7D vs hpx170: pros and cons

[righteous.]

I haven't been able to find any work lately because I don't have a HD camera, and I was initially looking at the hpx170, but am now drawn to the 7D. Since I know nothing of SLR cameras, I had some questions.

1. The hpx170 shoots 4:2:2, has a waveform monitor, and shoots 24pN. These are features that I find to be a necessity, especially the 4:2:2 color. Where does the 7D lie in terms of these aspects? Does it shoot true 24pN, have a waveform monitor, or 4:2:2 color?

2. What are the drawbacks to using DSLRs for video? Does it have a rolling shutter, or aliasing, etc.? Is the 7D even comparable to the hpx170, or does the video-oriented camera have a clear advantage?

One thing that draws me toward the 7D is the interchangeable lenses/shallow DOF capabilities. I know I would never even bother with 35mm adapters with the 7D, so there's one clear advantage. Factoring in the cost of an hpx setup (camera + cards + auxillary lenses), I would much rather be able to produce equal or better images with something cheaper. How much would a solid 7D setup run me (camera + fast primes + telephoto + any other accesories I missed)?

 

[kidwoo]

http://tinyurl.com/yd2nth2

 

[deltoidjohn]

1. If a waveform monitor and 4:2:2 colour are a necessity then don't bother with the 7d.

2. Rolling shutter is worse with DSLR's because they have a bigger sensor to read out. They also suffer from aliasing and miore. There is no manual audio gain control and no way to monitor your audio, so seperate sound is almost a necessity for any serious work. As a primary camera, the 7d cannot touch the HPX170 in terms of professional features and ease of use.

You're going to need a few extras to make the 7d easier to use as a video camera. The most important, in my opinion, is a LCD loupe of some kind such as the zacuto z-finder or LCDVF. You'll want some kind of shoulder mount/rails setup to help you get steady handheld shots because the form factor is very hard to use handheld for extended periods. A few ND filters will help out alot if you are shooting outdoors and need to lower the exposure without losing your nice shallow DoF. Then there's all the regular stuff like cards, extra batteries (plenty of these because they don't last long in video mode), etc.

It depends on what sort of work you will be doing, but personally, I would never use a DSLR as my only camera. As secondary cameras for cut aways and selected shots they are awesome and give you a whole new level of creative control at the pricepoint, but there are still too many things missing for me to consider one as an only camera yet.

 

[kidwoo]

Plus what he^ said

 

[Colonel Panic]

http://tinyurl.com/yd2nth2

DVXUser was the first listing. Funny and ironic.

 

[Lindquist]

omg, just found a hpx for $1300!!! wtf!

im going to talk to the lady tonight an see whatsup

either way if its decent im buyin it!

 

[righteous.]

http://tinyurl.com/yd2nth2

Do you honestly think I would take the time to post on DVXuser and wait for replies if I could find all the info I needed through google?

1. If a waveform monitor and 4:2:2 colour are a necessity then don't bother with the 7d.

If it doesn't have 4:2:2 color, then what does it have? 4:2:0?

Rolling shutter is worse with DSLR's because they have a bigger sensor to read out. They also suffer from aliasing and miore. There is no manual audio gain control and no way to monitor your audio, so seperate sound is almost a necessity for any serious work.

So there IS a rolling shutter? How much of a problem is it? and by saying that it's worse on DSLRs, are you saying that it's on the hpx170 as well?
I read Barry's article on aliasing, and what got from it is that aliasing is only a problem for repeated, consistent patterns and textures, correct? Will I still be able to shoot landscapes and things like wood grain okay?
The audio capabilities aren't important; I rarely use audio, and when I do I record it seperately. Audio generally sounds crappy unless you're recording it separately anyways.

As a primary camera, the 7d cannot touch the HPX170 in terms of professional features and ease of use.

I realize the 7D doesn't touch the hpx170, but it's also a significantly cheaper camera. I guess what I'm asking is: is it worth the price tag? Any freelance work I do is in the ski industry, which has an absurdly low standard for footage. They don't care about tracking, composition, or color; as long as the skier is in the frame it is acceptable. My DVX footage kills most work that I've seen in terms of everything except resolution, and yet they are the ones getting the jobs because their camera says "HD" on the side. Having said that, I really just wanted a nice camera for personal projects-nothing too prestigious. I would also like to progress as a cinematographer in aspects such as working with a shallow DOF, without having to mess around with those PITA 35mm DOF adapters (it's not like I can afford one anyway). Also, by getting a HDSLR I feel like I will have a more variety in the type of footage I shoot, because I will be able to shoot timelapse photography, or get good light without having to spend a lot of money on lighting kits. I've used the hpx170 extensively for jobs, and while it is a nice camera, it felt like an updated DVX, and nothing more. I already know how to grade pretty well, and I understand histograms and all that, but it has the same size sensors as the DVX, meaning no shallow DOF. So in all reality, I can see myself making great use of its features, but I can't see myself learning anything new from it.

I actually should have elaborated my OP better. I think the main reason I want an HD camera is so that I can progress as an instrumentalist, because the DVX (as much as I love it), is so incredibly restricting in aspects such as resolution, color, DOF, etc. Chances are that the hpx170 isn't even an option unless I want to take out a huge loan, which I would like to avoid. Do you think I should just give up filming until I can afford a p2 camera, or would a 7D be a good camera to tide me over until then? I kind of wanted the 7D to serve as a transitionary camera for college until I'm actually in a position where I NEED professional features, because right now the only feature I need for freelance is the HD logo stamped on the side of the camera.

You're going to need a few extras to make the 7d easier to use as a video camera. The most important, in my opinion, is a LCD loupe of some kind such as the zacuto z-finder or LCDVF. You'll want some kind of shoulder mount/rails setup to help you get steady handheld shots because the form factor is very hard to use handheld for extended periods. A few ND filters will help out alot if you are shooting outdoors and need to lower the exposure without losing your nice shallow DoF. Then there's all the regular stuff like cards, extra batteries (plenty of these because they don't last long in video mode), etc.

Why do you feel that a z-finder of some sort is a necessity? How is it different from using the on-camera LCD? Filters are a given; I was planning on eventually getting a mattebox setup and a steadicam. Do you feel a follow focus is necessary as well?
How long do the batteries last in video mode?

It depends on what sort of work you will be doing, but personally, I would never use a DSLR as my only camera. As secondary cameras for cut aways and selected shots they are awesome and give you a whole new level of creative control at the pricepoint, but there are still too many things missing for me to consider one as an only camera yet.

I would say that this camera will be 20% freelance, 80% personal/random things. My DVX100b is still running strong, so I will always be able to use that.

 

[Lindquist]

I got reply from the lady who has a hpx170 for $1300.

this is what she said.

"For our and my safety craigslist requries to verify you by phone ,so youll receive an automated call or SMS and an authorization code ,so i will need it to verify and to trust you,so please keep in mind(or note) the code ,and reply to me with it,thanx"

 

[Lindquist]

if someone could help me out that would be great.

never had a response like this on craigslist, either its super legit or way unlegit.

 

[Cranky]

So there IS a rolling shutter? How much of a problem is it? and by saying that it's worse on DSLRs, are you saying that it's on the hpx170 as well?

The HPX170 has CCDs, which do not have rolling shutter. Same for the HMC150.

I realize the 7D doesn't touch the hpx170, but it's also a significantly cheaper camera. I guess what I'm asking is: is it worth the price tag? Any freelance work I do is in the ski industry, which has an absurdly low standard for footage. They don't care about tracking, composition, or color; as long as the skier is in the frame it is acceptable.

Whatever their standards are I don't think they will like jello.

My DVX footage kills most work that I've seen in terms of everything except resolution, and yet they are the ones getting the jobs because their camera says "HD" on the side.

How about the HMC150 for ski stuff + T2i for beauty shots from a tripod.

 

[Bucknfl]

If money is tight get the canon t2i for 899.00. All the canons are a nightmare to see the lcd in bright sunlight without an ad on finder. Consider the Panasonic GH-1, it has an articulating lcd and electronic viewfinder, the downside is you can not use an external monitor and if you want 24p you have to de-interlace in post. The canons are tough to use for action sports and run and gun but good for more staged production. Read Barry's review.

 

[Lindquist]

so no one can give advice to me?

 

[kidwoo]

Do you honestly think I would take the time to post on DVXuser and wait for replies if I could find all the info I needed through google?

And then there's the ability to search on this very site.

So yes, I'm going to make jokes at your expense because all your questions have been discussed here by everyone on the planet within 5 minutes of thinking about one of these cameras.

So here's some stuff that hasn't already been presented:

Check this site out if you don't know about it already.

www.unofficialsquaw.com


Other than the crappy helmet cam stuff, every video on that site was shot with either an HPX or a 7D, usually both. Follow the links to the vimeo site and peruse. See if you can tell which is which.

I own both and as stated, the 7D is a nice compliment, but I'd take the HPX any day of the week over it if I only had one. Fast pans destroy the footage on the canons without pretty wide lenses. There are one or two things the canons can do that the HPX can't. But there are about a million things the HPX can do that the canons can't.

That said, check these guys out as well.

www.dendritestudios.com

Other than the obvious gopro footage, they're ONLY using 7Ds for video and getting good results. They know what they're doing and are well aware of their limitations though.

 

[kidwoo]

so no one can give advice to me?

here's some:


man up and go get it or start your own thread

 

[Lindquist]

ur dumb ahha..

just a simple question not that long..

but w/e

 

[Gary Huff]

no need to be an asshole now

 

[deltoidjohn]

If it doesn't have 4:2:2 color, then what does it have? 4:2:0?

Yes, 4:2:0. Alot of people transcode to 4:2:2 either cineform or pro-res for editing but if you're shooting freelance and handing the files over straight from the camera they will be 4:2:0.

So there IS a rolling shutter? How much of a problem is it? and by saying that it's worse on DSLRs, are you saying that it's on the hpx170 as well?
I read Barry's article on aliasing, and what got from it is that aliasing is only a problem for repeated, consistent patterns and textures, correct? Will I still be able to shoot landscapes and things like wood grain okay?

There is definitely rolling shutter on the 7d. It is really noticable in pans so check out lots of footage on vimeo and you'll get an idea pretty quickly of what the capabilities and limitations are. My friends shoot skating footage with it and the subject in the foreground looks ok because the camera is panning with with at the same speed they are moving but the backgrounds are often at a very noticiable slant.

I realize the 7D doesn't touch the hpx170, but it's also a significantly cheaper camera. I guess what I'm asking is: is it worth the price tag?

Heck yes! Especially if you choose the 550d instead. Just don't expect it to have all the bells and whistles of a video camera. Actually, don't expect it to have even basic features of a video camera such as autofocus.

Any freelance work I do is in the ski industry, which has an absurdly low standard for footage. They don't care about tracking, composition, or color; as long as the skier is in the frame it is acceptable.

What about out of focus footage? Is that acceptable? You're gonna need to spend alot of time practicing your focusing with this camera. It's very difficult to track fast moving subjects and keep them in focus because of the shallow DoF, but there are some people out there who really have it wired.

Having said that, I really just wanted a nice camera for personal projects-nothing too prestigious. I would also like to progress as a cinematographer in aspects such as working with a shallow DOF, without having to mess around with those PITA 35mm DOF adapters (it's not like I can afford one anyway).

Well for that purpose the 7d/550d is a great camera. It'll teach you to shoot like you are using a film camera... seperate sound, minimal camera movement, f/stops, lens selection etc. But it doesn't have the features you said were a necessity, such as waveforms and 4:2:2 colour. As a camera to learn on and get you through college, it will be great. It will also produce great images for some paid gigs provided you really learn how to use itand understand it limitations.

Why do you feel that a z-finder of some sort is a necessity? How is it different from using the on-camera LCD? Filters are a given; I was planning on eventually getting a mattebox setup and a steadicam. Do you feel a follow focus is necessary as well?
How long do the batteries last in video mode?

The LCD is very hard to see in even moderately bright sunlight. It will be a complete nightmare with all the glare bouncing around in the snow. It's alot worse than any video camera because you cant move the LCD around to avoid the light. With a z-finder you are still using the LCD but it cuts out all the glare, as well as magnifying the image to make focusing easier (though some have complained it just magnifies the pixels without making the focus any easier to jugde). It aslo gives you an extra contact point for more stable handheld shots. A follow focus will make things easier but you should be able to make do without. The batteries last around 2 hours but it could be alot less in the snow because of the cold. The main problem is because they use a closed battery compartment, you can;t just put in a battery that's 6x as big and will last all day.

 

[righteous.]

The HPX170 has CCDs, which do not have rolling shutter.
How about the HMC150 for ski stuff + T2i for beauty shots from a tripod.

I really have no use for an HMC150. It's just a tapeless DVX that uses a codec that my powerPC G5 can't even process...

If money is tight get the canon t2i for 899.00. All the canons are a nightmare to see the lcd in bright sunlight without an ad on finder. Consider the Panasonic GH-1, it has an articulating lcd and electronic viewfinder, the downside is you can not use an external monitor and if you want 24p you have to de-interlace in post. The canons are tough to use for action sports and run and gun but good for more staged production. Read Barry's review.

Money is tight, as in I don't have $5000+ to spend on a video camera. I see no reason to limit myself to a t2i when I can afford a ~$2,000 setup. Also, if I'm getting a new camera, there is no way I'm going to buy one that makes me do inverse telecine for 1080p. It's 2010, these things shouldn't even be an issue at this point...
I really have no interest in using 720p unless I absolutely have to, and what I gather from Barry's article is that the GH1 is better for 720p whereas the 7D is superior in 1080p. Also, I hate flip out LCDs.
Keep in mind that I'm mainly getting this for non-sports. If the rolling shutter/aliasing really become a problem, I can always use my DVX for sports.

ur dumb ahha..

just a simple question not that long..

but w/e

Maybe if you make your own thread to ask blatantly stupid questions, then we won't give you any guff.

don't expect it to have even basic features of a video camera such as autofocus.

I really just need white balance, shutter, f:stop, etc. Useless novelties such as autofocus aren't important to me. Would I be right in assuming that I will have more headroom in grading (compared to a DVX) because of the more sensitive sensors? Even though it is only 4:2:0?

What about out of focus footage? Is that acceptable?

Sadly, yes. These people almost have no standard as long as the skier lands the trick and is in the frame.

Well for that purpose the 7d/550d is a great camera. It'll teach you to shoot like you are using a film camera... seperate sound, minimal camera movement, f/stops, lens selection etc. But it doesn't have the features you said were a necessity, such as waveforms and 4:2:2 colour. As a camera to learn on and get you through college, it will be great. It will also produce great images for some paid gigs provided you really learn how to use itand understand it limitations.

Well the reason I originally stated the 4:2:2 color or waveform monitors as a "necessity" is because I feel that color/histograms are an area of cinematography that I would like to make a norm, speaking in terms of workflow. Ambivalently, I feel that getting a 7D will push me to improve in other aspects, such as using interchangeable lenses, shallow DOF, practically being forced to record audio separately for anything serious, or photography even. While I won't have access to 4:2:2 or waveforms, I feel that all in all I will improve as a visual artist nevertheless. Perhaps I will even benefit more from a 7D than an hpx170? Since the hpx170 will only let me improve in the area of 4:2:2/waveforms, I will still basically be using a high-definition DVX; nothing new really.
For work, 4:2:2/waveform aren't a necessity by any means. Literally, the only thing I need to sell my footage is the ability to shoot at least 720p. Having said that, I'm not filming for jobs. Everything I do is personal and independent, and companies come to me and ask to buy my footage, so the freelancing part is actually a very small factor in all of this so long as it's HD.

The LCD is very hard to see in even moderately bright sunlight. It will be a complete nightmare with all the glare bouncing around in the snow. It's alot worse than any video camera because you cant move the LCD around to avoid the light. With a z-finder you are still using the LCD but it cuts out all the glare, as well as magnifying the image to make focusing easier (though some have complained it just magnifies the pixels without making the focus any easier to jugde). It aslo gives you an extra contact point for more stable handheld shots.

makes sense!

The batteries last around 2 hours but it could be alot less in the snow because of the cold. The main problem is because they use a closed battery compartment, you can;t just put in a battery that's 6x as big and will last all day.

Why can't I put in a big battery and have it last all day? Could you elaborate?

 

[xmephestox]

You can get a switronix adapter that lets you use longer lasting batteries, including the panny batteries u own for ur dvx. you can also get the handle accessory that takes 2 7d batteries, OR AA batteries. will double your time on it.

keep in mind, 7d = 12 min record times. (roughly) 4 gb recording limit with no rollover for span clips like a hpx 170. limitations of fat 32 formatting on the CF cards.

7d has had problems overheating occasionally for long period of use.

7d low light performance kills the hpx 170 in those terms.

is S35 depth of field what you absolutely need for the work you do?

price of a hpx 170 alone could mean tricked out 7d, most expensive thing will be the lenses, but if you buy smart they can be feature proof.

firmware upgrade for 7d one day might give you proper histogram in the very least like the 5d, HDMI marshall monitor also gives you false color for exposure if u wanna spend the 1200 dollars or so on it. very useful.

4:2:0 is your recorded color space. it's 8 bit, LONG GOP compressed footage. It is not possible to get 4:2:2 with that kind of compression limitations. That's the sacrifice made for file size ratio. But people tend to transcode it to a 10 bit 4:2:2 codec to give it extra overhead for when you do bring into CC, mathematically it has more room to work, and you can get just that little bit more out of it when your pushing your color around.


the moire/aliasing, rolling shutter artifacts/jello is unavoidable for the level of CMOS censor you are getting. it is a CMOS sensor limitation, and in the end 7d as much as it gives you for the price, isn't exactly the highest grade sensor out there. But there are always ways to work around things, and honestly IMHO, the general public barely notices these things, it's us as filmmakers that are extra nit picky because we want the best, and will always want that. which pushes us to put out better work.

 

[righteous.]

keep in mind, 7d = 12 min record times. (roughly) 4 gb recording limit with no rollover for span clips like a hpx 170. limitations of fat 32 formatting on the CF cards.

Could you elaborate? Are you saying I will only get 12 minutes on a 4gb card?

is S35 depth of field what you absolutely need for the work you do?

like I said, all i need to make money off the footage is to be able to shoot HD. I could just uprez DVX footage to 720p, then lie to the companies and tell them it's HD footage and it wouldn't make any difference. But I'm sick of using miniDV tapes due to their durability issues, and codec limitations.

4:2:0 is your recorded color space. it's 8 bit, LONG GOP compressed footage. It is not possible to get 4:2:2 with that kind of compression limitations. That's the sacrifice made for file size ratio. But people tend to transcode it to a 10 bit 4:2:2 codec to give it extra overhead for when you do bring into CC, mathematically it has more room to work, and you can get just that little bit more out of it when your pushing your color around.

How does one transcode 8-bit 4:2:0 footage to 10-bit 4:2:2? Wouldn't this be along the same lines as uprezzing SD footage to HD? Is this even possible if I have a powerPC G5? I don't see how you can make color sampling magically appear if it isn't in the raw footage...