Dr. Strangecam

R

radicalkat

Member
Hey folks,

I've been eyeing the HMC 150 for a while. Then Panasonic goes and changes everything. So here's the movie I want to make now: "Dr. Strangecam, or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the MOS." Can you guys help me get there?

-Adam
 
I've worked with CCD chip cams since the 1990s. I now shoot on EX3s and XF305s. Honestly, I don't even notice the CMOS chips. They make great images, I do notice that.
In my day-to-day shooting with CMOS cams, I never notice any problems with jellocam. If that's your biggest worry, I find it to be unfounded, and I was one of those who dreaded the jellocam effect. In fact, I bought an HPX500 for that very reason. Now, it's sold and gone and I am quite happy with my CMOS cams.
The AG 160 and 130 seem to be very good cams. Certainly better than the 150. If I were you, I'd hold out for the new models.

edit - I see the word "notice" in my post twice, yet when I try to edit one out, there's only one word in my post, but it keeps posting the word "notice" twice.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that input. What kind of work do you do? I'm mostly interested in short films. I just worry about tracking, handheld, and steadycam type shots, shots from inside moving cars, etc...
 
I do whatever pays. Commercials, sports, docu, instructional, web-based, short films. I do tripod and handheld.
Aagain, don't sweat the CMOS chips. It seems the majority of cams are going to them. If you decide to go to large sensor cams like the AF100 and FS100, they're all CMOS. Even the Alexa, F65 and Epic are CMOS.
 
On the other hand, CMOS does suffer from flash banding, which is quite noticeable and very ugly.

CMOS is the devil's spawn in imaging technology. It really ought to be abandoned forever, much like the tube was in favor of solid state.

(Funny how we seem to be going backwards on this one, though, leaving behind the older superior technology for the newer, inferior one. And all us little sheep follow along, bleating blissfully away...)
 
Who says its inferior technology? Try to make a full raster 1902x1080 CCD chip smaller than 2/3". CMOS runs cooler, more pixels can be placed in a smaller frame, no vertical smear (which is quite noticeable and very ugly); it does have its advantages.
I've used both, I'll work with either.
 
I've shot both. I've come to like the sharpness from the CMOS and hate the noise from the 1/3" CCD in low light.

If you are shooting shorts then there is nothing in CMOS you should be scared of unless you plan on shooting strobing lights. The CMOS jello doesn't rear it's ugly head unless you are (a) unstable or (b) panning too quickly.
 
How is CMOS like when shooting around people with camera flashes going off or strobe lighting? Fast pans? Looks like many of the other issues have been fixed with electronic magicry, have these issues? I remember seeing a still from Barry of a planes propeller that looked like it was made of rubber.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't alot of this depend on which cmos sensor we are talking about? Every single low end (sub $1000) camcorder I've seen suffers from flash banding. The high end stuff from the major players seems minimally effected by jello. I have two HMC150s and come from having two DVX100Bs. It was a major selling point for me but in the future I will genuinely not fear it as much due to the progress over the past 4 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top