HPX170 vs PD170

Yes, price is one issue, but I think for some (especially long-form shooters) workflow and data storage (at a price point) are the real selling points of the HMC150.

Barry - don't know if you've looked at this, but in terms of image and especially color sampling: HMC 1080p24 downrezzed/transcoded to DVCPro HD 720p vs. DVCPro HD 720p from the HVX? HMC 1080p transcoded to ProRes 720p?
 
The compelling argument for the 150, vs. the 170, is price tag.
Click to expand...

I guess for myself, I just disagree. Any camera that uses temporal compression has a flaw that takes it off the table for consideration, regardless of price.
 
ullanta said:
Yes, price is one issue, but I think for some (especially long-form shooters) workflow and data storage (at a price point) are the real selling points of the HMC150.
Click to expand...
Workflow is in the HPX170's favor though, with all major NLE's supporting the format properly and in realtime right now (excepting the obvious). Data storage, yes, that's in the 150's favor.

Barry - don't know if you've looked at this, but in terms of image and especially color sampling: HMC 1080p24 downrezzed/transcoded to DVCPro HD 720p vs. DVCPro HD 720p from the HVX?
Click to expand...
Well... hmmm. Did not bother, did not even think about it. I shoot 1080p on the HVX, I only use 720p on it when I have to, so it didn't even cross my mind. Horizontal color sampling will be the same between them after that downrez, and vertical will be probably still better on the HVX original since you're starting with 720 color samples instead of 540. But I wouldn't downconvert to DVCPRO-HD 720p because that'd be giving up 33% of the horiz res that the 150 would have captured, so ... why would I do this? Except as an intermediate codec for editing speed?


HMC 1080p transcoded to ProRes 720p?
Click to expand...
I don't use the Mac, therefore I have no need for nor exposure to ProRes, so no testing conducted.
 
Jim Simon said:
I guess for myself, I just disagree. Any camera that uses temporal compression has a flaw that takes it off the table for consideration, regardless of price.
Click to expand...
I am with you on that one. I am no fan of temporal compression unless there's adequate bandwidth (i.e., I wouldn't have a problem with 100mbps MPEG-2, but I have a huge massive unconquerable problem with 19mbps MPEG-2).

I haven't been able to conduct a proper extensive torture test yet on AVC-HD 24mbps, but from my initial experiments, at least in 720p mode, it appears to be at least as robust as 35mbps MPEG-2, and probably better. Meaning that it's going to handily and easily best HDV and should even best XDCAM-EX. That will make it suitable for many people. Perhaps not you and me, perhaps not for all uses, but for the tens of thousands of HDV shooters, they should find AVC-HD 24mbps simply heavenly.
 
Cheers on that info Barry. I shoot mostly 720 so a B-camera is what I'm looking for.. and at that price I could reasonably get two fully outfitted 150's for the price of one 170 when you consider P2 cards, etc. I will be upgrading to a new mac pro so editing and speed won't be as much of an issue.


I have the SD9 camera and yes it's a bit of a pain, but the footage is really impressive and I think the 150 will be even more so, with much more manual control.. and it being that much more sensitive makes it the idea choice for long form stuff. I'm having to sometimes shoot 4 or 5 hours of footage and that much P2 handling and wrangling really requires either a lot of sweat labor on my behalf or hiring a P2 assistant.. So let's say, that's a real deal issue at paying someone 250 or 300 bucks as an assistnat. 10-15 days of that for the year is the cost of the HMC itself.
 
Barry_Green said:
Workflow is in the HPX170's favor though, with all major NLE's supporting the format properly and in realtime right now (excepting the obvious). Data storage, yes, that's in the 150's favor..
Click to expand...

Well, again, the price point factors in, especially for long-form. Like Justyn says, workflow for an HMC150 vs. an HPX170 within my price point (and ther pricepoint of many, I think) is the difference between having enough storage for 7-hour a whole days' storage vs. having to deal with media transfers all day. In fact, If I have a weekend of performance days, with the HMC I'd be able to addord to shoot the whole shebang and not have to stay up late each night transferring media. And archiving is a different world as well. Even putting the cards online for transfer/transcoding: haven't tried this yet, of course, but I could have five SDHC readers attached to the computer for less than $100, vs. $1800 or whatever for the 5-slot P2 reader. With price differences like this, for small producers, price and workflow are deeply intertwined.

And, again, for long form, the workflow is about even for now. And, dare I say it, a Mac is equal to a PC! I'm not editing directly off cards, and need a few cards on-line at a time, so everything's being transferred to the edit system, which might just as well be "transcoded onto the edit system". In my process, I'm perfectly happy with the FCP approach to P2, because it's integrated into my backup process... I WANT that extra copy, and would be making it anyway, so the "Log and Transfer" time is not more than I'd normally spend. If the transcode times to ProRes are not terrible, then it'll be the same - NOT a workflow problem if the workflow kinda takes advantage of transcoding as a form of backup.


As to the comparison between downrezzed HMC 1080p and HPX 720p (both in DVCPro HD 720p) - just 'cause that's potentially what I'd be shooting on either! That is, the lowest datarate HD from the HPX vs the highest datarate from the HMC, in the most direct comparison possible...

Hey, with money no object, sure, I'd prefer the HPX... which I guess brings us back to the only real benefit being the price tag. Hmmm. But I for some reason felt compelled, i guess, to elucidate that this means pricetag of media and accessory storage, readers, etc, and that that would lead in many cases to the camera being used in very different workflows. Here I go again. Forgive me,,,
 
Last edited:
Ulanta... very profound there. That's what I keep coming back too. Most of what I need the 2nd camera for.. the HMC would handle. If I need variable frames then I have the HVX and what not.. and sure I want to get the 170, but with so much changing so fast.. Why not pick up a great little cam.. fully outfitted with a couple of batteries, all for a whopping 4K. The money I will be saving on the 170 is enough to buy the 8 core Mac PRO. Now that's a darn tempting idea.. especially given what might happen with the P2 cards and the release of the Scarlett. Shoot, I already have 5 - 8 gig cards and that alone would allow me to probably record about 2.5 hours of footie...


This little bugger is looking more and more appealing.. based upon economic and logistical matters. To be able to spend 350 bucks and record for 3 friggin' hours would be like the biggest blessing. I've been shooting P2 over two years on 2x4 gig cards.... Shoot, those 2x4 gig cards and the P2 store, cost me about 3k by itself....
 
The workflow on the 150 will be vastly superior to p2 for me. I work with alot of out of town producers that want to take their media with them at the end of the shoot. Many other producers I work with just flat out won't work with p2 and have continued to shoot standard def as a result. The biggest advantage the 150 SDHC workflow offers over p2 is a low cost media that never has to be reused in the field and is its own archive. With the 150 you won't need laptops, p2 stores, p2 cards, or digital asisstants. The lower cost on the 150 is a nice benefit but it really isn't a reason I'm buying it.
 
No, but you will need a very fast computer or deal with transcoding to an intermediate format to do your editing with material from the 150.
 
William_Robinette said:
No, but you will need a very fast computer or deal with transcoding to an intermediate format to do your editing with material from the 150.
Click to expand...

True.. but everyone needs a fast computer anyway, don't they? I don't know anyone who needs a slow computer.
 
Good call Ming. Also the price different more than equals a few thousand dollars so that would buy a fast computer either way.


That is a valid point about the client providing the media. All they need to spend is a 100 bucks and that would cover most all day shoots. This is a sweet deal and I'm sure it'll be under 3k in a year or so...
 
What does availability look like for the HPX170 when these hit the streets? Are most of the main online dealers sold out of their first shipments, or will I be able to grab one in a few weeks?
 
Question to Barry or anyone for that matter,
Having MANUAL audio level controls are clearly a given, but in my field of work,
having AUTO audio level control is equally important. My questions are:

A- I understand the HVX-200A has both MANUAL and AUTO audio level control. Is this correct?
B-Does the HPX-170 have both MANUAL and AUTO audio level control or just MANUAL?

Thanks for taking my question.
 
Thanks for the reply Barry. Please go to this official Panasonic site.

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro...00a/index.html

Then scroll down to where it says "Audio Dials and Flexible Input Selection".
There you will see that it clearly states that AUTO LEVEL CONTROL CAN BE TURNED
ON OR OFF.
Can you please clarify what they are talking about. Beyond that, if these cameras do not have any AUTO AUDIO LEVEL CONTROL, is there some kind of limiting device in the camera. It's hard for me to imagine no limiting control in these cameras due to the zero headroom of digital audio.

Thanks in advance,

dan
 
Link doesn't work. There's auto level control in the little AVC-HD cameras, like the HSC1U and HMC70, but not in the HMC150 or HPX170 or HVX200.

And yes, there is a limiter, they call it ALC but it's not "auto level control" it's "automatic limiter control."
 
Can anybody give us some help?

We are going to develop a TV project with HD workflow.

We need to hook up three (3) cams to a switcher and record the signal (HD of course)

We need to know what cameras, switchers and where to record.

We are thinking on HPX170

Can we use (SDI?).

Thanks!
 
Dan Leniczek said:
It's hard for me to imagine no limiting control in these cameras due to the zero headroom of digital audio.
Click to expand...

This you have in the HPX ALC function. Auto Level Control, also abbreviated as ALC would seek out no sound and boost to reasonable sound. This is no good. The P2 cameras have ALC but it is Auto Limiter Control and it is good, that is the functionality that you are looking for.


Best,

Jan
 
Last edited:
erdiaz said:
Can anybody give us some help?

We are going to develop a TV project with HD workflow.

We need to hook up three (3) cams to a switcher and record the signal (HD of course)

We need to know what cameras, switchers and where to record.

We are thinking on HPX170

Can we use (SDI?).

Thanks!
Click to expand...


Sure you could with the right switcher. It needs to Frame Synchronize the signal and have HD-SDI input.

Best,

Jan
 
Appreciate the reply Jan. I see you have an Expo slated for the 23rd in Seattle. If I can get the day off from work, I'll be sure to attend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top