HPX250: can you dial in white balance?
- Thread starter JamesVibe
- Start date
Nope, too bad because that is something I really got used to with the XL H1. The AF100 has it and I hoped this camera would as well (I also wish it had the ISO option instead of just Gain but that's minor).
As for the camera itself, it's really pretty amazing for 5 grand (see my post Good, Bad and Ugly below). However, personally, I still prefer the richness DVCPRO HD - and I think my HPX500, although considered "long in the tooth", really produces a nicer, more tactile image. But for the resolution junkies you can't find much to dislike about the 250 - there is a little "jello" - just discovered that yesterday when shooting in a forest at sunset - I had thought it was virtually non-existant, but it does crop up occasionally,
As for the camera itself, it's really pretty amazing for 5 grand (see my post Good, Bad and Ugly below). However, personally, I still prefer the richness DVCPRO HD - and I think my HPX500, although considered "long in the tooth", really produces a nicer, more tactile image. But for the resolution junkies you can't find much to dislike about the 250 - there is a little "jello" - just discovered that yesterday when shooting in a forest at sunset - I had thought it was virtually non-existant, but it does crop up occasionally,
Mark Williams
Veteran
I really find it difficult to understand why Panasonic would not have improved the HPX170 with higher res CCD's a sharper lens, and slower zoom control vs. what looks like taking a step backward IMO on the HPX250 with CMOS, and possible "jello" . I am sure its a technology/cost thing but I really want to like/buy the HPX250 but I am so used to "rock solid" imagery and pleasant look of DVCPROHD footage on the HPX170.
Yes thats another issue I would like Barry to let the Panasonic developers know for the next FW update: dialable Kelvin for White balance! Please! Today I tried and tried to get 6.2 k
but it gave me 7.4 k or 8.0 k with whatever white balance card I held in front of it in the end I gave up and used ATW since it looked more like what it was.
If in PRST we could at least dial in our desired Kelvin.....
but it gave me 7.4 k or 8.0 k with whatever white balance card I held in front of it in the end I gave up and used ATW since it looked more like what it was.
If in PRST we could at least dial in our desired Kelvin.....
I really don't want this to seem flippant, but that cam already exists. Its called the HPX3100. Get the sharpest lens you like with great control, full raster image on CCDs, record to Intra or DVXProHD if thats what you want. Sure sounds great to me except for a price. Every manufacturer except JVC has gone the CMOS route in their smaller chip cams to get resolution into a less expensive box. And I don't believe the JVC will offer any image IQ over the HPX170, though others may know more about that. Not saying I prefer it, but there is a reality.
Grant
Mark Williams
Veteran
Grant,
Yes, an excellent cam by all accounts. But way out of my price range and not the size/weight that I could easily carry backpacking. But it is nice to know that it exists. Maybe there will be some "trickle down" to a smaller package.
Yes, an excellent cam by all accounts. But way out of my price range and not the size/weight that I could easily carry backpacking. But it is nice to know that it exists. Maybe there will be some "trickle down" to a smaller package.
The problem for me - an aging, fiercely independent veteran documentary filmmaker who has always needed to own his own equipment - is that I can no longer afford to plunk down $40,000 for a camera that may become obsolete in less time than I can pay for it. I just barely covered my HPX500 ($27,000 with lens, 16x9 finder and accessories) when the pundits deemed it inferior in all respects to the current crop of artillery. Consequently, in order to keep producing without having to take on jobs that I don't really want, I need to depend on these sub-$10,000 cameras.. and since I like Panasonic, these are my choices - AF100 and HPX250 - I own both and interchange them for specific needs.
The Jello issue I mentioned above cropped up in one complex shot that really taxed the chip and the codec.. I'm not excusing it, but I also don't intend to take out a mortgage on my house to get better.. I still have the HPX500 after all.. F___ the pundits!
The Jello issue I mentioned above cropped up in one complex shot that really taxed the chip and the codec.. I'm not excusing it, but I also don't intend to take out a mortgage on my house to get better.. I still have the HPX500 after all.. F___ the pundits!
Dino
Veteran
Mac, to be fair, the HPX3100 is $20K plus lens and VF, so $30K without cards. It only holds two P2 cards, no 720P, no off-speed frame rates.
There is no way a full raster CCD would work in a palmcorder due to power and heat issues. The HPX250 has less noise and more resolution than our HPX2700, which WAS a $40K camera body, never mind adding a $30K 22X lens!
BTW, a couple of posts make it seem like DVCPRO HD is not an option on the 250. It is, I shot today in DVCPRO HD, 720/30PN with our HPX250.
There is no way a full raster CCD would work in a palmcorder due to power and heat issues. The HPX250 has less noise and more resolution than our HPX2700, which WAS a $40K camera body, never mind adding a $30K 22X lens!
BTW, a couple of posts make it seem like DVCPRO HD is not an option on the 250. It is, I shot today in DVCPRO HD, 720/30PN with our HPX250.
We can always wish. Sometime this year or early next, I will probably upgrade, so I am in this internal crisis. I'd like a shoulder mount, I'd like to use my Canon glass, records to P2-Intra, and I'd prefer not to spend over 10k without glass. Isn't going to happen, but I can always dream. Maybe a C-300???
Grant
I picked up this camera a couple weeks ago and have been very impressed with it. We use if mainly for shooting an online show but also do some corporate production with it as well. As for the specific question on if you can dial in a specific color temp the answer would be no. However you do have controls to shift the color phase, as well as independent adjustments to the A and B white balance channels that will shift the temperature colder or warmer, but not in specific kelvin temperatures.
Of course if you're looking for shallow DOF stuff this is not the camera for you. But if your doing run and gun ENG stuff, or even studio stuff that doesn't need a shallow DOF then it's a great camera. Here's a couple links to shows that were shot with the camera.
This is an episode of the weekly online show we produce. The footage was doctored a little in post. There is some softening done and the blacks are crashed a bit. It was shot AVC-Intra 100 720 30pn. The encode is an H.264 at 5mbps. then uploaded to Vimeo.
http://m2digitalpost.com/2011/12/bariatrictv-com/
This is a quick product install video we did. It was shot in all natural light, no additional lighting was used. It was shot AVC-Intra 100 720 30pn. The encode is an H.264 at 5mbps. then uploaded to Vimeo. The adjusted scene file settings are as follows...
Chroma Level +4
Master Ped -3
Gama Cinelike D
Knee Low
Matrix Cine-Like
Skin Tone Detain on
V Detail Freq Thin
http://m2digitalpost.com/2011/12/zerowaste-usa-instalation-video/
Again we have been very impressed with the camera. In early January we'll be shooting a corporate piece inside of the cab of a semi truck. The smaller size of the camera is going to be a major plus for us on this shoot. We also do some press conference coverage and event videos that many times have us shooting speakers in large rooms. The 22x zoom lens is going to be a huge help in those situations.
Mike
M2 Digital Post Inc.
San Diego, CA.
Of course if you're looking for shallow DOF stuff this is not the camera for you. But if your doing run and gun ENG stuff, or even studio stuff that doesn't need a shallow DOF then it's a great camera. Here's a couple links to shows that were shot with the camera.
This is an episode of the weekly online show we produce. The footage was doctored a little in post. There is some softening done and the blacks are crashed a bit. It was shot AVC-Intra 100 720 30pn. The encode is an H.264 at 5mbps. then uploaded to Vimeo.
http://m2digitalpost.com/2011/12/bariatrictv-com/
This is a quick product install video we did. It was shot in all natural light, no additional lighting was used. It was shot AVC-Intra 100 720 30pn. The encode is an H.264 at 5mbps. then uploaded to Vimeo. The adjusted scene file settings are as follows...
Chroma Level +4
Master Ped -3
Gama Cinelike D
Knee Low
Matrix Cine-Like
Skin Tone Detain on
V Detail Freq Thin
http://m2digitalpost.com/2011/12/zerowaste-usa-instalation-video/
Again we have been very impressed with the camera. In early January we'll be shooting a corporate piece inside of the cab of a semi truck. The smaller size of the camera is going to be a major plus for us on this shoot. We also do some press conference coverage and event videos that many times have us shooting speakers in large rooms. The 22x zoom lens is going to be a huge help in those situations.
Mike
M2 Digital Post Inc.
San Diego, CA.
Kolor-Pikker
Well-known member
From what I've heard, the 3100 has a fairly audible cooling fan that can be heard in a quite room, audible enough to be picked up by the on-board mic in fact... and it can't be regulated.
Yes, but there are some big problems with camcorders regardless, and some things that need to change:
1. No middle ground. You have the sub-$10k range of cameras available in working kits, and then it jumps to big-buck stuff that needs more big-buck stuff just to work. Problem is, pundits mainly want the the big-buck features.
2. Lenses are too damn expensive. Some people have compared SD and HD lenses, compared kit, $10k and $30 lenses, and the verdict is that few ENG zooms are very good or even noticeably different in performance, regardless of price. When someone's straining to see the difference between the kit zoom on the PMW 350 and a top-of-the-line brand name, then something's definitely wrong.
3. Not enough modularity. Camcorders already have user-replaceable parts and components that can be accessed with just a screwdriver, it would be trivial to go the ALEXA route and make an upgradable camcorder system where the sensor block, processor, codec board, media slot and so on can all be swapped out.
When dealing with something in high price ranges, it's difficult to release a new product unless there are enough improvements for it to be sensible, but a completely modular system would allow upgrading components as new tech becomes available immediately, at a lower cost, and less headaches. Additionally, you could simply pick the features without paying for what you don't want, like putting together a PC.
It's nice that the large-sensor camera revolution has stirred things up a bit, but not in the way I wanted to see. Prices for the high-end stuff should come down by about half, because as it is, large sensor cameras make for a fairly appealing alternative in many cases, and then the release of a new camera system that actually has modern features and can keep up with the recent surge of technological advancements.
I too would like an easy to use control for adjusting both temperature (yellow/blue) and tint (magenta/green).
Dino
Veteran
Yes, the HPX3700 and even the 720 native CCD HPX2700 have fans that can be heard from time to time. These cameras utilize CCD's that use a lot more power than CMOS and they have 32 bit vs. 18-20 bit DSP's, and of course AVC-Intra. We know how hot the P2 cards are when pulled out of the camera right after recording.
The secret to the low cost HD lenses, those under $15K, is CAC. This equalizes the the $6K lens with the $25K + lens, same as how the palmcorders have so little CA. If these cameras could resolve more than 1080x1920, we would see more corner softness.
Even with the best 2/3" HD ENG zoom lenses, I see more CA and port holing than with the newer palmcorders.
No middle ground - that really is it in a nutshell.. I've said before too many times that the problem for a truly "independent" filmmaker is the need to keep current with equipment, but do it so you can still make a living. When I could count on the technology to remain unchanged for 5-10 years, I could justify spending more money.
But now, with the technology changing (often needlessly, IMHO) every 1-2 years, I really have to keep my costs under $20,000. Right now I'm doing that by mixing the AF100 (which, relative to this thread DOES HAVE DIAL IN WB) and the HPX250 - but it would be nice to have the features of those two cameras in one box.
Simply.. AF100's dial in WB, ISO/Gain choice, VFR, interchangeable lenses and larger sensor (could be 3/4" folks, don't really need that much DOF and just think of the CAC zooms we could use) combined with the back end of the HPX250... P2 and AVC-I. I know, there may be a VFR issue and heat problems - but I remember when that was the problem when people wanted 16x9 on the DVX (those long-ago pre-HD days).
Stick a modular viewfinder on that package and price it near the HPX500. That would be something.
But now, with the technology changing (often needlessly, IMHO) every 1-2 years, I really have to keep my costs under $20,000. Right now I'm doing that by mixing the AF100 (which, relative to this thread DOES HAVE DIAL IN WB) and the HPX250 - but it would be nice to have the features of those two cameras in one box.
Simply.. AF100's dial in WB, ISO/Gain choice, VFR, interchangeable lenses and larger sensor (could be 3/4" folks, don't really need that much DOF and just think of the CAC zooms we could use) combined with the back end of the HPX250... P2 and AVC-I. I know, there may be a VFR issue and heat problems - but I remember when that was the problem when people wanted 16x9 on the DVX (those long-ago pre-HD days).
Stick a modular viewfinder on that package and price it near the HPX500. That would be something.
Last edited: