2 AF100s -- How would you grow (HPX250 vs. 160)?

M

MichaelTiemann

Active member
I have a pair of AF100s and am looking to replace my HMC150. A straight-ahead upgrade would be to pick up a 160 or two. But it's tempting to upgrade further, to a 250. Surely there must be many considering the pros and cons of this dilemma. Anybody come to any decisive conclusions?

The big pro for the 160 is that is is so much like the AF100s that I don't really need to think about anything: same media, same compression, same bit depth, etc.

The potential pro for the 250 is to set a new standard (10-bit AVC-Intra) and let the AF100s become more special-purpose cameras, instead of all equal. The prices of P2 have come down somewhat, but still not cheap, and still not particularly long-lasting (compared with what the AF100 can do).
 
If shooting to the AVC-I codec entices you, I'd look at the 250. However, if you're fine with AVCHD, then the 160 would be more up your ally it seems.
 
two cents, aside from the normal bits: with AVC-Intra 50, you'll be able to shoot ~256 minutes with two 64GB P2 cards. This should be long enough duration to work a full day with most shooting schedules.
 
I know for general event shooting where there will be flashes, the HMC150 is really the only camera left with CCD's so you don't get rolling shutter and flash artifacts. I use it as my primary event camera and will continue to do so as long as possible just for the global shutter.
 
Does the HPX250 have the same sensor as the 370/371? If so, I'd test it very, very carefully before investing - especially if you want it to be your main camera. AVCIntra100 is no great benefit if you're starting with excessive skew, noise, speckles and trailing motion artefacts. To my eye, the DSP on the HPX370 is even worse than that on the AF100. I'd certainly want to do detailed comparison between the XF305 and the HPX250 before making a decision. The XF may only be 50Mbps Mpeg2 but at least the DSP is very good.
 
If it were me, I would buy the AC160 as it does the same variable frame rates as the AF100, the HPX250 does not have the over crank in 1080. Operational structure (menus) are similar to the AF100 as well. The 250's menus are like the 370. So yes both of these cameras do have the HPX370 chipset, but they are sufficiently different that youreally should take the time to understand the difference.

Best,

Jan
 
I'd go with a AC160. Same SD cards and batteries alone will save some headaches. Not to mention P2. We have a couple HPX170s and P2 is okay. It's rock solid. But there is still so much to worry about; record times, transfer times, specialized card readers, high cost. Personally, I have been loving the image quality from AVCHD, even over DVCPRO HD. And SD media feels so much better: shoot literally all day with a couple 32GB cards, take a card slide it in the computer's SD slot, transfers super quick, and each 32GB card is $50, not $600.

There were originally a few comparisons between AVCIntra100 and AVCHD, I remember the Guiseppe(sp?) vids and stills where they compared and the differences were negligible. I'm not saying AVCIntra isn't better, I'm saying in most shooting scenarios you'd be hard pressed to tell a difference. The biggest advantages are the 10bit color which will have less potential for banding, and 4:2:2 which is better for color accuracy across your image. But I really would contend that 8-9 times out of 10, AVCHD would be just as good with little to no difference between IQs.
 
P2's down to $10/gb. It's not free, granted, but compared to what it was when it first came out, it's fallen in price dramatically. $2200 for an 8GB card in early 2006. That was $275 per gigabyte. Now it's $10/gigabyte. The price is now 3.66% of what it used to be.

Again, not saying it's free, but it sure isn't the high-cost issue it used to be.
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
If it were me, I would buy the AC160 as it does the same variable frame rates as the AF100, the HPX250 does not have the over crank in 1080. Operational structure (menus) are similar to the AF100 as well. The 250's menus are like the 370. So yes both of these cameras do have the HPX370 chipset, but they are sufficiently different that youreally should take the time to understand the difference.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...

Going off at a slight tangent.... would you happen to know (I'm sure you do!) if its possible to flip the image on the HPX250 'in camera' for when using an adapter?
Thanks
 
Barry_Green said:
P2's down to $10/gb. It's not free, granted, but compared to what it was when it first came out, it's fallen in price dramatically. $2200 for an 8GB card in early 2006. That was $275 per gigabyte. Now it's $10/gigabyte. The price is now 3.66% of what it used to be.

Again, not saying it's free, but it sure isn't the high-cost issue it used to be.
Click to expand...

That price decrease is about the same as the price decrease in flash memory. So relative to SD cards, P2 is still just as expensive as it was in 2006.

In 2006, Sandisk Ultra2 SD cards were about $45/GB. Now they're about $1.60/GB, or 3.6% of what they used to be. P2 is still about 6 times more expensive than SD.

So I would agree with Jan and recommend that the OP get the AC160, especially since he is already using SD cards and AVCHD with the AF100.
 
Sumfun said:
That price decrease is about the same as the price decrease in flash memory. So relative to SD cards, P2 is still just as expensive as it was in 2006.

In 2006, Sandisk Ultra2 SD cards were about $45/GB. Now they're about $1.60/GB, or 3.6% of what they used to be. P2 is still about 6 times more expensive than SD.
Click to expand...

Well if I'm not mistaken, P2 is essentially 4 SD cards in a RAID array. Thus they should be about 6 times more based on the resources used.

4 SD cards and Raid Array = about 6 times a single SD card.
 
Andrew McCarrick said:
Well if I'm not mistaken, P2 is essentially 4 SD cards in a RAID array. Thus they should be about 6 times more based on the resources used.

4 SD cards and Raid Array = about 6 times a single SD card.
Click to expand...

Yes, P2 is essentially 4 SD cards in a RAID array. But we're talking price per GB here. So a 64GB P2 card costs about 6 times more than a 64GB SD card.

If the price of a 64GB P2 cards costs 6 times the price of a 16GB SD card (as in your example, 16GB x 4 = 64GB), I don't think anybody would be complaining.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top