the money on say a BT-LH80W.

Hope this helps,

Jan

Hi Jan,
Thanks for all the info. One question about viewfinders: I hear Panasonic announced a *color* viewfinder at NAB, but only for the 2000/3000/Varicams. Do you know how much it will retail for?

 

[Jan_Crittenden]

I think a nice update for the 500 would be all the improvements the170 got over the 200 (like last clip delete, playing clips without having to dig into the menu to find the corresponding recording format, waveform/vectorscope etc. etc.) + a HD signal out of the VF connector (the latter is probably complicated to incorporate (expensive) while the 170 improvements are only software based).

If the 200A did not get the improvements neither could this camera. It took a redesign of the internal workings of the camera to get the improvements on the 170. None of these improvements are inexpensive, if they were, they would have been on the 200A. The HD out on the VF requires another full uncompressed stream of video and you are right there, very expensive. But the improvements on the 170 were not cheap either.

Thanks.

Jan

 

[Cees Mutsaers]

Thanks Jan for the clarification, it was just wishful thinking from my side )))

If the 200A did not get the improvements neither could this camera. It took a redesign of the internal workings of the camera to get the improvements on the 170. None of these improvements are inexpensive, if they were, they would have been on the 200A. The HD out on the VF requires another full uncompressed stream of video and you are right there, very expensive. But the improvements on the 170 were not cheap either.

Thanks.

Jan

 

[Paul Hudson]

Back to the original question; no comparison, go for the DVCPro HD!

 

[Justyn]

I'll have to second that decision just simply based upon the horror that a CMOS camera represents unless... you shoot headshots and corporate videos where movement and pans aren't necessary. I don't think you can also call HDV a professional format as it's a nightmare to edit natively unless you have a super fast current computer. When editing HDV on my box, I can't scrub cleanly and that's a pain. One thing I will say, is that since so many people have seen the problems with rolling shutters and CMOS, atleast people are coming to its defense and saying it isn't a problem. I've seen it and I don't like it one darn bit. It also absolutely messes you up for motion tracking greenscreen work. Simply can't substitute for a CCD.

 

[Flintstone]

Afer testing he HPX500 for the weekend, and after comparing the Sony S270 and the EX1 footage I took during the week, I'm sold on DVCProHD. There is not doubt in my mind that the HPX500 is the best camera in that price range. I can't look at HDV and XDCAM EX the same way again. And now onto choosing the lens... Arghhh... another dilema!

 

[alexdias]

Good decision and good luck with your choice of lenses.

I tried for 2 months to put together a package for about 20K including a wide angle HD lens and I couldn't. I really dig this camera and although I recognize one should spend a lot with the glass in front of your camera I just couldn't come up with the 20K for the lens only. So if you, like me, need wide shots and are not willing to work with adaptors keep in mind the extra $$$. If you can live with the standard choice of lenses you'll do fine for about 25K.

We decided to rent for the project and wait until something cheaper is available.

 

[STORMDAVE]

Have you guys considered a good SD lens for now? I got a Canon j8x6 by recommendation from Hunter here....they're working on getting the camera ready for us so we can pick it up within a few weeks.

 

[pathfinder]

Each will defend and make claims of the bells and whistles of one's EX1 or HPX500 but both will achieve the same purpose regardless of the resolution, format differences, or whatever else that comes or did not come with it. I think in the end, it comes down to the size of your wallet. If you got 25 grand to spend on a camera, why not an HPX500. If you got 50K, the HPX500 or an EX1 will most likely not even be in your buying discussions. You'll be talking with the big boys who are among the Red, HPX3000, or even the Varicam and Cinealta clubs. Anyways, I'm an HPX500 owner and that's where my budget ends but I love it. It had served me well and that's my two pennies of thoughts.

 

[Pixie]

The HPX500 is a great camera, it is based on a professional Compression algorithm namely DVCPRO HD. The EX doesn't hold a candle next to the HPX500, in it picture making capability, the EX1 may have the edge on resolution until the camera moves and then all bets are off. The HPX is quieter, has better low light response, has better motion handling, has a better algorithm and is as quiet as the EX1. The CAC works regardless of zoom position, and it is based on P2, and a proven workflow. And no there are no plans to discontiue it any time soon, I see it in the product line for more than a year, at least.

And to settle something said earlier about the 200A and the HPX500, I think that the two cameras are equal in the noise category. We took what we found out in the making of the 500 and applied it to the 200A. The 500 is better in low light, sharpness and dynamic range.

Best regards,

Jan

Jan, if camera moves is all that places a lower resolution camera over the EX, then I beg to differ. I could get 2 EXs for the price of a 500 and then create multiple cam angles to simulate movement. Heck, I could even achieve movement from a wide angle shot without panning(let the actors work for their pay). Creativity is the name of the game, and let's not forget these cameras are just tools. I totally agree with Barry that you can tweak certain data to achieve the look you want. Before I got the EX I saw footage from both cameras in tradeshows, and the EX was very convincing. I saw footage where gain on the EX was set in the minuses with absolutely no light and believe me - zero noise. Professionals have also vouched that 4.2.0. particularly from the EX is also keyable (haven't tried that yet). No doubt both cams are great, but for me, where my end product is 35mm wide screening, the choice is simple. I'm cranking out all the remnant res I can get out of the higher res EX. No puns intended.


Ask not what you can get out of your cam,
Ask what your cam can get out of you.

 

[Jan_Crittenden]

Jan, if camera moves is all that places a lower resolution camera over the EX, then I beg to differ. I could get 2 EXs for the price of a 500 and then create multiple cam angles to simulate movement. Heck, I could even achieve movement from a wide angle shot without panning(let the actors work for their pay). Creativity is the name of the game, and let's not forget these cameras are just tools. I totally agree with Barry that you can tweak certain data to achieve the look you want. Before I got the EX I saw footage from both cameras in tradeshows, and the EX was very convincing. I saw footage where gain on the EX was set in the minuses with absolutely no light and believe me - zero noise. Professionals have also vouched that 4.2.0. particularly from the EX is also keyable (haven't tried that yet). No doubt both cams are great, but for me, where my end product is 35mm wide screening, the choice is simple. I'm cranking out all the remnant res I can get out of the higher res EX. No puns intended.

I think that every one is entitled to their own opinion and frankly I do not happen to agree with you. It becomes very apparent on a large screen that the GOP takes a hit on the Resoultion in a move, it is a fact that builings in a pan can take on a skew. There are many facts that say that looking at a camera in an ideal situation doesn't get your through the tough spots.

Additionally when you compare not just the CCD to the CMOS, the I-Frame to the long GOP, the 4:2:0 to the 4:2:2 (and yes I have seen some good examples but the people all seem to have helmut hair) we are also comparing workflow, and the workflow on the EX1 is only similiar in the fact that they are recorded on memory. The fact is that the rest of the workflow like moving from playback to record, the metadata functionality, and editing to and from the Memory are so outstandinly different. And then there is the 5 year warranty. And don't forget about recording the color black in daylight and under tungsten lighting.

AsI said, you are totally welcome to your opinion and I hope in a couple of months you are still happy. However, I really do not happen to agree with your assessment of the situation. Yes I do agress with this

Ask not what you can get out of your cam,
Ask what your cam can get out of you.

Except when your camera has different ideas about what it is going to capture and doesn't bother to tell you.

Best regards,

Jan


QUOTE]

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

Good decision and good luck with your choice of lenses.

I tried for 2 months to put together a package for about 20K including a wide angle HD lens and I couldn't. I really dig this camera and although I recognize one should spend a lot with the glass in front of your camera I just couldn't come up with the 20K for the lens only. So if you, like me, need wide shots and are not willing to work with adaptors keep in mind the extra $$$. If you can live with the standard choice of lenses you'll do fine for about 25K.

We decided to rent for the project and wait until something cheaper is available.

It CAN be done. I got my HPX from B&H for $7999 with the $2K rebate. Scored an Angenieux HD wide angle lens for just under $9K.

 

[Bassman2003]

What is wrong with the color black on the Ex-1?

Also, what if one were to purchase the upcoming Flash XDR CF recorder and used it on the EX, or even the HPX-500?

This would be my course of action as it would eliminate the motion/codec problems of the EX-1 plus give it 4:2:2.

Or it might yield more detail from the HPX-500 as the Mpeg-2 codec is a full raster codec.

Either way it costs in the same ballpark as some hours of recording time in SxS or P2.

 

[Barry_Green]

What is wrong with the color black on the Ex-1?

Infrared pollution. Depends on how much infrared is in the light you're shooting, but sometimes it renders blacks as reddish or purplish.

This would be my course of action as it would eliminate the motion/codec problems of the EX-1 plus give it 4:2:2.

An external recorder will remove the long-GOP issues but it wouldn't change the rolling shutter characteristics.

 

[Noel Evans]

Scored an Angenieux HD wide angle lens for just under $9K.

Nice.

 

[Jan_Crittenden]

What is wrong with the color black on the Ex-1?

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=139436

Also, what if one were to purchase the upcoming Flash XDR CF recorder and used it on the EX, or even the HPX-500?

Okay so define your workflow and what intermediate codec were you going to edit in. How are you going to deal with metadata, or do you plan to have 300TB on the shelf and know exactly what is there my memory?

This would be my course of action as it would eliminate the motion/codec problems of the EX-1 plus give it 4:2:2.

You will have to wait till fall, then you want to be sure that there are no problems, and you will spend $5000 and that plus the EX just gets you a camera that has unpredictable results. Do you thin the guy that took the pictures in the thread referenced above thought they were going to turn out that way? The Convergent design isn't going to change the imager.

Or it might yield more detail from the HPX-500 as the Mpeg-2 codec is a full raster codec.

No it only doesn't prefilter. People have no idea that the reason that the DVCPRO HD codec and even HDCAM codec do a prefilter. There is no reason to have the full footprint if by having it you introduce more compression artifacts. Prefilter the high frequncies and then they don't turn into a mess. I mean really you don't see Sony rushing out and changing the HDCAM CineAlta because its 1080 is 1080 X 1440. Do you? What comes out of the playback HDSDI is full raster HD and that is true for any HD camera.

Either way it costs in the same ballpark as some hours of recording time in SxS or P2.

Be sure to calculate your storage requirement. And make sure that you like the way they have implemented their compression. Uncompressed HD at 8 bit is 994Mbs so we know they are doing some compression, so what is it and how good is it and how do you edit it and how do you manage the metadata.

Hope this helps,

Jan

 

[Bassman2003]

Thanks for your replies.

I had not heard of the infrared issue.

I am trying to setup an appointment at a rental house to see the HVX, HPX and the EX-1 side by side.

Hopefully they will let me see these cameras at their place to finally judge the images in person.

No matter what camera I choose, the Nano Flash XDR ($3,500) still seems like the best value for me.

2 hours of P2 costs ~$7,000

I can get that plus more cards for backup for much less with the XDR, at selectable bitrates & 4:2:2.

I don't use metadata as my DVC-200s are all tape based, so it is not part of my workflow.

Storage on the shelf seems to be a component of any solid state recording setup.

With the XDR, I can see putting CF cards on the shelf relatively soon from a price point of view, which is just like tape.


I will boil it down my main concerns with this upgrade as it has been very frustrating:

- The lack of a 1/2" offering from Panasonic. I have been using DVC-200s for five years, I view buying a 1/3" chip camera (even though the image is supposed to be great and 1/3" is the new 1/2") as a step backward.

- Scared that in a few years, the lower resolution chips of the HPX-500 (I have not seen the output yet, but have seen some examples and one TV show shot with it) will be long in the tooth before the cameras normal life span.

- CMOS does not fit with a lot of event shooting, which i do a lot of.

- P2 seems like it is forced and is overpriced for the marketplace.

- P2 is another item that I will feel like a sucker when the 64 GB cards cost $900 and I payed 4 times as much.

What is going to make my decision is if the HPX-500 can keep up with the EX-1 from a detail perspective, the HPX-500 is the clear choice. Because the XDR will even the playing field in terms of color & bitrate.

Detail is most important to me because that is the first thing customers notice.

I want to stay a Panasonic customer, and please feel free to convince me, but the image has to determine the choice.