HMC150 vs. XH A1...Help!

D

dUNIT

Member
I'm on the verge of purchasing a new camera in the $3,000 range and don't know wether to go with the HMC or the XH A1.

Please give me your opinions and explain why as much as you can.

Big thanks in advance.
 
It would be helpful to know what type of productions you will be using the camera for, but I can give you some general advice. Both cameras will give you really nice imagery, but my personal preference is the HMC150. If you went to a Canon website you will probably find the opposite.

Here is my list of things that the XH-A1 does better than the HMC150
1. 20x zoom lens.
2. Iris ring on the lens.

Here is my list of things that the HMC150 does better than the XH-A1
1. Better low light.
2. Lighter weight.
3. Wider lens.
4. Better LCD viewfinder.
5. Better use of focus aides like expanded focus working while you are recording.
6. Better manual zoom. You can snap the zoom in for focus much quicker than the XH-A1.
7. When choosing to see more detail in the LCD the zebras still work.
8. AVCHD is a more robust format than HDV.
9. DRS, Dynamic Range Stretch.
10. Panny Mojo.

I'm sure other can add to the list, but this is the top 10 that come to mind off the top of my head.
 
also its slightly more difficult to hand off a HDV tape to a producer. they may need your camera or another canon camera to capture the tape. the "P2" like workflow of the SD cards means you can hand the producer a SDcard or a HDD with the footage on it.
 
XH A1 uses high definition CCD, while HMC150's CCDS have a resolution of 960x540, using pixel shifting to achieve high def, so it does not look as Sharp as XH A1. Usually pixel shifting visually increase resolution by 50%, so from 960x540 to 1440x810, while HDV is 1440x1080.
If I have $$$, I would buy both, but in any case when I need sharpness, I will use my SONY HDR-HC3
 
lifepo4 said:
XH A1 uses high definition CCD, while HMC150's CCDS have a resolution of 960x540, using pixel shifting to achieve high def, so it does not look as Sharp as XH A1. Usually pixel shifting visually increase resolution by 50%, so from 960x540 to 1440x810, while HDV is 1440x1080.
If I have $$$, I would buy both, but in any case when I need sharpness, I will use my SONY HDR-HC3
Click to expand...

Panasonic was fully aware of this when they designed it. Pixel surface area is the main determiner of low light sensitivity. Panasonic was correct that 1080 is too many pixels to squeeze onto a 1/3" sensor and still maintain reasonable low light capability. The XH-A1 is a great camcorder but suffers greatly in low light. The sensors on the HMC will produce increasingly more detail and better color reproduction with significantly less noise than the XH-A1 the lower the light goes. This significant low light increase is gained at a minor and almost unnoticeable decrease in resolution.

This is the same reason that the HC-3 has better low light sensitivity than the HC-7, despite the HC-7's slightly larger sensor.
 
I do not have a full comprehension of what all of those number mean, but I can confirm this. As the scene gets darker, the XH-A1 gets really soft, but the HMC150 holds up well in low light scenes.
 
lifepo4 said:
XH A1 uses high definition CCD, while HMC150's CCDS have a resolution of 960x540, using pixel shifting to achieve high def, so it does not look as Sharp as XH A1. Usually pixel shifting visually increase resolution by 50%, so from 960x540 to 1440x810, while HDV is 1440x1080.
If I have $$$, I would buy both, but in any case when I need sharpness, I will use my SONY HDR-HC3
Click to expand...

The HMC has got progressive CCDs and it can produce 60 (50 for PAL) progressive images per second while the XH-A1 has got CCDs which can only produce interlaced images. The progressive mode of the XH-A1 is simply deinterlacing.

So when you're shooting 1080i the XH-A1 definitely produces sharper images but when shooting progressive the XH-A1 should lose vertical sharpness through deinterlacing.
 
i have both cameras in my arsenal and i gotta say......i have no idea which camera is better. i love 60p, cheap REUSEABLE media, lightness and better balance, wider lens...i dont agree with mark in that the HMC has a better viewfinder. larger, yes, but the A1 looks considerably sharper, but the HMC's LCD has a smaller angle of viewing (or whatever the term is) and tends to turn black/dark when viewed at different angles. i do think the HMC is more user friendly and, for the lack of a better word, more humble than the A1. you'd be a winner whichever camera you decide to go with but I do think that the AVC codec, although still a pain in post, looks and feels better than HDV overall. but you'd be hardpressed to notice the difference unless you really compare both side by side. I dont know about the panasonic MOJO because the HMC is my first panny cam but the A1 has been great in my hands. you might want to look at stillmotion footage if you doubt the potential of the camera. future-proofing, the HMC will probably win out. i think the real question, the most important question for you to figure out is whether you'd rather shoot on tape or shoot on SD cards. my vote is SD cards as they come cheap. 90 minutes on a 16GB card for around $20 (transcend) is hard to beat.

the battery prices suck though but its manageable. at least you have better low light performance. and if you shoot with a non-flip adapter, the HMC has a flip feature. actually my comments seem to be going for the HMC...
 
if you shoot with a non-flip adapter, the HMC has a flip feature. actually my comments seem to be going for the HMC...[/quote]

Sometimes you have to write things down to see them clearly! I prefer the look of the HMC my small input.
 
Hey, dUNIT - you may not care for advice from someone that has neither camera (yet), but I have been going through the same evaluation process trying to determine which to buy. I have been haunting this site and dvinfo.net, reading posts and comments and evaluating (on paper, at least) the XHA1, HVX200, EX1, HPX170 and the HMC150. I am a lifelong Canon shooter and am transitioning into video from a still photo background, so my first inclination was just to be loyal and go with the XHA1.

Since I am not so advanced in the video area, I probably won't be able to eyeball the differences in the video quality between the two and so I tended to throw away this part of the selection criteria, as either will be good enough for my purposes. Next, and really of high importance for me, is getting out of the "mechanical" (e.g., tape-based) recording media and to use SS media. This throws out the XHA1 and the HVX200. Of the remaining cams, I really looked hard at the EX1 and HPX, but for my circumstances spending nearly double the cost of the 150 just on the camera alone doesn't make sense, and the price of the P2 media that would be required is prohibitive. For the EX1, there are some 3rd party solutions for shooting to SDHC that now seem viable to cut costs, but the even higher price of the cam over the HPX doesn't work for me.

So, to make a too-long story shorter, I have settled on the 150 and will be placing my order prior to the rebate offer being withdrawn in March. I like the idea of shooting on the SDHC cards, and at the price that they are now (and getting lower), I am planning on using the cards as archival media and transcoding from there into Cineform intermediate for editing.

I hope this point of view helps you in your decision making.
 
Last edited:
jpmulligan said:
Hey, Jeff - you may not care for advice from someone that has neither camera (yet), but I have been going through the same evaluation process trying to determine which to buy. I have been haunting this site and dvinfo.net, reading posts and comments and evaluating (on paper, at least) the XHA1, HVX200, EX1, HPX170 and the HMC150. I am a lifelong Canon shooter and am transitioning into video from a still photo background, so my first inclination was just to be loyal and go with the XHA1.

Since I am not so advanced in the video area, I probably won't be able to eyeball the differences in the video quality between the two and so I tended to throw away this part of the selection criteria, as either will be good enough for my purposes. Next, and really of high importance for me, is getting out of the "mechanical" (e.g., tape-based) recording media and to use SS media. This throws out the XHA1 and the HVX200. Of the remaining cams, I really looked hard at the EX1 and HPX, but for my circumstances spending nearly double the cost of the 150 just on the camera alone doesn't make sense, and the price of the P2 media that would be required is prohibitive. For the EX1, there are some 3rd party solutions for shooting to SDHC that now seem viable to cut costs, but the even higher price of the cam over the HPX doesn't work for me.

So, to make a too-long story shorter, I have settled on the 150 and will be placing my order prior to the rebate offer being withdrawn in March. I like the idea of shooting on the SDHC cards, and at the price that they are now (and getting lower), I am planning on using the cards as archival media and transcoding from there into Cineform intermediate for editing.

I hope this point of view helps you in your decision making.
Click to expand...

JP:

Im the original poster of the XH-A1 and HMC-150 comparison threads on DVinfo.

You decision process is sound and the HMC-150 is at the top of the 1/3" sensor camera heap, and it's a big heap. I bought my first one the first day they were available. It's a great camera.

I was and am a Canon fan too. I think learning on Panasonic controls will be a big help in the future over the Canon control set. The Pana is based on a Pro camera style control set, not consumer like the XH-A1.

The EX-1 is a very nice camera but is a different price point. The 1/2" sensor is very nice, and a step up in performance, but not worth it to me currently.

Jeff
 
For those of you that have used both the A1 and HMC150, how does the 150's stock lens compare depth of field wise to the A1's? Yes, I know that a stock lens won't give me as much control as a DOF adapter will. My reason for asking is because the A1 has pretty darn good DOF control for a 1/3 CCD camera, and I will probably only add a DOF adapter to my arsenal if I end up switching to the HMC150 later this year (mainly due to the flip function making it easier).

And does the HMC have a basic peaking function like the A1 or is it a totally different method of focus assist?
 
Nektonic said:
For those of you that have used both the A1 and HMC150, how does the 150's stock lens compare depth of field wise to the A1's? Yes, I know that a stock lens won't give me as much control as a DOF adapter will. My reason for asking is because the A1 has pretty darn good DOF control for a 1/3 CCD camera, and I will probably only add a DOF adapter to my arsenal if I end up switching to the HMC150 later this year (mainly due to the flip function making it easier).?
Click to expand...

The ccd size is the same, it's just down to the aperture of the lens. HMC is 1.6-3.0, maybe you can find out the value for the Canon.
 
studio1972 said:
The ccd size is the same, it's just down to the aperture of the lens. HMC is 1.6-3.0, maybe you can find out the value for the Canon.
Click to expand...

Canon A1 is 1.6-3.4 (f=4.5mm - 90 mm/35mm equivalent to 32.5mm - 650 mm). And the reason I ask is that for getting more DOF control when zoomed in, the A1's lens is 20x while the HMC has a 13x (f=3.9mm to 51mm/35mm equivalent: 28mm to 368mm). I remember my DVX having pretty good DOF for a 10x lens, so I figured maybe the HMC will have good DOF with an even longer zoom to wide range.

If we round both telephoto values up, then the HMC is basically 400mm/35mm equivalent, while the A1 is 650mm/35mm equivalent. I guess that can make a noticeable difference in achieving shallow DOF with a stock lens when on a telephoto setting.
 
Nektonic said:
Canon A1 is 1.6-3.4 (f=4.5mm - 90 mm/35mm equivalent to 32.5mm - 650 mm). And the reason I ask is that for getting more DOF control when zoomed in, the A1's lens is 20x while the HMC has a 13x (f=3.9mm to 51mm/35mm equivalent: 28mm to 368mm). I remember my DVX having pretty good DOF for a 10x lens, so I figured maybe the HMC will have good DOF with an even longer zoom to wide range.

If we round both telephoto values up, then the HMC is basically 400mm/35mm equivalent, while the A1 is 650mm/35mm equivalent. I guess that can make a noticeable difference in achieving shallow DOF with a stock lens when on a telephoto setting.
Click to expand...

Going with the figures you stated, if both cameras are in the same position at the same zoom on the same subject, the DoF would be pretty much identical. The A1 has a longer zoom so if you use the very top end of that zoom, theoretically you might achieve shallower DoF, personally that is not something I would find practical to do, maybe if you are a bird spotter?

So in realistic terms, they are identical for DoF.

If DoF is important to you I would strongly advise getting an adapter, the HMC has a flip option on the LCD so you don't need a flip device, which is very handy. Also, it is better in low light then the A1, which is also helpful for adapter use.
 
studio1972 said:
The A1 has a longer zoom so if you use the very top end of that zoom, theoretically you might achieve shallower DoF, personally that is not something I would find practical to do, maybe if you are a bird spotter?

So in realistic terms, they are identical for DoF.

If DoF is important to you I would strongly advise getting an adapter, the HMC has a flip option on the LCD so you don't need a flip device, which is very handy. Also, it is better in low light then the A1, which is also helpful for adapter use.
Click to expand...

Agreed on the extreme zooming in. It has its uses but only for static shots, and is very useful for wedding videography when you get banished to the back of the church for the ceremony.

I am thinking of an HMC, but am waiting to hear about any new cameras once NAB rolls around, especially since it is not too far off now. As for the 35mm adapter, that is also a possibility for later in the year. I really like the HMC's tapeless capability and the improved low light is important to me as well.
 
DOF on the HMC 150 Fully zoomed in , if you got the xha1 you can compare it.
the ND filter was set to 1/4 shot /1080 30p. The cars are atleast 30-40 meters away ( google it) This cam is way better in low light.
.....And yes I know these shots are oversaturated I was just testing some scenefiles setting.
I wished it were a little sharper and had a longer lens but Im starting to love the image it produces.

1233276286.jpg


1233277254.jpg


and another one...

1233170334.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top