HPX250: $730 Rebate on the AG-HPX250 + 64 Gb P2 Card

Darn, I should have waited one more month before I bought mine from you guys -
 
Im with Phil1076. Sounds like they are tying to get rid of their stock of 250's cause AF stinks! They have to come out with a "B" version..... I mean, right now - IMO - its not worth it to buy one. Why should I pay for something that is sub-par in performance? Fix AF, give me dial in Kelvin, better color peaking - this will be the camera to have for ENG style shooting. I would pay extra $1000 for a solid real lens
 
The AC130 and AC160 also received major price drops....the 160 dropped by a whopping $500 ($4195 at BH now!)


Something smells here.

"Let's get rid of this crap to those who don't know any better and then fix the problem and charge extra for the fix".
 
It's not unusual at all for Panasonic prices to drop after a video camera's introduction. Especially if they want to spur sales. Sometimes they will even bundle them with extras. The exception seems to be when cameras are in high demand and short supply like the GH2 initially was. Prices have now dropped on them also.
 
Hard to tell what Panasonic is doing or will do. Part of me also thinks they are offering a "deal" since the EX1R has a $400 rebate right now and Panny wants to compete with that camera. I seriously doubt there will be a B version this soon or any time soon. Although, how long was the HPX300 out before its problems created the HPX370?
 
Hmmm..a price drop from Sony is rare as they are the greediest of the bunch.....maybe the EX2 is around the corner.
 
I always thought Canon was the greediest.

I'm having a hard time right now because I need a camera. The HPX250 is great on the back end and the price is right. I've never owned an EX1(R) and have always wanted one. However, I really like P2 and the built in codec of the 250. Too bad Panny didn't make a lens like the XF305 and stick it on the 250. Even at another $1200 to $1300 it would be a no brainer because of what the rest of the camera can do.

What is getting me is the loss of light (around 2 stops) as the lens zooms out on the 250. I owned an HVX200 and an HPX170 and never had a problem with focusing (never even set it on auto), nor the peaking, nor the inability to dial in Kelvin. What got me with those cameras was the low light performance and the introduction of noise. So, now we have a new camera and it looses a pretty significant amount of light at tele, which means more gain, which means more noise. I should have just kept my dang HPX170!

On the positive side, if I buy a 250, at least I'll get to use the money I save on other gear that I also need. And, can I make money with the 250? Of course! Just about every feature of the 250 tells me to buy it. I know the menu system, I'm comfortable with P2, etc. However, I can say this, if I buy a 250 and Panasonic discontinues it in a year and comes out with a "B" or a "270" I will be very upset.

What to do, oh what to do?
 
Last edited:
I think your concern about the lens ramping is either misplaced, or perhaps you're not aware of how the other cameras perform. The EX1, the XF305, the 170 and the 250 all ramp their f-stop as you zoom in. There's nothing unique about the HPX250 in that regard. The EX1 doesn't SAY it's ramping, but it is, it goes from f/1.9 on the wide to f/2.8 on the tele. The XF305 also goes to f/2.8 at tele, and the HPX170 goes to 3.0.

The HPX250's lens zooms in quite a bit further than the HPX170's, with a little bit more light loss. The HPX170 is at f/3.0 at Z99, the HPX250 is f/3.2. I mean, it's a trivial difference.
 
Barry_Green said:
I think your concern about the lens ramping is either misplaced, or perhaps you're not aware of how the other cameras perform. The EX1, the XF305, the 170 and the 250 all ramp their f-stop as you zoom in. There's nothing unique about the HPX250 in that regard. The EX1 doesn't SAY it's ramping, but it is, it goes from f/1.9 on the wide to f/2.8 on the tele. The XF305 also goes to f/2.8 at tele, and the HPX170 goes to 3.0.

The HPX250's lens zooms in quite a bit further than the HPX170's, with a little bit more light loss. The HPX170 is at f/3.0 at Z99, the HPX250 is f/3.2. I mean, it's a trivial difference.
Click to expand...

Barry, nice to know. Does the HPX250 display the correct f/stop in the viewfinder when it ramps out to full tel?
 
It always shows what iris it's at, or "open". When it's open to its maximum it says "open", but if you stop down just a tiny bit it'll display the numerical stop. On the lens itself it says f/1.6 at the wide and f/3.2 at full tele.
 
Basically, what Barry said. The 22x lens with a fixed low f-stop throughout its range would probably cost $100K and be the size of a rocket launcher.

f/3.2 at full tele is actually amazing when you consider the massive range.
 
Barry_Green said:
I think your concern about the lens ramping is either misplaced, or perhaps you're not aware of how the other cameras perform. The EX1, the XF305, the 170 and the 250 all ramp their f-stop as you zoom in. There's nothing unique about the HPX250 in that regard. The EX1 doesn't SAY it's ramping, but it is, it goes from f/1.9 on the wide to f/2.8 on the tele. The XF305 also goes to f/2.8 at tele, and the HPX170 goes to 3.0.

The HPX250's lens zooms in quite a bit further than the HPX170's, with a little bit more light loss. The HPX170 is at f/3.0 at Z99, the HPX250 is f/3.2. I mean, it's a trivial difference.
Click to expand...

Barry, I know how the EX and XF perform. But, I admit, I am only informed about the HPX250 from what I read here - haven't seen one "in the flesh." From what you are saying, is it fair to say the 250 looses only 1.5 stops at the long end?
 
The 250 goes from 1.6 on the wide, to 3.2 at the tele. That's two stops over the course of the whole lens. But 3.2 is only about 1/3 of a stop more than 2.8, which is what the other cameras go to, and you said earlier that you "should have kept your 170"; I was pointing out that the 170 goes to 3.0, and the 250 goes to 3.2. The difference between 3.0 and 3.2 is only 1/6th of an f-stop. So if you were happy with the 170, why wouldn't you be thrilled with the 250, which goes 60% further telephoto at the cost of only 1/6 of an f-stop?
 
I shot with an HVX200 yesterday, hadn't used one in years. I had an f2.0 at a waist shot, f2.4 at a head and shoulders and f2.8 zoomed in. This in a camera with a much lower ISO rating than an HPX250, even at PAP Level 2. If concerned about ramping when zoomed all the way in, do what we've been doing with ENG zoom lenses for 30 years--don't zoom all the way in.

A client rented our 250 yesterday to shoot closeups of a cell phone. He loved the camera, sent me an enthusiastic email this morning about it. You don't need to use the full range of a 22x all the time, but it's nice to know it's there when needed.
 
DustBowl said:
I always thought Canon was the greediest.

I'm having a hard time right now because I need a camera. The HPX250 is great on the back end and the price is right. I've never owned an EX1(R) and have always wanted one. However, I really like P2 and the built in codec of the 250. Too bad Panny didn't make a lens like the XF305 and stick it on the 250. Even at another $1200 to $1300 it would be a no brainer because of what the rest of the camera can do.

What is getting me is the loss of light (around 2 stops) as the lens zooms out on the 250. I owned an HVX200 and an HPX170 and never had a problem with focusing (never even set it on auto), nor the peaking, nor the inability to dial in Kelvin. What got me with those cameras was the low light performance and the introduction of noise. So, now we have a new camera and it looses a pretty significant amount of light at tele, which means more gain, which means more noise. I should have just kept my dang HPX170!

On the positive side, if I buy a 250, at least I'll get to use the money I save on other gear that I also need. And, can I make money with the 250? Of course! Just about every feature of the 250 tells me to buy it. I know the menu system, I'm comfortable with P2, etc. However, I can say this, if I buy a 250 and Panasonic discontinues it in a year and comes out with a "B" or a "270" I will be very upset.

What to do, oh what to do?
Click to expand...

What to do? Buy the 250, if it checks all your needs and you think you can make money off of it, and as you say, you need a camera now. Don't worry about what's coming out next year. If you think like that, you'll never buy a camera, as you'll always be waiting for "the next best thing."
If the 250 is the proper tool for now, and it's a sound business decision, then there's no reason not to own one.

I'll throw in the Canon XF 300/305 as an alternative, as it does have a very good broadcast codec, cheaper media, and has one of the best lenses ever put on a camcorder. I've owned an HPX500 and a Canon XF305, and I'd pick the XF over the 500 any day. I also got to play with the 250 and I must say, I was very impressed. I honestly don't know which I'd pick, the 250 or the 305.
 
Phil1076 said:
Basically, what Barry said. The 22x lens with a fixed low f-stop throughout its range would probably cost $100K and be the size of a rocket launcher.
Click to expand...

Actually, even studio/field lenses that can cost upwards of $100k and are the size of rocket launchers have aperture ramping too... the few lenses that don't have it are "cine-style" zooms.
Interestingly, the HPX370's lens doesn't have aperture ramping as evidenced from info on the Fujinon site, so lenses under 17x may very well not have any, unless it's a super wide-angle lens maybe.
 
I don't recall any Fujinon 2/3" normal ENG zoom that didn't ramp and vignette. We have an Arri Alura(Fujinon) 18-80mm T2.6 Cine zoom. It does not ramp, that's 18-80mm, a foot long, 10 lbs, $25K, considered small for its range(and inexpensive). Compare that to the HPX250 lens, 28-616mm F3.2, a couple of pounds, a couple thousand dollars? Makes 18-80mm seem rather pathetic!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top