ALL: Ag-AC130/160 official brochure is up!

Thanks, interesting to see all the specs. Interesting to see there is now an option for auto gain on the sound inputs, could be handy for some situations.
 
The preset white balance has a variable setting, where you can adjust from 2.4k to 9.9k. Now *that's* interesting. "Super Gain" up to 24dB and 30dB. Focus in red is included. This is looking like one heckuva pair of cameras (three if you include the HPX250) for the price.

I want to know if it's still a Lieca lens... it says Panasonic lens on the side. Is Panasonic now making their own lenses?
 
Last edited:
Is Panasonic now making their own lenses?
Click to expand...

To the best of my knowledge, they always have. Panny built them to Leica specs, and had the right to use the name. But they were never actually built by Leica.
 
Jim Simon said:
To the best of my knowledge, they always have. Panny built them to Leica specs, and had the right to use the name. But they were never actually built by Leica.
Click to expand...

Interesting! Had no idea. I thought they actually were built by Leica, but this would make more sense as it would save Panny a lot of cash in production.
 
Well, I don't know, but I doubt Panasonic themselves is building the lenses, they're probably buying them from another manufacturer (whether Leica, or Leica designs manufactured by Fujinon, or ?) The Japanese manufacturers cooperate to a surprising extent; back in the DV days the Canon XL1 used to buy its chipset from Panasonic, Panasonic used to buy their LCD panels from Sony, and Sony's VX1000 bought its lens from Canon.

The 130/160 lens looks and feels and acts exactly like the Leica Dicomar designs from the HVX/HPX170 series, just more telephoto. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was the same Leica design, just more telephoto, although why it doesn't have the badge I don't know.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well, I don't know, but I doubt Panasonic themselves is building the lenses, they're probably buying them from another manufacturer (whether Leica, or Leica designs manufactured by Fujinon, or ?) The Japanese manufacturers cooperate to a surprising extent; back in the DV days the Canon XL1 used to buy its chipset from Panasonic, Panasonic used to buy their LCD panels from Sony, and Sony's VX1000 bought its lens from Canon.

The 130/160 lens looks and feels and acts exactly like the Leica Dicomar designs from the HVX/HPX170 series, just more telephoto. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was the same Leica design, just more telephoto, although why it doesn't have the badge I don't know.
Click to expand...
maybe too much post lens correction? ive read somewhere if a lens has too much post correction leica doesnt want their brand attached to it?
 
Barry_Green said:
The 130/160 lens looks and feels and acts exactly like the Leica Dicomar designs from the HVX/HPX170 series, just more telephoto. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was the same Leica design, just more telephoto, although why it doesn't have the badge I don't know.
Click to expand...

Barry, do you know if the 130/160 servo motor behavior is any better than the HMC-150 motor? I have never used the HPX170 but I find the HMC-150 motor/lens combo to be pretty generic for a lot of zooming. Thanks
 
Well, I did not want to say bad, but the HMC-150 zoom motor does not have very much speed difference from slow to quick and it is impossible to start and stop smoothly. It is kind of on or off.
 
It has three speeds, and no real ramping... all the Panny prosumer cams since the DVX have been like this... it's always been a weak spot for those of us who zoom. It would be great if the new ones were different... but... I'm not holding my breath!
 
I recently started using an XF300 and Canon included some very nice servo control for the type of product hte camera is. Very smooth starts and stops and if one turns the speed up to high in the menu it is pretty snappy. Almost up to a broacdcast lens. This has swayed me to the Canon over the upcoming Panasonics. The little bit of video posted about the 160 has a few long zooms and the servo seems to be acting the same as the previous models, same speed and ramping. But that is not a complete evaluation.
 
I have a hard time thinking why anyone would choose the 160 over the 250. There's 1080 60p in
the 160 and not the 250. I'd trade that all day long for the codec.The 250 just seems like such
a better camera. You never need to worry about getting an external recorder for better bitrate.

It's a little more expensive and p2 cards cost some, but everything else is vastly superior with that avcintra codec.
10bit color 100mb

All guesswork at this point of course.
 
Well, yeah... that's why it's more expensive! Because it does more. :thumbsup:

Reasons to get a 160 over a 250 would include if you already have some AVCCAM products and don't want to duplicate efforts and costs by going P2. With the 160 you could use the same inexpensive SDHC cards, and use all the same menus and controls, and have all the same features (like face detection and whatnot) that the 250 doesn't have.

Whereas if someone already had some P2 products, the 250 is just an absolute no-brainer, it's the obvious choice for them, if they can afford the additional $1k MSRP and the cost of a couple of P2 cards.

If someone doesn't have an investment in either platform, well... that's where the choice gets trickier. Even so, they're not the same camera. The shell is the same, the lens & MOS chips are the same, but all the internal guts seem different. The HPX250 is totally a handheld version of the HPX370. On the other hand, the 160 can record 12 continuous hours on a single card, and does full 60p overcranking in 1080p HD mode.
 
chauncythedog said:
I have a hard time thinking why anyone would choose the 160 over the 250. There's 1080 60p in
the 160 and not the 250. I'd trade that all day long for the codec.The 250 just seems like such
a better camera. You never need to worry about getting an external recorder for better bitrate.

It's a little more expensive and p2 cards cost some, but everything else is vastly superior with that avcintra codec.
10bit color 100mb

All guesswork at this point of course.
Click to expand...

The question is, is it $1,000 + the cost of P2 superior? For me, no. Not for 95% of what I do. Yes, I would much love AVC-I, but "love" and "need" are two different things, and given the dual record abilities of the 160/130, P2 for what I'm shooting more and more of... medical stuff that doesn't require a 10-bit 4:2:2 codec... simply isn't worth the extra cost. I'd rather take the $2,500 I save on it + P2 cards and put it towards better lighting and audio. Or an AF100. Frankly, I'm trying to debate between the 160 and 130 and whether the HD-SDI output and 1080p/60 is worth it for the rare times I would actually need it. I mean, I'm shooting on an HMC150 and folks are happy with the results.

I may end up picking up down the road, but all the benefits of AVC-I and P2 are benefits I just don't need right now. Your mileage may vary however.
 
I get it. I understand the 130, there the cost difference is significant. Serioulsly that sounds good for you. If avc2 is really good.

But the thing is if someone is going to spend 5K$(or whatever street is) on the 160, it seems everyone who spends that much, within a couple of months, wants a nanoflash so they can get to to 50mb bit rate and thereby qualify to submit to bbc, discovery, etc. (not that those qualifications make a lot of sense quality wise!) For $1k more you get that baked in and never have to deal with it.

Maybe it's just me but the price difference is minimal for all the more you get. I was actually pretty shocked that the cost of the 250 was as low as it is. That's all.
 
Oh, don't get me wrong. The gear geek in me drooled over what you get in the 250 for the price... bang for the buck really is quite ridiculous. But for someone like me who hasn't invested in P2, I would have to spend another $1,500 for cards plus maybe a card read on top of the extra $1,000 for the camera, and I personally really wouldn't get any practical benefit. Plus the dual record ability of the 160 has unique benefits for my work flow (the person I shoot a lot for lives 20 miles away, so handing him one card to review footage and make a cut list for me saves a 40 mile round trip drive). But I can only speak for myself and my own work flow. Frankly, if I had already invested in P2, I don't see why one wouldn't buy one over the 160.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top