AJ-HPX 2000 vs. 500

MDCFILMS

MDCFILMS

Active member
We are shooting our next short on this camera. We need to negotiate a price but we will get it.

I didn't see a post for this camera? What does this camera have that's better than the HPX 500 except for like I think an extra p2 slot?

Please Inform?

Michael and Daniel Carberry
 
The 2000 has a lot more going for it than an extra P2 slot. Off the top of my head:

1) A true 1280x720 imager, which results in a sharper picture than the HPX 500 (the 500 has an SD imager which uses a form of interpolation to create an HD image. It's still an HD image, but not quite as sharp as the image produced by the 2000).

2) The 2000 is a little more light-sensitive, and noticeably less noisy than the 500. It also has some digitally enhanced zoom and night-shooting modes for news photography.

3) You can buy an add-on card for the 2000 that lets it record in a new codec called AVC-Intra (the HPX500 only records in DVCPRO HD, as far as high-def is concerned). AVC-Intra is 10 bits versus DVCPRO HD's 8 bits, and is said to capture the same detail as DVCPRO HD in about half the data rate. At 100 Mbps, AVC-Intra will capture a more data-rich image than DVCPRO HD. Panasonic's HPX3000 also captures to AVC-Intra, and it looks like Panasonic is going to move all of its pro cameras to that codec in the future....

4) You can attach an HD (as opposed to SD) viewfinder to the 2000, but not the 500.

5) The 2000 is about 1 pound heavier than the HPX, or maybe a little more.

6) The 2000 draws almost twice the power as the 500.

7) I believe the 500 has 4 inputs for mics, but the 2000 has 2.

8) The 2000 is more than twice the price of the 500!


Those are the major differences I can think of....
 
I don't think I would call the imagers on the HPX500 sd, there is nothing sd about it. It does use spatial-offset to achieve hd, but so do others. I wish my standard def sony 400 had the same "sd" imagers.
I think another difference between the HPX500 and the Hpx2000 is there is no CAC function on the 2000. The 3000 also has the CAC function.
 
well I think the 500 comes best out of the test except for the little more sharpness, if you will notice it anyway.
 
Yeah the CAC function is something to seriously think about if you don't have the $$$$ for better glass. CAC is a very nice little feature that you can easily update via downloadable lens files from Panasonic.

To make customers happy for not having the CAC function, Panasonic created a Proxy Video option into the 2000. With this optional card, the camera can create native Mpeg4 Proxy video clips that you can quickly download and send out as dailies from an IPhone, Blackberry or even dump it to an IPod for your clients viewing pleasure.

The 2k and 3K camera both have a GPS option that allows the shooter to add meta data information into the video clip that you can use later on in post. Think Amazing Race or Google Earth and you want to know where was the camera shooting and at what time. Kind of cool...

Another 2K feature is the Dynamic Range Stretching. A feature that reduces whiteout in very bright areas by averaging luminance values via divided individual sectors within a frame. However, I believe the caviat to DRS is that it also controls black levels and slightly lightens areas of dark detail. This can be ok, don't get me wrong. But if you use Auto Knee and DRS together, you can lose control of your blacks easily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top