Pros and cons from daily users / owners of the HPX500

DSR300 is an excellent camera, the "last of a breed"... I stopped using it when I bought a 100A and couldn't go back to interlaced video... (I shot ACCIDENTAL HERO with the 300). I "gave" it away, but the guy I gave it to is an Apple certified Mac expert and keeps me running, so I sleep at night.

Several years ago I bought an XL H1 and shot MY NAME IS BELLE with that camera (1080i), had no problems with HDV, and really like the Canon too.. they're all tools.

The HPX500 has all of the advantages of those cameras plus way more.. I do miss the ability to dial in white balance (XL H1) and the lighter weight (DSR300), but the picture, the very film-like 24p (better than other cameras I've seen for some reason, maybe I just prefer 720) and the P2 cards make up for those things.

Technology changes so quickly these days that I am reluctant to spend the big bucks on high-end video... I have a $60,000 Aaton already that I hardly get to use. So, for me, the HPX500 is a perfect compromise between "affordable pro-sumer" and the other extreme... Red is interesting, but not a documentary camera in any of it's current designs.

Our site is macandava.com

It's an intentionally simple website, designed by Jerry Takigawa, an artist who doesn't like to overload space.
 
Andrew McMillan said:
you gave a dsr 300 away :0 to a computer guy! * I hate you* Just kidding, no but really if anyone has one they'd interested in letting go for a good prive I'd be intersested.

I have two dsr 300's and they need a freaind for our studio, because they don't play that nice with my pd 170.
Click to expand...

I have a DRS-500WSL I've sell you for a good price. No Lens, but lenses for that are easy to come by.
 
Mac said:
Okay, the guy that started this post got a 500, I know because I bought the PortaBrace bag from him, which he didn't need - and it's an excellent bag, by-the-way, although not a carry-on... Thank you Kit.

I've shot a bunch with the 500 in the year since I bought it, I don't have any idea how many hours, but a lot, like hundreds.. I just completed a very footage-intensive feature length documentary (BOYHOOD SHADOWS), produced a dozen 10-15 minute docs and a slew of regional commercials for colleges and hospitals... I've also shot with the 200 during that same period (I bought it a few months after the 500 as a back-up).

P2 cards... I can not understand the issue people have with the cost.. yeah, at first (before I was using Panasonic) they weren't too appealing... but now, with the 16 and 32 and soon to be 64 cards, they are nearly essential... I have five 16s, and I've used every one at least 50 times with no problems whatsoever. I paid for them once and now I own them!

The camera... I got mine with the Fujinon lens and I am extremely pleased with the look I'm getting with 720/24pn - And the quality of the audio is superb. I don't do scopes or rez chart tests or post clips... I just shoot films - 24/7.

Let me put this in perspective - I have a masters in film from UCLA (many years ago) specializing in cinematography originally, then I changed to documentary when I photographed a doc about Caesar Chavez. I've shot hundreds of films - in actual FILM, mostly super16 (I owned one of the first super16 cameras on the west coast, an Eclair NPR) and I still own and occasionally use an Aaton super16 camera. I have nearly a hundred film festival awards, including 11 CINE Golden Eagles, so I'm not a "newby" by any stretch.

Comparing the HPX500 to a Panaflex Platinum? Well, it won't - But comparing it to super16, especially for documentaries, it is vastly superior... I hated video for over 20 years, but now, finally, I feel that I have a tool that is more than comparable and satisfies my needs - especially for the cost...

I still think it's too heavy though.
Click to expand...

Hi Mac,

Congratulation on your superb work. I'm a doc filmmaker myself working out of the SF Bay Area and your footage is very inspirational.
I've just shot a feature length doc with the 200 and as I prepare for my next project, which will include traveling to 3 continents, I've been testing the HPX500. My only issue for far with the camera is finding a cost effective HD wide lens.
What have you been using on the wide range?
Thanks,

Alex.
 
Man that white balance dial feature sounds amazing. It's so simple. Instead of carring around a bunch of different coloured cards.
 
alexdias said:
Hi Mac,

Congratulation on your superb work. I'm a doc filmmaker myself working out of the SF Bay Area and your footage is very inspirational.
I've just shot a feature length doc with the 200 and as I prepare for my next project, which will include traveling to 3 continents, I've been testing the HPX500. My only issue for far with the camera is finding a cost effective HD wide lens.
What have you been using on the wide range?
Thanks,

Alex.
Click to expand...

Alex,

I got the KJ13x6BKRS if that is wide enough. Bought it from Samy's DV and Edit here in LA. Im about to shoot my first feature length doc here on the 9th of July. Any pointers from either of you?
 
Andrew McMillan said:
Man that white balance dial feature sounds amazing. It's so simple. Instead of carring around a bunch of different coloured cards.
Click to expand...

It is very useful. Though when you dial the white balance out of the the standard manual balance its still a process of dialing for the look you want unless you know that all your lights are 5k and off you go, or you just wanted to dial in 5600k for a midday exterior. The HPX has Ach and Bch adjustment which doesnt tell you what your setting is , but in conjunction with a BC monitor it can help you sweeten.
 
Bayne: The 13x6 is not wide enough for doc work. Most of the time I find myself in really small places with 2 people or more and this lens will not cover the action properly.

Andrew: I did not test the Canon 8x6, which btw is quite wide, but I tested an old wide SD Fujinon (i forget the precise model) and although it performed well on wide on the long end it was clearly not sharp enough.

My comparison was made in relation to the low cost Fuji standard lens, usually part of the HPX "package".
I'm not gear obsessed and like Mac said before, I shoot films not charts so my evaluations are biased and personal.
 
Well you need sharpness for wide shots, but not so much when you zoom in. Especialy scince half or more of the screen is out of focus due to DOF. Talent won't mind it being soft on the CU's either. :)

I personally wouldn't spend more than 4k on a lens for the HPX. By then I would be thinking about another camera.

I've always been skeptical of the lens game ever scince those $500 nikons owned those $20,000 Ziess super speeds. :0
 
Alex: In my case I prefer cropping things - I tend to shoot very tight, often with the mid to full telephoto range, so the Fujinon (I got the one w/o the 2x because it's lighter) works fine for me...

The great thing about 3/4" cameras is that even using the mid-range you can have enough selective focus that it draws the viewer's eye to the subject - true, I miss focus sometimes, but I live with it, same as with 16mm.

I also hand-hold most of the time, sometimes 6-8 hours a day (thus the weight concern - I'm old) - The 500 is a nice camera - once it's up on your shoulder - everything is well placed - audio control, focus assist, scene files, etc, so you don't have to take your eye away from the finder.

True, the Canon's WB dial is good for someone with enough experience to have a sense of what they want the color temperature to be... But you could take a white balance, note the number, then switch to manual and make it warmer or cooler.

With the XL H1 I could dial WB walking from an exterior to an interior w/o having to pull out a white card - I seldom have time for that luxury - I dislike telling my subject to hang on a second while I adjust the camera , kinda intrusive.

So, with the 500 I use presets and miss whites sometimes too... But the nice thing about DVCPRO HD is that it handles correction in post very well.

The HPX500 could certainly be improved - better finder of course (I wish Panasonic offered a better, affordable, not heavier finder as an option), dial in WB and a good diet program to take off about six pounds.
 
Does anybody know if the offer pakages with the 2 inch finder instead of the 1.5?

Crazey how much difference a half of an inch makes.
 
Thank you Mac.
It's nice to hear from someone who works so similar to me.
Maybe one of these days we can get together for a coffee, I'm not too far from you.
Cheers,

Alex.
 
alexdias said:
Bayne: The 13x6 is not wide enough for doc work. Most of the time I find myself in really small places with 2 people or more and this lens will not cover the action properly.

Andrew: I did not test the Canon 8x6, which btw is quite wide, but I tested an old wide SD Fujinon (i forget the precise model) and although it performed well on wide on the long end it was clearly not sharp enough.
Click to expand...

Doesnt a 13x6 and an 8x6 have the same FOV as each other? 6mm?
 
there are no real correct answers to your question because its all relative to what you are comparing to, and in todays video world it has become mind boggling the amount of choices and the way the market is changing faster than we can afford to upgrade.

that said, here are some of my likes and dislikes from a professional viewpoint, but bear in mind that most of my shoots are pro level and as such my comparisons are more to pro cameras whereas teh HPX500 isn't really a pro cameras and more of a inbetween prosumer and pro. I'm not listing everything but just higlighting the most significant

Pro:
1. Low cost for 2/3" chip with B4 mount
2. Ease of workflo
3. ease of menu
4. shoulder mount lightwieght makes ENG easier (cameras like RED make you want to throw them against the wall)
5. CAC correction helps those who can't afford professional lenses get a better look.
6. XLR sound options.
7. Quick release plate.
8. When the larger cards comes out you'll be able to shoot all day without changing cards. (althought it cost you almost as much as the camera for the cards)
9. In the old days you hand of tapes and almost never see the footage or have to fight to get it for your reel. Now often you take the footage home with you still on card after downloading. Makes it easier to build your reel.
10. firewire ports. (something my Varicam doesn't have)
11. Variable frame rates instantly viewable (this is a huge help for amateur directors)

Cons:
1. Not much demand for it from my professional clients
2. Poor rez in comparison to other high end cameras.
3. Poor viewfinder compared to my high end cameras (the least they could do is design it so I could use my varicam viewfinder on it, but no they have to make me suffer for no good reason)
4. Grainy in the darks
5. no color wheel like on pro cameras, which makes run and gun a little more difficult.
6. Hi cost of cards
7. Sometimes having to wait at the end fo a shoot to download footage to a clients harddrive before you can go home. ( a lot easier to just hand off tapes)
8. 8 bit instead of 10 bit.
9. Goofy histogram focus assit that isn't used by any person I know on a professional level. If you're doing ENG it gets in the way and if you're not doing ENG than you're using a pro onboard monitor like my LH-80.

Overall a very good camera for the money but NOT a professional camera that will get you a lot of professional work. I'm hoping this will change after the Olympics since its the official camera. But the reality is people rarely want the cheapest option in a professional world, they either want the best or something in the middle. And the HPX500 is at the bottom of the Panasonic pro line.

for someone wanting to make a micro-budget feature its great.
 
I just finished up a multi-month, multi-episode TV doc series. Shot reams and reams of footage. We shot with the Canon kit lens with the doubler (can't recall the model offhand.)

Don't care for the LCD or the viewfinder, too small for critical focus. The focus assist histogram is worse than useless. For critical focus, a monitor was required, period.

Other than that I was extremely pleased. Rugged, dependable. Plenty of runtime on 4 x 16gb cards, for shooting interviews and b-roll all day. My b-camera op (HVX200) was stuck with 8gb cards, after awhile I took pity and started giving him one of the 16's.

Loved the low light capabilities...it significantly freed me up lighting-wise. VIdeo noise levels were not objectionable for my purposes.

I shot a bunch of stuff with default scene file 5 settings. I had a homebrew scenefile for high-contrast outdoor situations, and I used the DSC warming card (the newer, very slight warm version.) I ditched my LIghttools Warmcards, they were much too inconsistent and too strong.

I used the Kata case that can be broken down for carry-on stowage. I flew all over the country (and to Germany) for months on end.

That's it off the top of my head. As a practical tool for a documentarian, I couldn't be happier.
 
Hi- interesting to hear. I'm still worried about the focus: can't carry a monitor everywhere. I guess I need to drive an hpx for a day, and see how bad the viewfinder/histogram comba are for what I'm doing (on-the-shoulder, a lot of wide/mid on the lens, but zooming in to grab quick close-ups, all natural lighting).
What sort of a monitor do people use? Is there a small monitor with a battery and a shoe that can be used easily?
 
robstowell said:
Hi- interesting to hear. I'm still worried about the focus: can't carry a monitor everywhere. I guess I need to drive an hpx for a day, and see how bad the viewfinder/histogram comba are for what I'm doing (on-the-shoulder, a lot of wide/mid on the lens, but zooming in to grab quick close-ups, all natural lighting).
What sort of a monitor do people use? Is there a small monitor with a battery and a shoe that can be used easily?
Click to expand...

Taking it out for a test drive is very smart. Just for youf info I use it daily and do a lot of run and gun with it with out a monitor and have had great success. That said I could stand to have a better on but would not say it is un usable by means. I have found it easier to focus in 30p and 60i over 24p just my 2cents.
 
I use the viewfinder histogram always and love it. Takes about 30 minutes to get used to it but when you do the results are tack sharp. May seem strange at first but it's extremely sensitive and never fails me.

If you consider, low-light sensitivity, color reproduction, clarity, format flexibility, variable frame rates, and recording standards (NTSC & PAL) the HPX500 is an amazing camera and a great value. I shoot a lot and love it more every day.

Is it a RED? No, but the Red is an entirely different beast. Think big production, big post-production pipeline, and big support crew, etc. It's an fabulous camera for what it's designed for, as is the HPX500.
 
Icarus2005 said:
Overall a very good camera for the money but NOT a professional camera that will get you a lot of professional work.
Click to expand...

Interesting its not working out for you. Havent had an issue. I offer three options, HPX, Sony XDCAM 350 and Red. HPX is doing very well, mind you though Im just restarting up back here in Aus, so it has been slower than usual whilst im in this vortex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top