HMN150 or the Sony EX1: buyer quandary

K

kendo

New member
I was asked to put together a proposal for a local non-profit. It’s an Opera company looking for several cameras so they can shoot multi-cam shows, match quality, color, etc.

Since they are looking to shop the footage around for a broadcast network to show, I’m not sure if I should be recommending the HMN150 or the Sony EX1. Sure the EX1 has a ½” chip, but the budget I’m working with is not enough to get 3, yet 4 of the cameras. Going with the HMN150 will allow 4 cameras to be purchased.

But I keep going back to the same question: Is the footage of the HMN150 high enough for broadcast networks? Since it’s not Discovery HD content being filmed, I’m not so concerned about their specs, but what about a PBS or FOX? Would they accept HMC150 footage?

K
 
kendo said:
I was asked to put together a proposal for a local non-profit. It’s an Opera company looking for several cameras so they can shoot multi-cam shows, match quality, color, etc.

Since they are looking to shop the footage around for a broadcast network to show, I’m not sure if I should be recommending the HMN150 or the Sony EX1. Sure the EX1 has a ½” chip, but the budget I’m working with is not enough to get 3, yet 4 of the cameras. Going with the HMN150 will allow 4 cameras to be purchased.

But I keep going back to the same question: Is the footage of the HMN150 high enough for broadcast networks? Since it’s not Discovery HD content being filmed, I’m not so concerned about their specs, but what about a PBS or FOX? Would they accept HMC150 footage?

K
Click to expand...

PBS: http://www.pbs.org/producers/redbook/specs/digital_television_dtv_requirements.html

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV#Use_in_broadcast_television -- The PBS accepts HDV for widescreen programming acquisition and to a limited extent for use in HD programs. PBS may allow usage of "less than full broadcast quality equipment" if compression artifacts are "not obvious when viewed on an HDTV monitor". For example, the Art Wolfe's TV series Travels to the edge was produced for PBS in HDV format using Canon XL-H1 camcorders.

In progressive mode, resolution of the 150 will be no less than of the Canon with less artifacts. Here you have it.
 
I have talked to a few local stations and asked them how they prefer the footage... and got different answers from every one... Some wanted certain compressions and others just said send me a ".mov". That being said I would ask the station you want this to play on - directly. Once the footage is in the timeline, you can export any way needed by the station.

The HMC has the same chips as the hvx/hpx P2's, big difference being only the p2 work flow (which is used in broadcast). Other than that you can get into a pissing war about the codecs used - but once its "broadcasted" no one will see the difference.
 
Could you get 3 Ex's and a DSLR? That might give you a fourth point of view with some interesting DOF...plenty of people are cutting that sort of footage together.
 
You should really look at the strengths and weaknesses of both. The EX-1's big advantage is the 1/2", full raster chips. As far as acquisition, since I'm assuming this a professional ballet company and you're just shooting their performances, then they would be on a stage adequately lit so it's not that much of an issue. And I think I read somewhere that outside of 1080i, the two cameras actually perform quite similarly in terms of lighting.

The chips of the EX being full raster and non-pixel shifted then is the only other advantage, and it's subjective just how big an advantage it is. I personally prefer the overall "look" of the HMC, so for me it's not much of an advantage. The next person may have a different preference. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

XDCam-EX is basically high-bitrate, glorified HDV. MADHMC is right... on paper AVCHD is a superior codec (apart from the camera that uses it), in reality no one is really going to see the difference.

If the ballet company is trying to shop it to the networks not as a one time shot but a reoccurring show, or they were trying to shop the footage in order to get a network to shoot a full-on one time show out of it, then there would probably be money in the budget if it's picked up to buy or rent better cameras anyways.

Plus, keep in mind also that SxS media is a whole lot more expensive than SDHC.
 
To send a HD program to PBS, it must be submitted on Sony HDCAM 1080i/29.97.

I hope you know how much it cost! It is really costly!
 
our local PBS has done small town docs about certain towns in PA which is filmed by regular non pro people who live in these towns so they accepted all formats and had it broadcast. I'm with MadHMC150. Its best to ask what they will and will not accept.
 
matt s. said:
our local PBS has done small town docs about certain towns in PA which is filmed by regular non pro people who live in these towns so they accepted all formats and had it broadcast.
Click to expand...
What is the delivery format? Or DV/HDV/M2TS file is ok?

This is true, PBS affiliates have their own local programs, and may have their own guidelines for such programs. For example, KPBS in San Diego broadcasts upconverted DV widescreen footage ("California Gold", for example) on its HD channel. Does not look like HD at all. Any consumer HDV or AVCHD would look better.
 
Plus, keep in mind also that SxS media is a whole lot more expensive than SDHC.[/QUOTE]

I own an HMC150, but also do a good bit of shooting with the EX1. One thing to consider is that the footage from the 150 at prores takes up 5-6 times more hard drive space than the ex1 footage XDCAM, in my experience. To be perfectly honest, I might have sprung for the EX1 if I had it to do over. But the 150 does take beautiful images, as does the EX1.
 
HMC has a cleaner image than the Sony EX1, no way near as sharp but cleaner with less artifacts and noise.
AVCHD spanks HDV.
 
Many, many sincere thanks to everyone who commented. I very much appreciate your time and sharing of your expertise.

With that said, I’m still on the fence! I must act judiciously as the counsel for this opera company, and must submit a proposal tomorrow!

Shaun1970, you note that the “HMC has a cleaner image than the Sony EX1, no way near as sharp MC has a cleaner image” The no way near as sharp makes me very nervous. Is the difference between the 2 cameras that noticeable where the HMC150 is just not in the same league, taken as serious?

RR
 
The EX1 has full raster chips, the HMC150 doesn't. But if you're worried about the HMC150 looking like it's out of focus or something, don't. It's plenty sharp. As sharp as the EX 1? No, but it's still plenty sharp. If it wasn't, the HMC150, HPX170, and HVX200 wouldn't be as popular as they are (they all share the same imaging element). And honestly, a lot of find the HMC/HPX/HVX image a lot more pleasing than the Sony's.

Look around at footage of the two cameras on Vimeo.
 
Didn't mean to scare or confuse you with that statement. I should of said what Mike said, that the HMC is still plenty sharp just not as sharp as the EX1. Noise is definately less apparent with the HMC too. I'm not a real big fan of the EX1's image, sometimes super sharp can add to a fake or overly processed looking image, IMO the HMC is a slightly softer organic kind of look.

As everyone say's, its the MOJO factor of Panny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top