HMC150 vs Z5, FX1000, XHA1

dcloud said:
id have to disagree. You coud get a better footage if you fix the settings. that hmc shot obviously is not in cine gamma nor the colors were set properly

color and dynamic range, the hmc could do better there

fine details however, thats the only limitation of hmc.
Click to expand...

You have to assumed that all camera were at their best, if not then maybe the other camera could also get much better. (-:
Don't be such a fanboy of Panny that you refuse dto see it, be a fanboy of what is the best for your need, if the best picture quality is not your priority then yes the HMC is exellent camera for the money because of the tapeless and all the feature that it has, but you can't say that it hold its own in picture quality compared to the other camera cuz that ain't so.
 
PSA1 said:
if the best picture quality is not your priority then yes the HMC is exellent camera for the money because of the tapeless and all the feature that it has, but you can't say that it hold its own in picture quality compared to the other camera cuz that ain't so.
Click to expand...

Higher Resolution ≠ Better Picture Quality

The main reason I am a big fan of Panasonic cameras like the HMC150, is that I love the "look" of the final image being recorded. Yes Sony or Canon cameras in the same price range will produce higher resolution images, but to me they just don't have the same image quality that I see from the Panasonic cameras. ( resolution is the least important quality I look for )

To my eyes the Panasonic video cameras produce a very "film like" end result, much more so than either the Canon or Sony cameras.
 
PSA1 said:
... even the XHA1 2 years old technology is so much sharper and has better color, on the HMC also look at the green stem of the flower againts the window, it has so much detail enhancer that you see so much ringing (halo) on the edge, when you gain tapeless and the price is so low, you have to give up something and that is picture quality.
Click to expand...

Do you have an XH-A1?

I used the XH-A1 for the last several years before upgrading my cameras to the HMC-150 after trying one out in many comparisons and shooting a few weddings using both.

The HMC-150 provides a far better picture in comparison to the XH-A1.

The next version of the XH-A1 will probably trouce the current 150, but not the current XH=A1.
 
PSA1 said:
Are you for real? the HMC is the worse of the bunch, worse details of all the camera, and no red, just look at the letters and the texture of everything, it has almost none, even the XHA1 2 years old technology is so much sharper and has better color, on the HMC also look at the green stem of the flower againts the window, it has so much detail enhancer that you see so much ringing (halo) on the edge, when you gain tapeless and the price is so low, you have to give up something and that is picture quality.
Click to expand...

I'll be perfectly honest... they ALL looked like crap in those screen grabs.

PSA1 said:
You have to assumed that all camera were at their best, if not then maybe the other camera could also get much better. (-:
Don't be such a fanboy of Panny that you refuse dto see it, be a fanboy of what is the best for your need, if the best picture quality is not your priority then yes the HMC is exellent camera for the money because of the tapeless and all the feature that it has, but you can't say that it hold its own in picture quality compared to the other camera cuz that ain't so.
Click to expand...

No, you don't have to assume that all cameras were at their best. When you don't know who was doing the test, or know the conditions under which it was done, you can't just assume that it was a good test. The tester may have been biased one way, or may not have the technical or practical knowledge to perform it adequately. We simply don't know (unless you can read what ever Asian language that was). I have seen some far better comparisons of many of these cameras. I honestly don't think it does any of them justice.

Also, to say outright that the HMC is not the best picture quality says a lot about your own fanboy-ism. "Best" is subjective. Do a simple search on Vimeo. They are all capable of producing ridiculously good images in the hands of a skilled operator. HOWEVER, an aweful lot of people prefer the "look" of Panasonics. It has nothing to do with tapeless or price. All things being equal, I prefer the look of the HMC/HPX/HVXa over the A1/G1, and both over the comparable Sony's. That doesn't mean any of them are bad. I just like the look of them, much like I prefer Coke over Pepsi and Fords over Chevies.
 
Its also possible that all cameras were set to Auto Mode, and this may result very bad by Panasonic, because it has worst auto functions as there are many complains. Many areas under auto mode, get over-exposed.

On the other side Sony Cams are very fast and accurate Auto-Functions.

This is the best reason you can't assume that all cameras were at their best. Because Panasonic is a Master in Manual Color Controls which gives you total freedom in how you want the image to look. It can beat almost all available cams in the range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top