for indie cinema: HD (eg HPX 170) v DVX100BP--please enlighten

D

DeanTaylor

New member
Hello

I'm casting about for the best tool for intended dramatic production of my own scripts.

Please enlighten: would the DVX100B offer more for cinematic ventures than, say, an HD camera--e.g., the HMC150 or HPX 170? Which is to say I will definitely not be a wedding photographer or corporate filmmaker. No special effects, bells and whistles.

My concerns are more in the area of editing, sound and image quality in a controlled environment. The ability to connect shotgun boom mic, lens changes, filters...

Had you seen Coppola's film Rumblefish--or work by Malick?

I'm willing to pay more for the optics...I'll probably explore the nuances to be found in b & w...

At any rate, please advise as to camera options. The trend of opinion--eg the comments at Amazon on the glories of the DVX100a for indie filmmakers--scants High Definition as a viable option, eg HPX170/HMC150. As I'm beginning my homework I will read all commentary and evaluate...


Thanks


Dean
 
i own a hpx170, and i used to own a sony vx2100 before i got my hd hpx. I must say its a Huge upgrade, an well worth it, form better colors, HD picture,
better codec, ect... i recommend HMC150 Since it records to SDHC cards ( much cheaper than p2 cards)
 
Neither the HPX nor the HMC are really "cinematic". If you're looking for that look and you'll be shooting in controlled environments, I'd say get something with interchangeable lenses...like the AF100 or the FS100. If you're on a budget, a DSLR might do the trick.
 
Last edited:
My concerns are more in the area of editing, sound and image quality in a controlled environment. The ability to connect shotgun boom mic, lens changes, filters...
Click to expand...

Audio-wise, and for the ability to connect microphones, the DVX, the HPX170, and the HMC150 are exactly the same.

The HPX170 "offers" absolutely everything the DVX100 does (literally; there's a DVX100 inside of it, and an improved one at that), and considerably more. Of the three you mention, it is hands-down the best camera.
 
When I first made the move to HD a few years ago (DVX to Sony FX7) I was downconverting most of my footage anyway, so didn't notice a massive difference in the quality of the footage. Then I started editing in HD, and while I noticed a little difference, I think it still felt like the footage was essentially the same (because it was from the same camera). Then I started editing footage shot on other HD cams too (Sony NX5, HPX170, XHA1, etc) and again I noticed a little increase in the quality.

Then I went back and watched some of my old DVX footage, and it looked terrible. Soft, dull, and ancient. I'd been making a gradual shift to HD and in the process of taking baby steps had managed to overlook just how much of a difference it made. The difference between the DVX and current HD camcorders is huge - and the gap is just getting bigger.

My advice would be to go HD. You won't regret it, and the quality of images will be much higher than with the DVX. Not to take anything away from the DVX, but it's nearly 10 years old. That is very ancient in the world of electronics these days.
 
thank you John! I appreciate your taking the time...

BTW, if you know of a website/forum geared to cinematic discussion for

Indie filmmakers, please advise.

Dean
 
Much obliged, Dave, for sharing your expertise!

BTW, if you know of a website/forum geared to cinematic discussion for Indie filmmakers, please advise.

Dean
 
Sincere thanks for the thoughtful response, Phil!

BTW, if you know of a website/forum geared to cinematic discussion for Indie filmakers, please advise.


Dean
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top