HPX370 filter poor design

Hi everyone,

we just received our HPX371 a few days ago. Today I wanted to use a UV-filter to cover the glass of the camera. What I found out is that you can only screw in the filter if the sunshade is attached. If the filter is screwed on you can't remove the sunshade anymore.

This is absolutely poor design! If I ever want to mount a matte box - the workflow would be:

1.) screw off the UV-filter
2.) remove the sunshade
3.) attach the mattebox
4.) screw on the UV-filter again.

Maybe the HPX300 has the same problem?

I can't understand how a company like Fujinon can produce such a crap!

Cheers

Pro.
 
Hi everyone,

we just received our HPX371 a few days ago. Today I wanted to use a UV-filter to cover the glass of the camera. What I found out is that you can only screw in the filter if the sunshade is attached. If the filter is screwed on you can't remove the sunshade anymore.

This is absolutely poor design! If I ever want to mount a matte box - the workflow would be:

1.) screw off the UV-filter
2.) remove the sunshade
3.) attach the mattebox
4.) screw on the UV-filter again.

Maybe the HPX300 has the same problem?

I can't understand how a company like Fujinon can produce such a crap!

Cheers

Pro.

Yes, the HPX 300 had the same issue and the Sony PMW 350 that I replaced mine with has the very same issue with its stock Fujinon lens. The problem seems to be with the lens shade's inner thickness—it won't pass over the filter's thin metal holder. No such problem with a Matt Box, however.
 
Or with my often cynical view, is it another handicapping of these basically free kit lenses to persuade other users that they should stick with the £10,000+ regular Fujinons?
Steve
 
Or with my often cynical view, is it another handicapping of these basically free kit lenses to persuade other users that they should stick with the £10,000+ regular Fujinons?
Steve

Well, if that were the case, the unscrewing of a filter is a small price to pay for what are reasonably decent lenses.

The last poster is correct. No need to keep the UV filter on the lens when using a matt box with filters—unless you are truly fearful of windblown, lens damaging elements.
 
no problems with my Schneider filter !!!

Hi everyone,

we just received our HPX371 a few days ago. Today I wanted to use a UV-filter to cover the glass of the camera. What I found out is that you can only screw in the filter if the sunshade is attached. If the filter is screwed on you can't remove the sunshade anymore.

This is absolutely poor design! If I ever want to mount a matte box - the workflow would be:

1.) screw off the UV-filter
2.) remove the sunshade
3.) attach the mattebox
4.) screw on the UV-filter again.

Maybe the HPX300 has the same problem?

I can't understand how a company like Fujinon can produce such a crap!

Cheers

Pro.
 
Are you Happy

Are you Happy

Hi everyone,

we just received our HPX371 a few days ago.

Pro.


How about the overall performance of the camera. Are you happy with result, low light performance, skew issue and noise level.

Like to hear from a few real shooters before making a purchase decision.

Thanks.
 
How about the overall performance of the camera. Are you happy with result, low light performance, skew issue and noise level.

Like to hear from a few real shooters before making a purchase decision.

Thanks.

Abelcine has a comparison video online (Hpx 300 vs 370):

http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/04/05/at-the-bench-with-panasonic-hpx370/

They address the questions that you have posed. From the video, however, and this may be an internet factor, while there is clear improvement in light sensitivity favoring the 370, I did not notice any significant difference in skew from their demonstration, and as for noise, while once again I could not see a difference, it could be a delivery or viewing monitor issue as the reviewer seemed to feel that there was reduced noise.
Good luck.
 
Back
Top