HMC150 and HPX170

TigerFX said:
How do you do this? Is there a freely available codec available or have you purchased one?
Click to expand...

I use Vegas Pro to edit my AVCHD and don't have any problem with it. However, I do agree that if you need to do color correction or other intensive editing for your master, it is best to use an intermediate 10bit format that is less compressed. One I find very good for that is the CineForm codec. It works great as an intermediate format for me, and it is lossless. It seems to handle AVCHD very well, and a nice side benefit is that it also works as a plugin with Vegas Pro, so I can use it from the Vegas timeline, if I need to, or as a standalone transcoder.

Hope this helps.
All the best with your choice.
 
Luciano said:
I use Vegas Pro to edit my AVCHD and don't have any problem with it. However, I do agree that if you need to do color correction or other intensive editing for your master, it is best to use an intermediate 10bit format that is less compressed. One I find very good for that is the CineForm codec. It works great as an intermediate format for me, and it is lossless. It seems to handle AVCHD very well, and a nice side benefit is that it also works as a plugin with Vegas Pro, so I can use it from the Vegas timeline, if I need to, or as a standalone transcoder.

Hope this helps.
All the best with your choice.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, you can definitely use Cineform. It's quite popular and for a good reason. But just in case you didn't know, you can use Sony's included and free 10bit YUV codec which will give you similar results. I used it on an AVCHD/HDV wedding project that had tons of Bullet color correction as well as transitions etc. It worked very well as an intermediate AVI.
 
Brad_C said:
Don't get me wrong, you can definitely use Cineform. It's quite popular and for a good reason. But just in case you didn't know, you can use Sony's included and free 10bit YUV codec which will give you similar results. I used it on an AVCHD/HDV wedding project that had tons of Bullet color correction as well as transitions etc. It worked very well as an intermediate AVI.
Click to expand...

Thank you for pointing it out, Brad.
The point for TigerFX seems to be that there are various options to streamline the process of the AVCHD from the 150 and for many of us it does not pose a problem. Personally I love it, and chose it over the HPX170 primarily because it is essentially the same hardware (at least for the most part), but it eliminates the extremely high costs of P2 workflow.

Either way you go, you will have to compromise with one thing or another. For me the final decision came from my wallet. The 150 did fit the need, and I was able to use the extra $ for additional equipment I needed.
 
Luciano said:
Thank you for pointing it out, Brad.
The point for TigerFX seems to be that there are various options to streamline the process of the AVCHD from the 150 and for many of us it does not pose a problem. Personally I love it, and chose it over the HPX170 primarily because it is essentially the same hardware (at least for the most part), but it eliminates the extremely high costs of P2 workflow.

Either way you go, you will have to compromise with one thing or another. For me the final decision came from my wallet. The 150 did fit the need, and I was able to use the extra $ for additional equipment I needed.
Click to expand...

Hey, no problem. Sharing info is what we should be doing.

I was in a situation similar to yours. Trying to start up my videography hasn't been easy and it's a harsh reality when you see how much all of this truly costs. For me, I fell in love with the HMC150 the minute I laid eyes on it. Only sub-par results would have steered me away. I was already using AVCHD on some small projects and while it did cause some initial headaches, I found ways to work around it and be ok with it. So when I saw the 150 come out, it didn't worry me at all.

Each new format that comes around is going to be one that is a headache at first. AVCHD is VERY efficient in storing beautiful images and a very tight space. That is always going to cause issues down the line. It will get better. Besides, using SD cards for recording is in my opinion...fantastic. Small, cheap, and continuing to get better. Rugged too.

My 150 shows up Monday, and I can't wait. Like a kid in a candy store. I hope some people around here can realize how good they have it when they can afford 3 and 4 of these cameras like it's nothing. "It's just a tool". It's more than that for me. My 150 is going to be my right hand man and I'm going to take care of it. I don't get opportunities like this very often and I happy that my first choice for a cam is a smart one.

:thumbup:
 
TigerFX said:
Yeah but there's really no way to use this with the HMC150, right? Not until there's an affordable HDMI capture card for laptops (HMC150 has no Firewire, real shame) :(
Click to expand...
That is correct. AVCHD cannot be streamed over a firewire connection, so the only way you could use something like OnLocation with any AVCHD cam would be if they were to support capture cards.
 
Cineform is more than 10-bit...it is wavelet compression instead of DCT...and very high bandwidth, similar to ProRes (which is DCT). In Propect HD there are also additional tools.

I am using DV Rack, which Adobe bought to create OnLocation. It looks like they took some features out of the CS4 version. There were quality monitors and other stuff that seems gone.
 
DavidNJ said:
Cineform is more than 10-bit...it is wavelet compression instead of DCT...and very high bandwidth, similar to ProRes (which is DCT). In Propect HD there are also additional tools.

I am using DV Rack, which Adobe bought to create OnLocation. It looks like they took some features out of the CS4 version. There were quality monitors and other stuff that seems gone.
Click to expand...

Right David. Adobe seems to have the habit of doing this. Buy out a good competitive product and then take some features out to make it fit their line of products. But that's another topic.
 
thanks everyone for the debate. It's a bit different for me in that I own a lot of existing equipment already since I started out about 5yrs ago with my DVX. I have mic's, monitors, rigs, capture card, etc. so I'm looking also looking at which camera would fit in best with what I have.
The nice thing for me about the 170 is it also shoots DV and that'd fit with anything I do on the DVX.
 
I have not used the 170 but after reading all this I should have bought that instead if the 150.
I also have big probs w/vegas 8 Pro and the AVCHD files(thank u sony). But one thing (or 2) not talked about is the fact that the 150 has pretty crappy response in auto focus, and auto iris isn't a lot better. I do mostly manual stuff, but it would be nice to have something at least as good as the DVX in this area when needed.
It does give great images, if you can get them edited and mastered.
 
Id have to say the support for AVCHD is growing very fast... vegas 9.0 is a big improvement over 8.0 and I can now preview the files with VLC player!

Auto focus works best in 30 or 60, but hey we all should shoot manual.

I was hoping someone would come up with a frame rate hack... Id like to do some time lapse.
 
vegas 9.0 is a big improvement over 8.0 and I can now preview the files with VLC player
Click to expand...
I decided (so far) not to upgrade to 9,0 - you have to read a while to find that they support SONY AVCHD. But up front they only say AVCHD. If its true what I've read that Panny and Sony worked on that format/codec together and then Sony tweaked it to work only with equipment they are friendly with, I'm not interested in shelling out another pile of cash for what I see as a minor upgrade to a possibly fading NLE.
I do not pretend to know a lot, or even a little about the technical aspects of this stuff. But I am getting old and crusty and am not willing to spend resources (particularly time) trying make expensive things play nicely together. It Just Ain't My Job

I will find a solution hopefully sooner rather than too late.
 
Interesting. I haven't made a decision yet, but am leaning more to the 170 or maybe the next model up with both tape and digital recording...
 
The other pro editing software out there also supports AVCHD. BTW You can have Vegas 8 and 9 installed at the same time.

Every new file format pushes the limits of old computers and software. I have seen many file types take years to come around. If you can edit it (vegas 9) and play it raw (VLC player), then what more is needed?
 
Very simple.
You want variable frame rates?
You want time lapse?
You can afford it?
99% of of professional videographers don't need or care about this for most projects.
You need these things? Spend 3000 bucks more for an HMC170.
You don't? The 150 for half the price. Or two 150's for one 170.
Actually, if you can afford a 170, get an EX1. 1/2" sensors. No comparison.
Simple.
 
no firewire out on the 150 is the only thing I don't like.0. I do want the variable frame rates however so I'm stuck really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top