HPX300 Price!

yeah i saw and posted as well,thats really fair.And b&h listed so late(then other sites).I think they calculated everything and then listed.Hope the price will not change till april:)
 
Can't wait to see Spec-Comm's price. Those are my guys!!! But wow!!!

This price is exactly what I wanted.

Full Shoulder Mount form factor
Avc-Intra
COMES with a lens...

8.5k!!!!

it's on.

Edit: by the way, anyone know if it comes with any cards just yet? I hope we find this info out soon.
 
Last edited:
I doubt if they will need to bundle cards to move the cameras. You never know, but I would be surprised. Maybe a short promo with a freebie 16GB card would be nice though. I still haven't figured out exactly why Panasonic USA bundles P2 cards, but only at certain times though. They bundled the 16GB with the 170s and the 170 was very anticipated, a lot of people wanted that camera.

Will be interesting to see. I think it would be a very good way to bury the EX3. The 300 with a pair of 16s or 32s and Sony's sales would plummet.

D

Dan
 
I don't see how this is an EX-1/3 killer.

They are both CMOS cameras.

One has a better codec, the other has larger chips.

The EX has an affordable long-form memory solution, the Panasonic doesn't.

They both cost $8,500.

Funny how the conversation about how bad CMOS is changes when a CMOS camera gets produced by the home team.

Just sayin'
 
Bassman:

I shoot with the EX1 and EX3 weekly and they are great cameras. I have not shot with the HPX300 yet obviously, but it looks like it will surpass the EX3 handily in features other than the CMOS size. Most people would agree that the EX3 is a dressed up EX1 with a sort of shoulder mount and a magnifying glass over the LCD versus a dedicated LCOS viewfinder and flip out LCOS screen, etc.

Just my opinion, having shot with the EX3 quite a bit.

Dan
 
I'm with Dan, completely. I'm excited about the HPX300 regardless of it's jello issue. I've never had a real issue with jello given that the RED produces the same thing.
 
puredrifting said:
I think it would be a very good way to bury the EX3. The 300 with a pair of 16s or 32s and Sony's sales would plummet.

D

Dan
Click to expand...

Yep, it's soo easy to take down your competition in bad times. In good times it's 10x harder. A promo deal now with a 64 gig card would PUNNISH sony's ex-3 market. :Drogar-Love(DBG):

C
 
Yes, I tend to agree. But they arent the same price. Add min $1k for a battery solution, at 18watts the cameras power consumption is good, but even so Id recommend at least 3 batteries to get you through a day at around 400 a piece plus charger its getting up there. The EX3 wins the cost battle. But with CAC, AVCIntra, wireless mount, pro ND wheel off the top of my head seems well worth the difference. And please, the difference between 1/3 and 1/2 inch chips is minimal. No doubt Id go AVCIntra 1/3 camera over XDCam EX codec with 1/2. You know everyone perception is different of course. And at the end of the day if you have talent, who cares what you get right?
 
One has a better codec, the other has larger chips.
Click to expand...
Larger chips? To my eye, the difference between 1/3" and 1/2" chips is too minor to really be a deciding factor, don't get me wrong, The EX1 and EX3's picture has been less noisy then say a 1/3" HVX or HPX, but chip sizes differences like that aren't that great IMO.

I saw an HPX3000 demo, which used AVCintra 100, and it looked great. I would take AVCintra as opposed to a 1/2" chip size
 
Hi Kholi,

I tried to inform myself what jello, skew, rolling shutter issues are using the search function but turned up with nothing. Can you explain it, give some example footage and how can you minimize it using a CMOS cam. The HPX300 looks like the cam I am going to buy this summer. I am glad I did not jumped on the 170 train.

thanks in advance.
Cees

Kholi said:
I'm with Dan, completely. I'm excited about the HPX300 regardless of it's jello issue. I've never had a real issue with jello given that the RED produces the same thing.
Click to expand...
 
Mathematical it does make a lot of difference 0.85 mm vs 1.27 mm (yes I am living in a metric country) but I do not know how it turns out in actual footage maybe it increases the light sensitivity by only 10%. I even heard somewere on the forum that 1/3 inch is not the same for every cam producer.

ryanweiss89 said:
Larger chips? To my eye, the difference between 1/3" and 1/2" chips is too minor to really be a deciding factor, don't get me wrong, The EX1 and EX3's picture has been less noisy then say a 1/3" HVX or HPX, but chip sizes differences like that aren't that great IMO.

I saw an HPX3000 demo, which used AVCintra 100, and it looked great. I would take AVCintra as opposed to a 1/2" chip size
Click to expand...
 
Bassman2003 said:
I don't see how this is an EX-1/3 killer.

They are both CMOS cameras.

One has a better codec, the other has larger chips.

The EX has an affordable long-form memory solution, the Panasonic doesn't.

They both cost $8,500.

Funny how the conversation about how bad CMOS is changes when a CMOS camera gets produced by the home team.

Just sayin'
Click to expand...

it makes me sick aswell especially reading some posts of jan and barry with regards to this new HPX300. imagine how they dislike the rolling shutter issue of the EX. now they are singing a different tune: "if you know the limitation of cmos cameras, you'll be alright". MARKETING :(
 
If the comments of two people on a message board make you sick, you need to get a life and go shoot something with whatever camera you choose.

The fact is that Barry has said all along that if you know how the camera works, you can minimize or avoid situations where the CMOS shutter creates a problem. He's also said that the issue renders some footage unusable, and it's a risk he never thought worth taking with CMOS technology.

So, now we seem to have a camera that offers what may be the best codec out there (Intra), interchangeable lenses, Panasonic color, real shoulder-mount capability and more for under $9K.

When people picked up EX1's the market spoke. Panasonic was smart enough to listen, and yet you complain about it.
 
Good points, but I still think larger chips do make a difference.

There is a reason why foks that can afford larger chip cameras buy them, they have a better overall look! More lattitude and depth.

And the jury is still out for on the 10 bit aspect of the AVC-intra codec.

If your NLE is 8 bit, (mine is - Edius), the 10 bit footage will be downsampled to 8 bit and the benefit of more color information will not have as much impact on your final delivered product.

Straight into After Effects (if it can open AVC-intra files) for chromakey work would be a great use though.

I just wish we could get out of this 1/3" chip prodction rut that the industry is in imho. The list of 1/3" chip cameras released over the past four years is staggering.

Sony showed that you can get larger imagers in a small form factor body.

The HPX-300 is a larger form factor, so technical issues should not be the culprit for the smaller imagers.
 
I hear you Bassman, but I think Panasonic may have made a conscious choice to go with 1/3" chips to accommodate the larger market of 1/3" lenses versus 1/2" lenses. They may have also looked at the ergonomics of the EX1 and JVC and decided that even with 1/3" chips, a real shoulder-mountable camera was the way to go.

I agree that larger chips would certainly be a good thing to have, but the beautiful thing about the marketplace we have now is that the options are out there. If you want 1/2" CMOS with interchangeable lenses, go with EX1 or JVC. If you have to have CCD chips, there's the HPX-170 and 500 in 1/3" or 2/3".

The new 300 may not fit everyone's exact needs, but I think it's a welcome addition to a market full of great options. And again, I think it proves that not only was Panasonic listening to the market, but specifically to many of the comments on these boards.

--SM
 
what is the difference between HPX500 and HPX300 besides the 2/3 chips.
I have a chance to buy a HPX500 for $7,ooo.
I'm going to try and use my 8.5 X 5.5 2/3 SD lens for now.
I really like the 2/3 chips for the lattitude and depth.

thanks, Paul
 
Can someone explain in PRACTICAL terms why the difference between AVC Intra 100 compared to other codecs is a bigger factor than that between 1/3 chip to 1/2 or 2/3 chipsize.

As far as I understand chip size governs dof which is obviously an important factor - what differences does AVC Intra make compared to DVCPro HD?

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top