Has anyone upgraded the HPX viewfinder?

Yes, it is a matter of picking the best of a really bad bunch of focus options, and hoping that is ok.

It always turns out ok, but takes you FAR too long to focus.
 
its obvious to me that if tons of people are willing to pay up to 2500 bucks for a new vf, they'd probably be willing to pay a few more for a board swap.
 
Much of my work is with IBM....and a lot of the shooting is talking heads.
the HPX300 looks great, but the DOF is killing me.
Panasonic must have alot of SD VF hanging around in some warehouse.
if they could just put a good discount on them then life would be good....:thumbup:
 
yeah, well, best bet is to upgrade that vf to the one off the sdx (12-1700 used) AND always roll with a very sharp field monitor, even if the client wont pay for it. I find the lh80 to be great, especially the red peaking.
 
I really don't have a problem with focus. I've been shooting BetaSP for over 20 years and the Sony viewfinder isn't much different from my 500. I can quickly zoom in and focus and pull out. But, I kinda know where the focus is anyway. Like a trombone player, I turn the focus ring while shooting and everthing stays in focus.

Of course, much of work has been with: XEROX, ABC, CNN. USPS, Playboy, Nexxus,
QVC, Seiko, METRx, Sundown, NatureMade, GulfStream, GE, Sony, Guthy-Renker, Sultan of Brunei

So, I guess after all of that practice, I'm just used to it by now.

JohnnyD
 
JohnnyD said:
I really don't have a problem with focus. I've been shooting BetaSP for over 20 years and the Sony viewfinder isn't much different from my 500. I can quickly zoom in and focus and pull out. But, I kinda know where the focus is anyway. Like a trombone player, I turn the focus ring while shooting and everthing stays in focus.

Of course, much of work has been with: XEROX, ABC, CNN. USPS, Playboy, Nexxus,
QVC, Seiko, METRx, Sundown, NatureMade, GulfStream, GE, Sony, Guthy-Renker, Sultan of Brunei

So, I guess after all of that practice, I'm just used to it by now.

JohnnyD
Click to expand...

Thanks JohnnyD,
coming from a person with all that experience makes me fell better about taken an other look at the HPX500.

thanks man.........Paul
 
I shot a big project on a xdcam shoulder in the Netherlands and what johny d says, in my experience the vfinder was not that better indeed. A bit later did a small thing on xdcamHD with HD vf but was'nt that excited about the vf. Its very nice though but expected more funny enough.
 
Aren't we just being too picky at times. I assumed that if the HPX500 has a good VF and onboard lcd monitor, I wouldn't be able to afford it in the first place.

For run and gun, there will be moments when the footage came out soft. But even with an 8 grand VF, that would still happen. For digital film projects, I have no problem because I do have the time to set up the shots correctly, even with the low quality VF.
 
well........the HPX300 has a great VF and onboard monitor.....so you know what happens when you "assume"....
and i really can't aford to have "moments when the footage cames out soft."

One bad "moment" could be a life time of no work........LOL
No really....the VF SUCKS.......
but i'm trying....i'm really, really trying to work with it.......wink*.....sorry, just venting.
 
use quick zoom in, focus and shoot. You get used to it. It's not the best, but for what the
camera costs, it's amazing what you get.
 
After putting up with this messy vf system for 12 months now, (yes even after upgrading to the 2.0"), I was a on a dance school shoot yesterday, shooting kids running around all over the shop.

IMO, a vf of this standard on such a camera in this day and age is unacceptable. I was guessing focus all the way, and it is tiring.

To me it juts simply needs more peaking control/adjustment so the edges of what is in focus is more defined.

Love the pictures, but VERY disappointed in usability stakes.
 
David See said:
IMO, a vf of this standard on such a camera in this day and age is unacceptable. I was guessing focus all the way, and it is tiring.
Click to expand...
Unacceptable? Well, there are no other 2/3" hd camcorder at this price point....want less compromises you do need a larger budget, pretty simple.

And arguments that the 300 has it, well, it also has its compromises with CMOS and 1/3" chip size. It's a good, but different camera.

I'm not to happy with the VF, standard one, on my HPX either but I accepted the fact that i paid 1/3 of what a Hpx2000 would cost me...or 1/5 of what a hpx 2700 retail for as i need the vfr function. For that i got a bit more soft image, less controll of the overall image and SD output for VF.

But the 2" upgrade, is it worth the cost? I do a lot of action filled shooting, a lot of action sport, and it took some practice to get the STD vf "feeling" of when it was in focus.
 
As I said...in my opinion.

I had a Sony DSR-570WSP before this and I can tell you - even though I thought it's vf was bad - it wasn't as bad as this one. At least I had some idea of focus and it had a decent range of peaking. What price point was the DSR-570?

I think the vf in an HD camera shouldn't be a compromise.....in my opinion.
 
Christian m said:
Unacceptable? Well, there are no other 2/3" hd camcorder at this price point....want less compromises you do need a larger budget, pretty simple.

And arguments that the 300 has it, well, it also has its compromises with CMOS and 1/3" chip size. It's a good, but different camera.

I'm not to happy with the VF, standard one, on my HPX either but I accepted the fact that i paid 1/3 of what a Hpx2000 would cost me...or 1/5 of what a hpx 2700 retail for as i need the vfr function. For that i got a bit more soft image, less controll of the overall image and SD output for VF.

But the 2" upgrade, is it worth the cost? I do a lot of action filled shooting, a lot of action sport, and it took some practice to get the STD vf "feeling" of when it was in focus.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The VF of the 500 is not the best but it's not that bad either. I have no regrets over the decision to go with this camera.
 
From what I understand, the 500 will never be capable of better because the VF output from the camera body is SD, so even a "better" VF will still receive an SD signal. I agree. focusing HD with SD viewing tools is scary and frustrating. I even like the LCD and VF better on my 170 over the 200/500, it is the same physically but they did bump up the peaking and it makes it workable.

The 300 VF and LCD? Don't get me started, they are superb. That LCD on the 300 is amazingly crisp and sharp, really easy to pull focus with.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top