Going Insane!

[Sand&Fog]

I am about to embark on perhaps my biggest purchase/investment yet. I just graduated form film school and am currently prepping for a bunch of projects ranging from music videos to short films to commercials as well as documentaries. I have prepared to make a camera purchase but despite hours f combing through this forum as well as reviews I am still left indecisive and uncertain as ever. My choices are standing between buying the HVX200A, HPX170, or the HMC150 with a Letus Adapter. I understand there are big differences with pros and cons for each one, but there are few big things that I still don't quite get!

1.) I remember reading a review on here by Barry that reviewed the HMC150 to have just as good of an image as the hpx170 in 720p mode. However, though I know it is not accurate, all the footage clips I have seen so far seem to not match the HVX200A/HPX170's image. As far as the 720p mode, is there a huge difference?

2.) One of the biggest things I have been looking at is the Waveform/vectorscope that is included. I have worked with Leader's products before and I understand how incredible it is to have one of these. But I have yet to see this features really reviewed yet. How good are the waveform/vectorscopes in these cameras? Are they fairly accurate? and how does the hpx waveform compare the hmc's? Last of all why the heck doesn't the hvx200A have one?

3.) Because I am doing a bunch of documentary work it was suggested to me to buy the hmc150. I understand that I can get memory cheaper, and more of it. However, I am not doing tons of run and gun shooting. And I have seen a few docs shot on P2 cards that look incredible.

4.) Even if the hvx/hpx has a better image, would it be more worth my while to get the hmc150 with a letus adapter? Would you choose a lesser image with DOF control?


Please feel free to address any of these comments and give me you opinion. I need all the help I can get. Thank you!

 

[mb72378]

Reply to #3

Reply to #3

As far as #3 goes for me, I don't feel like it's that much of a big deal to use the hvx200 for documentary. I have one (hvx) and I actually just finished up an all day event that I am doing a documentary on. What I do is bring my laptop with me, when the card is full, I dump the footage and format the card. And you don't have to have a laptop with a P2 drive, I just plug my camera in and transfer via USB 2.0 and its quick and easy. Im very happy with the recording time on my 16GB P2 card so I feel that the statement "its not good for docu work" is completely bogus. (unless u dont have a laptop)

 

[grimrebes]

1.) I remember reading a review on here by Barry that reviewed the HMC150 to have just as good of an image as the hpx170 in 720p mode. However, though I know it is not accurate, all the footage clips I have seen so far seem to not match the HVX200A/HPX170's image. As far as the 720p mode, is there a huge difference?

I am unsure, but I would say in terms of established workflow and industry standard, I would suggest the HPX170. If you are handing the footage off to anyone, I'd go with the DVCProHD cams...

2.) One of the biggest things I have been looking at is the Waveform/vectorscope that is included. I have worked with Leader's products before and I understand how incredible it is to have one of these. But I have yet to see this features really reviewed yet. How good are the waveform/vectorscopes in these cameras? Are they fairly accurate? and how does the hpx waveform compare the hmc's? Last of all why the heck doesn't the hvx200A have one?

The HVX200a doesn't have one because... Who knows? I am sure someone else couchcoughBarrycoughcough could talk at greater lengths about this with regards to marketing, technology and component availability... I find the waveform on my HPX to be one of the most valuable elements of the camera. I just did a shoot on the beach with some surfers during sunset, and our eyes compensate (even on my LCD it would seem) for the loss in light, which is constantly changing at that hour of the day. Proper exposure would have been hit or miss for me without it. I don't really use the vectorscope, but for someone working in a studio/narrative environment, I can see it being quite invaluable for set design, wardrobe, lighting, etc...

In short, I would say its pretty damn accurate.

3.) Because I am doing a bunch of documentary work it was suggested to me to buy the hmc150. I understand that I can get memory cheaper, and more of it. However, I am not doing tons of run and gun shooting. And I have seen a few docs shot on P2 cards that look incredible.

I don't know if there is a question in there I shoot docs with my HPX and FS-100. I don't have the money for a few 64gb p2 cards, but I rarely have issues, and when I do, its always human error. James Longley, director of Iraq in Fragments and Gaza Strip, told me a few months back that he has been working with the HVX on some upcoming work, so I'd say its a pretty solid setup overall, especially if you aren't run and gun.

4.) Even if the hvx/hpx has a better image, would it be more worth my while to get the hmc150 with a letus adapter? Would you choose a lesser image with DOF control?

Correct me if I am wrong, but the HMC150 is about $2k less than the HPX170. In an ideal world, I would suggest getting the HPX170, because even in doc shooting, and especially in commercial/music video production, variable frame rate shooting is just another option in your bag of tricks. I don't know what you shot with in film school, but I shot a number of projects in school on film because of variable frame rates (before the days of the HVX). The trade off is, you can spend that $2k on a letus adapter. My suggestion for you is perhaps to go to a boutique like Abel or Zacuto and try out a full rig with the 35 adapter attached. I realize it takes some getting used to, but especially on Doc shooting run and gun style, sometimes the depth of field that the 1/3" chips come with is a blessing in disguise.

Pulling focus can be very challenging in addition to the adapter and the 20 other things you will have going on with camera and your subject. Its a great tool to have, for sure, and there are days that I wish I had one, but if your image isn't in focus, you don't have much of an image to work with. I shot with an HPX900 a few months ago with a beautiful fujinon zoom on it, the images it produced were stunning, but I def needed an AC to help verify focus with the onboard monitor, and that was only a 2/3" ccd. Most folks I know need an additional onboard monitor to be sure their focus is spot on, so tack on another couple $$$$ with the cost of the 35 adapter, plus batteries to power it, etc etc...

This may just be me, but I have found that the kind of docs I have been working on, more often than not, less is more. Less gear, less stuff, less putzing and futzing with things... The more you have, the more that can go wrong... The simpler the setup, the simpler the shoot.

Also, with all of your acquisitions, consider lighting. Purchase, rent, whatever, but if you are doing music videos and commercials and other stuff, be sure never to skimp out on lighting. There is another thread that discusses how important DOF is in creating a filmic look, and I (as some others have said on the thread) that lighting tends to be infinitely more important. One person accurately suggested that many poor DoP's fall back on resolution and dynamic range to solve their filmic, cinematic look issue, but I have worked with guys that have shot SD,HD,16&35mm, and lighting is their tool always. I have seen better results done with a DVX than with the RED for sure, not because of the camera, but because of the people behind it.

Hope this helped with some food for thought.

 

[Barry_Green]

I remember reading a review on here by Barry that reviewed the HMC150 to have just as good of an image as the hpx170 in 720p mode. However, though I know it is not accurate, all the footage clips I have seen so far seem to not match the HVX200A/HPX170's image. As far as the 720p mode, is there a huge difference?

I think the 170 and 150 would be most comparable in 720p mode. That's the mode where the 150's codec is going to be most efficient, and its additional horizontal resolution will help cancel out the 170's additional chroma resolution. In my experimentation with the two, I'd say the 720p mode (especially 720/24p) is quite comparable between them.

2.) One of the biggest things I have been looking at is the Waveform/vectorscope that is included. I have worked with Leader's products before and I understand how incredible it is to have one of these. But I have yet to see this features really reviewed yet. How good are the waveform/vectorscopes in these cameras? Are they fairly accurate? and how does the hpx waveform compare the hmc's? Last of all why the heck doesn't the hvx200A have one?

The 200A doesn't have one because the 200 didn't have it. The 200A is unchanged from an operational/software/features point of view, other than having the new chipset.

The 170 and 150 waveform and vectorscopes are identical to each other. The waveform is pretty sweet, the vectorscope doesn't have labels for the colors so you just kind of have to know what's what. I love the waveform, the vectorscope gets less use.