Help on deciding on buying a camera

S

sharry

Well-known member
Hey all... I am looking in buying my first camcorder. I have been working since 4-5 years and have worked on various cameras like PD150, PD170, DSR250, DSR400, DVX100, Z1 and V1. My line of work is narrative filmmaking, music videos, documentary and a little bit of events. I am not very much interested in DSLRS because of their cons: Aliasing, moire, overheating, egronomics, limit of max size of clips, audio, codec and now after watching the SCCE documentary I'm not liking its resolution. So I want to buy a professional camcorder. I wanted to buy the Af100 but it gradually goes out of my budget because of the additional costs of lens and accessories. These are the cameras I have jot down which kind of fall in my budget:

- HVX200a
- HPX170
- HMC150
- HXR NX5

and probably

- EX1

I am looking at them used. Now I had a few questions.

- What is the difference between HVX200a and HVX200? I have heard a lot of bad things about the HVX200. People complain about the noise and low light and some even say about its image quality.

- HVX200a and HPX170 both shot at maximum quality in DVCPROHD. Is it 1920*1080. Can I call it true HD?

- What is the resolution lines of HVX200a and the HPX170?

- Should I be looking at the more consumerish NX5 and HMC150?

- How would you comapre EX1 with HVX200a and HPX170?

I have a budget of $2000-3500. Which camera would be good for me. I live in Pakistan. Broadcast here is still SD but content is created in HD. I would like a camera which would give me absolutley good quality of image and resolution. I would also like that the camera's resolution would be sufficient for theatrical distribution.

I would obviously want the EX1 but it also is a little out of my budget because I am also buying an editing station. But I would consider it if I get a good price on a used EX1.

Thanking you in advance. And sorry didn't know where to post.
 
The 200 and the 170 shoot DVCPROHD ~ this is a thin raster HD format and the 1080 mode is actually 1280 by 1080 not full raster 1920x1080. It's not a big deal, it'll fill the screen on playback when in a 1920x1080 edit.
With P2 you have to think about P2 Card costs too. You're posting this in a Panasonic forum so you're likely to hear more about panny cams.
BUy the newest and best cam you can afford. And get to work.
 
If you can afford the Af100 with one or two of the m43 lumix lenses... OMG.. I luuuurv it! HD stations take it, looks great on Blu Ray and with a Ninja attached you can shoot for Cinema...

Just my opinion but I am epicly biased becausemy Af100 is my new religion!
 
I know and I like the AF100... Its just that its not in my budget. When I look at interchangable lens I would go for primes. But even if I get a couple of zooms I will find something missing. So Af100 not for me at the moment! Later on in the future I might look at it.
 
NX5 and hmc150 do not have standard def modes, of course they can be downrezed in post. HPX170, HVX200 can be pushed farther color wise in post because of the 4:2:2 color sampling. I really like how my 170 transfers to standard def from 720p modes, but it will also shoot SD if the client needs the footy asap. the 200 models have the minidv tape drive which would good for that. You may end up having to go more consumerish if you can't afford a nice p2 card or two. I'd say get a 64gig for 1hr of the 1080, more than 2hrs in 720.
 
I own the HMC150 and I've used the HVX200 alot so I'll answer as best I can.

sharry said:
- What is the difference between HVX200a and HVX200? I have heard a lot of bad things about the HVX200. People complain about the noise and low light and some even say about its image quality.
Click to expand...

The 200a uses newer CCDs which were designed to increase low light sensitivity, decrease noise and provide more accurate color reproduction. The sharpness stayed the same. The HPX170 and HMC150 both use the same newer CCDS that the 200a does.

sharry said:
- HVX200a and HPX170 both shot at maximum quality in DVCPROHD. Is it 1920*1080. Can I call it true HD?

- What is the resolution lines of HVX200a and the HPX170?
Click to expand...

It is true HD, but it gets a little tricky to define. The 200a/170/150 chips resolve about 1440x810 worth of detail, so none of them are true 1080p cameras. The 200a/170 output 960x720 in 720p and 1280x1080 in 1080p, due to the standards of the DVCPROHD codec. The 150 uses AVCHD, which is capable of 1280x720 in 720p, and 1920x1080 in 1080p, although the detail resolved from the 150 chips will not give you 1920x1080 worth of detail.


sharry said:
- Should I be looking at the more consumerish NX5 and HMC150?
Click to expand...

I own the HMC150 and use the original hvx200 at work, but I've never used the NX5 so I can't comment on that. The HMC150's major advantage over the 170/200a is that it's cheaper, with much cheaper media and because of the codec, has much longer record times per GB.

sharry said:
- How would you comapre EX1 with HVX200a and HPX170?
Click to expand...

I've never used the EX1, but from my own previous research, it seems that the EX1 has the panny's beat in resolution. It'll do the full 1920x1080. It's better in low light, and has lower image noise, although the 170/150/200a are still remarkably clean themselves. Despite the technical inferiorities, alot of people really like the panasonic 'mojo' (ie: color reproduction) over the EX1.
 
I would say EX1 is the best in there. You can do ALOT of work with that camera, and with a Nano it is good to go for broadcast. It really beats out everything else on your list. Don't get me wrong, i love the HPX170 (I own one as well as my AF100, and we have several HVX200A/HPXs in our group), but if you can get an EX1, it is the better choice right now in fixed lens cameras... (untill the new panny's hit the street and we hear more about them). (Now, if you told me you would just be doing concerts and events, I would probably say the HPX due to flash banding, but that is pretty much the only situation where it outshines the EX1).
 
The slightly lower pixel count of the 170/200a (which is just a newer version of the 200) is really not a problem. Many are the shooters who use either the 170 or the 200a as a B cam for their top-end Varicams, very few people see the intercuts. The P2 cards are indeed a bit pricey, but the format is very robust, and I personally love it. Some of the lower data-rate cameras can give you a 'thin neg,' which is hard to push around in post sometimes. The 170 and the 200a are 8-bit, so there are limits, but the files have held up for me pretty well in compositing and grading. Also -- I'm and old phart and like the fact that each frame is a frame unto itself -- for me, it just works better when I start stacking things up.
Actually, it is is probably kinda hard to buy a bad camera right now -- so many advances have been made....my sage (old) advice would be to look at what you want to end up with image-wise, and find a camera that excels at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top