HPX170 - A Second Look

SPZ said:
Why? ... This is so frustratingly funny- does this make sense?
Click to expand...
Well, coming from a programming perspective, I can see why they'd choose to do it this way. Use it and you'll understand. If they showed the waveform and vectorscope on the flipped LCD, it means they'd have to render those upside down, even though the monitor is upside down, so they'd have to invent routines to rotate those functions 180 degrees. Same with the focus assists and the menus. It makes 10x as much work for them to implement all those features rightside up and upside down.

Realistically, they chose a decent solution that is not much of a hassle, I think (but then again, I don't use an upside-down adapter so I can't feel your pain.) The LCD flip is toggled at the press of a button. You could use it upside down to frame with, pop it rightside up with the press of a button to view your waveform/vectorscope, then pop it upside down again to continue shooting. The only inconvenience might be in using the focus assists, which, again, are only a button-press away, you'd just have to get used to focusing on an upside-down element.

Not having the assists implies having to go either for the flip module (which then requires rails, another hassle) or an external focus monitor for focusing .
Click to expand...
Or a minor button press... might not be rant-worthy, you'll have to try it.

I do have the BTLH80, so my issue is not actually about buying it, but how this small neglected aspect completely negates the advantage for low key adapter shooting!.... :(
Click to expand...
Again, I don't think we're talking about "completely negating". Think about it this way: to bring up the focus assist you press one button, right? Well, when you have the focus assists up and the LCD is rightside-up, pressing one button flips the LCD upside down and hides the focus assists (except for the focus bar, don't forget that that one is still active!) So to get back at the focus assists, you press one button -- instead of the "focus assist" button, you press the "LCD FLIP" button, but either way it's one button and then you have your magnified focus assist, your focus graph, and your focus bar, all at the press of that one button.

It really might not be even much of an inconvenience, much less a hassle, you'll have to try it and let us know.

I believe Jan should come up with something clearer about this process. It just doesn't make sense Panasonic allowing this 300 upgrade and then state that "if you go this way, you might lose this function in a future update".
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't know what to make of that either. I can't see why anyone would do the $300 thing if it means you might lose it and have to re-pay to have it done again! Then again, in the 2.5 years of the HVX200 being on the market there's only been two firmware updates, and only one that you really actually needed, so -- well, I guess it's a gamble on people's parts. I'd spring for the $500 one myself.

And get yourself a capture box (maybe any fellow DVXUSER can help?)
Click to expand...
I bought an Intensity Pro, but it didn't end up working in my laptop docking station. Sigh.

And, how about publishing your book overseas? Its impossible to get this book in Hong-Kong... Panasonic should actually have it everywhere these cameras are sold...
Click to expand...
I'd love to have distributors in every territory. I've got dealers in the USA, Australia, and Canada, but for some reason nowhere else. Ask your local dealers to carry it. Panasonic has nothing to do with the book's distribution, it's my own thing, but obviously I'd love to have it available locally to people where they didn't have to wait for a two-week delivery time and potential customs/import duties too. Having local dealers carrying it eliminates those things, so yeah, I'm all for it! :)
 
Barry_Green said:
Haven't checked on the 170, but on the 150 it was a tad off center, so I wouldn't expect it to be any different on the 170.
Click to expand...


:-( :-( :-( :-(

Camera manufacturers have gotten that right for years, why can't Panasonic? It can't be helping any of the other perfomance specs, like edge to edge sharpness, etc.

Duncan
 
What stabilizer would be good with the HPX170?

What stabilizer would be good with the HPX170?

Seems like everyone has their own stories about which stabilizer works for them?

Since this camera is lighter than the HVX200a,

Which is better, Glidecam 2000, or 4000, or merlin, or another suggestion?

Obviously no one has any hands on experience with the 170, but I'm interested in hearing what you all have to say.


Thanks,

Josh
 
thenewguy said:
Which is better, Glidecam 2000, or 4000, or merlin, or another suggestion?
Click to expand...

Having used the Glidecam 4000 (with and without the Smooth Shooter arm) and the Merlin (without an arm) I can say without hesitation:

The Steadicam Pilot is better. By a country mile. Perhaps more.
 
Barry, thanks for the info. Never thought about that "workflow". Should be usable- no focus pulling though...

Is the peaking function working flipped? Also, it doesn't seem that hard to do the "center zoom" focus assist flipped- would that require additional programing?

Anyway, it was just that itsy bitsy extra effort and it would've been perfect... HPX170a?...sigh...

Barry, you have nice friends with very expensive toys! Ask them to lend you 5 minutes of an HD-SDI capture workstation for a simple grab of HD-SDI goodness! :)

I'm absolutely terrified to jump to the HPX170, simply because the HVX200 (non a), for the money, has simply been the best camera I've ever seen - even in low light situations. The more I used this camera (for more than 2 years now), the more I can pull out from it. Bring in Digital Betacam, Beta SP, and even some HDCAM and, knowing its limitations and what to shoot, the HVX will stand up to 10x more expensive cameras.

I've researched the market for upgrades, I've looked into the Canons, the Sonys and the new EX's, and nothing still comes close to what this little cam can achieve... Like i said before, the jump from the dvx100 to the dvx100a was not a very pleasant experience for me- the original cinegamma from the original dvx was never matched in the "a", for example- and some other aspects concerning noise. That's kind of similar to what I felt when I tried the HVX200 "a". It was brighter and somehow cleaner, but the HVX200's picture just looked, well, more pleasing to the eye, to me.

But theoretically the "a" should be better. Am I seeing things? The HVX200a has bigger ccd's, newer internals, a new lens... But, to me, the image, well, the dinamic range, for example, just feels less "filmic" ?

What all this means is that I'm asking myself: is the HPX170 the camera for me? Is this an upgrade I should be going for? Going for the HPX would mean selling the original HVX...

Anyway, bottom line, its a business decision. Its about getting the best you can for the buck...
 
SPZ said:
Is the peaking function working flipped?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Also, it doesn't seem that hard to do the "center zoom" focus assist flipped- would that require additional programing?
Click to expand...
To make it upside-down, yes.

Barry, you have nice friends with very expensive toys! Ask them to lend you 5 minutes of an HD-SDI capture workstation for a simple grab of HD-SDI goodness! :)
Click to expand...
Back in Vegas, sure. Out here in the middle of a tiny beach town on the North Carolina coast? Don't know anyone. :)

I'm absolutely terrified to jump to the HPX170, simply because the HVX200 (non a), for the money, has simply been the best camera I've ever seen - even in low light situations. The more I used this camera (for more than 2 years now), the more I can pull out from it. Bring in Digital Betacam, Beta SP, and even some HDCAM and, knowing its limitations and what to shoot, the HVX will stand up to 10x more expensive cameras.
Click to expand...
Then why jump? If what you've got is doing what you need, stay put and keep excelling!

But theoretically the "a" should be better. Am I seeing things? The HVX200a has bigger ccd's, newer internals, a new lens... But, to me, the image, well, the dinamic range, for example, just feels less "filmic" ?
Click to expand...
I think the "a" looks better than the 200 in just about all ways. Cleaner, smoother, with more accurate color reproduction...

What all this means is that I'm asking myself: is the HPX170 the camera for me? Is this an upgrade I should be going for? Going for the HPX would mean selling the original HVX...
Click to expand...
Again, why do you need to upgrade at all, if what you've got is getting the job done?
 
Barry_Green said:
Yes.



Again, why do you need to upgrade at all, if what you've got is getting the job done?
Click to expand...

Basically, Economics, timming, and aiming to do an overall step forward in production value for what I do...

HPX170 Pros for this HVX user:

Lighter

Less Noisy and better Low Light (But this is a terrible myth coming from the HVX- the HVX is not as noisy as people paint it out to be, and isfantastic for night shooting- 1 and 1 and a half stops of low light would definitely improve it, but its not fundamental)

HD-SDI- the future is avoiding the compression of the supplied codecs for capture- Convergent Design's HD-SDI box should be the first of a series of capture solutions that can open new possibilities for narrative work- the in camera codecs will still, obviously, work for ENG and people needing hassle free, native quick editing workflows (as well as backup)

Better focus assists and LCD- Faster, more precise shots and better results for focus pulling scenarios.

Grey areas for this HVX user:

The Picture- I really, really would like to see a DVCPRO HD vs HD-SDI direct capture frame grab/ 10 sec video of a Human in both daylight and at a night setting with some lighting. If possible, in PAL! Yes, I know, this is asking too much, and I'm completely repeating myself, but its all about the results... All the HPX features are worthless if it fails to give me a better picture...

Maybe, just maybe, the ideal solution would be for me to keep the HVX and aim for the HPX next year...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for clearing that up Barry. I am still not sure which Recording Format option I would use to get the pure 1080p. According the the 170 manual, we got:

1080i/60i, 1080i/30P, 1080i/24P, 1080i/24PA, 720P/60P, 720P/30P, 720P/24P, 720P/30PN, 720P/24PN, 480i/60i, 480i/30P, 480i/24P, 480i/24PA

I assume you are referring to 1080i/24p, right?

Also, does the HVX200 have this same 1080p capability?

Thanks!


Barry_Green said:
It is 1080P and always has been and always will be. The camera creates all images in progressive mode -- it can't even DO interlace! It has to simulate interlaced recording by slicing up its internal 1080/60P signal into fields and recording those!

It is 1080P and always has been. The recording format of DVCPRO-HD doesn't support direct 1080P "native" recording, so pulldown frames are introduced, and your nonlinear editor strips them back out, and what you end up with on your timeline is pure progressive 1080p footage.
Click to expand...
 
1080i/24pA is what you want. Every NLE I can think of knows how to strip out the redundant frame and give you a pure 1080/24p stream. And yes, the HVX200 has the same capability.
 
This camera is going to come on line here soon and there will be plenty of talk. Let's give this camera its own space.
 
Barry_Green said:
1080i/24pA is what you want. Every NLE I can think of knows how to strip out the redundant frame and give you a pure 1080/24p stream. And yes, the HVX200 has the same capability.
Click to expand...

Hey Barry, not to get off track from your (greatly appreciated) article thread but does that mean that when shooting 1080i/24f with the Canon A1 that we're dealing with 1080p footage after being brought into an NLE?


Ok, back onto the topic here, the HPX170 is my new (soon to be) camera. I put my A1 up for sale and already started stacking my pennies for this Septembers HPX release. I can't wait to move back into the Panasonic world!
 
thanks for the confirmation

hey does anyone know of a release date for the HPX? I read September but not sure if a date was announced.
 
sylvanimate said:
I have researched that the HPX2000-3000 record a low rez proxy that post houses have been able to use as a pre render- edit until the render of a master needs to be submitted.

Does anyone know if the HPX-170 will be capable of doing the same?
Click to expand...

I do consulting for about every local TV station using FCP systems, and am installing Final Cut Server systems now. I'm trained by Apple, cert'd, etc. And I can tell you that anyone who needs an edit proxy for "DVCPRO-HD" has a poorly designed system. There's no reason to use a proxy for this codec, as it'll run just fine off of FW800 drives if needed.

If you do have so many stations, a Final Cut Server solution would be what you're really looking for, for a variety of reasons. It'll do your preview proxies and edit proxies, "if" you need them.

But I will always argue that off-line proxies for DVCPRO-HD is just a plain silly idea, if you're on Final Cut systems (that are not a kazlillion years old).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top