hpx500 or ex3

D

deebee69

Member
Its been a while since ive posted but thought this hpx500 forum would be the best place for my dilema.
I have been a hvx200 user right from the start of the release of the 200 .
with the help of barry green and others I have learnt a workflo with p2 etc and have been waiting for long form recording p2 cards for weddings etc.
Now with the 64gig cards x 3 of these on each of my 2 xhvx200s I should now be able to record a whole wedding.Hoewever I also have a budget available to either by a new hpx500 and stay with p2 or sell both the hvx200s and get 1x sony ex3 and 1xsony ex1.It doesent take long to work out that in one sence ill be utillising 3 cameras and 2 on the other.But which way togo my main aim is for quality of pictures are the hvx200s going to blend into the superior footage from the hpx500 ok?not forgetting that the footage from the sonys will be virtually identical.
What would you do?
 
I'll tell you what, it's all preference . You're asking a bunch of guys here that own and operate HPX500 cameras. Kinda like asking a Ford driver and fan if you should jump ship to Chevy. Personally, before I purchased my 500's, I almost went with Sony. VERY glad I didn't, for sure.

You already have your P2 workflow going. The 200's are nice cameras and will intercut nicely with the 500. If you have to go start over from scratch, sell all your gear, basically start over, I don't see the point to that. From a business standpoint, it doesn't make sense.

I would say stick with the 200's and get a 500 for sure, rather than go Sony. That's not because I am a HUGE fan of Panasonic, I would be telling you to stick with the Sony Cameras if you already had Sony eauipment and a Sony workflow going. They ALL produce nice images. Some have distinct features and advantages over others going both ways, but they all have their pros and cons.
 
I've NEVER liked the sony prosumer line. That said, the EX is a big leap from their porno-king the Z1U

There's really only one quation you need to ask yourself: do I want to plan for the future, or plan for right now?

The simple fact is the HPX will cut fine with the HVX you already own. It will use the P2 cards you already own. Moreover, people think you are more professional that the guy carrying around the smaller camera. Also, and this the most important thing, given your line of work, you will be able to buy professional lenses that are longer and have a doubler. Right now you can get a great SD lens for dirt cheap on ebay. The SD on the HPX will resolve about the same as the HVX if not a little better. And with the long lens you will be able to setup at the rear of the church out of peoples way and still be able to go in close leaving you with clean wide shots that don't show a cameraman in the shot. It's also a shoulder mount which is much nicer when doing the ENG stuff you likely do at the receptions. And in those receptions when things are often dark, you'll be able to use an onboard light that plugs right in to the camera like a frezzi.

The only thing I can say for the EX cams is that they will cost less, be lighter, and not require additional expenses like the lenses, batteries and heavy duty tripod.
 
Icarus2005 said:
The only thing I can say for the EX cams is that they will cost less, be lighter, and not require additional expenses like the lenses, batteries and heavy duty tripod.
Click to expand...

Well, you still need batteries, and there will still be expenses, whichever one you choose. If you're going with the EX line, especially for you with the existing gear, you're not going to save any money. You'll sell your P2 gear for 70% of what you bought it for, if that and probably have to fork over some cash for the Sony Gear. Completely new setup. Cards are still going to cost you on the Sony side, you'll still need tripods, albiet not as beefy ones, but it's not necessarily a huge expense.

At this point in the game and where you are at, the 500 with a SD lens will cost you less to get into and you will be much further ahead in the production world.
 
Go for the sonys. :) Way more resolution and that seems to be what you are looking for. The Sony cams will give you that hd bluray look. So damn clear. If you want people to look at your images and know it is hd then go with the Sony cams. Now if you are going for that film more dreamy less sharp image then you can stick with panasonic, but future proofing would be better with the Sony cams as you can still get that film look with the sonys. FYI the sony codec is amazing. It will give you the cleanest 720p image because the compression is still 35MB per second.
 
I've never had any client or even casual viewer not be aware that what I've shot with my HVX or HPX wasn't HD if it was meant to be that way (I shoot SD occassionaly as well). I just happen to like the more filmic look. I don't think the Sony's get as good a "look" as the Panasonic, but they can get a great look of their own. Different strokes!

Nik -

When you say it will give you the cleanest 720p image because the compression is still 35M per second, don't you mean "even though" instead of "because?"

As for DeeBee's question, if you've figured out the P2 workflow and like the HVX, you'll be blown away by the HPX. Since I got my in early July, I've barely looked at my HVX. And I shoot with a $350 SD Fuji lens (the doubler is way cool, too!). As for clients reaction, you are no longer the neighbor with a nice camera. Five pounds of Anton Bauer battery and a long lens just screams professional. You now look like the guys your clients see on TV. Throw on a matte box and follow focus and you look just like the movies guys. You might not shoot like an ENG or Spielberg, but you damn sure look like it!
 
Future proofing.... give me a break ;)

If thats the case shouldnt we all be saving for 4k res cpu'd scarlets haha.

Anyway true enough the EX is sharper, it just depends on what look however you think your clients will find more attractive. Both cameras are obviously HD looking, i mean hell we're comparing them to standard def video cameras remember!!!

The HPX is of course a professional camera, fitted and rigged like one, its image is obviously HD, and filmic looking. The Sony EX can't quite replicate this filmic look in the opinion of many afficiacendo's, but can be sharper especially in shots where that can stand out - particularly wide shots.

I imagine it could cut particularly well for big screen displays with lots of graphics / animations/corporate presentations etc. However, i also know for a fact that the hpx500 and even hvx200 made clients go wow as in 'that looks glossy and like a real... movie' - the ex (settings or not) still looks like video to my eye - and is the sharpest video pound for pound at that price point.
 
There are few reasons to consider the HPX.

1/ 2/3" CCD - better control of DOF, better dynamic range and lens choices are much broader. For the record before I bought my HPX (this was before they released it) I was seriously considering a SD cam, purely based on these points.
2/ 4 independent channel audio. Often overlooked, but the HPX gives you great sound and control straight to cam.
3/ The CCDs on this cam are not true 1920x1080. But what that means is two things, a little lower resolution and the sensors on the CCD are larger, this means those light hungry little buggers can access more light per pixel. In

So how much lower resolution? Well its subjective, but my HPX shots have been comparable to EX on the longer to mid zoom range and in some cases better. A little less on the wide end. I often use a blur to take the sharpness down on HPX in post if its for TV - obviously it depends on what I am presenting.

OK imagine this. Take a HVX, put the guts into a shoulder balanced body, upgrade audio, updrade all the components, add professional 2/3" sensors, add a professional 2/3" lens or rent 2/3" primes (no light loss etc), add a professional AB or V mount battery system with d tap to power a fs or on cam light - and on a camera with extremely low power consumption, add 2 additional p2 card slots, (small one but handy for me) add a professionally mounted shoulder strap, add precision black balance, add mechanical ND wheel, add 4 pin xlr power in, add etc etc etc Hows that stack up to the EX3 in your opinion?

As an FYI I am not someone who touts camera companies (personally I understand for the most part most companies marketing is a lot of fizz and bubble, and I choose not to listen). I use cameras that suit me for what I am doing. To verify my unfanboyness to Panasonic ask some of the locals around here if I am. The answer may be blunt :P

Happy hunting.
 
Last edited:
Not to hijack the thread, but while we're on the subject... Does anyone know how many stops faster an HPX500 would be over a 200A/HPX170?
 
Of course you would expect this answer from me, go with the HPX500. The reason being that you said you are doing weddings. There is lots of flash photography going on there. This causes haok on the CMOS imagers used in the EX3 cameras.

And I second all of the other pro-HPX500 answers.

Best,

Jan
 
We are using the HVX200, HPX500 and the EX3. I can hardly get my cameramen to want to take the HVX200 out any more and for quality ofmuch of the shooting we do our editors and directors orefer the EX3. That said, Jan is right about shooting in and around where people are using flash photography.

I really like the SxS cards because of the ability to copy direct to our Mac Book Pros rather than having to use the Duel Adapter. I also like the fact that we can get close to twice as much HD recording time per GB on the card as compared to the P2s.
 
i got to do a side by side with the ex3 and my 500 today. we were shooting some how-to vids for litepanels. we were on a really nicely lit news set. lots of big colors and detail. our talent was lit warm and we had a cityscape mural behind them with a blue gradient backlit frosted glass wall behind that. we had both cams up and on monitors. i was expecting to be blown away by the sharpness of the ex3. it was a little sharper but not a huge difference. i did notice a huge difference in the colors. we were both zero'd out on color settings, both on cine gamma, both shooting 1080/60i, both white balanced the same, etc.

the 500 looked great. rich warm skin tones and nice cool background. it looked like network news. the ex3 looked great too but we couldn't get the skintones as nice. the 500 just seemed to pop more while the ex3 came in a bit flat.

the ex3 did take the cake on the wide shot. it handles small detail better than the 500. i must say though i was using SD glass so maybe a nice HD lens would have helped.

i was surprised at the difference in DOF. i didn't think the two would be much different but they are. the 2/3" DOF is way cooler.

i am supposed to get some of his footage his week so hopefully i can post some comparisons.

so to sum it up, i am still happy with my 500 and won't be jumping ship anytime soon.
 
For jpbs that have a bit of dough behind them rent the Canon 13X Wide angle... Its so sharp its sick.

Just used one on a F900 Job for CNN. God that lens is Sharp as hell...... IT will make any camera look better....
 
Ok I went to the movies today and watched Yes Man starring Jim Carrey. Pretty Good Movie, but what I noticed was that the local ads before the movie looked pretty damn good compared to the actual movie. So basically there is no way you actually need more resolution than what the hpx500 offers to make an amazing movie. So I would still recommend the ex3 but if they were the same price I would say get a hpx500. Maybe the rumored HPX300 will be the super cam.
 
True the resolution of the EX1/EX3 and new HPX300 is better than the HPX500. However what about the rolling shutter problems of the EX1/EX3/HPX300 (all CMOS). This is what worries me more than some lack on resolution !!! Can you give me/us an idea how difficult /easy it is to circumvent the rolling shutter issues with a CMOS cam? For what kind of shooting a CMOS cam can not be used at all.

Nik Manning said:
Go for the sonys. :) Way more resolution and that seems to be what you are looking for. The Sony cams will give you that hd bluray look. So damn clear. If you want people to look at your images and know it is hd then go with the Sony cams. Now if you are going for that film more dreamy less sharp image then you can stick with panasonic, but future proofing would be better with the Sony cams as you can still get that film look with the sonys. FYI the sony codec is amazing. It will give you the cleanest 720p image because the compression is still 35MB per second.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cees Mutsaers said:
True the resolution of the EX1/EX3 and new HPX300 is better than the HPX500. However what about the rolling shutter problems of the EX1/EX3/HPX300 (all CMOS). This is what worries me more than some lack on resolution !!! Can you give me/us an idea how difficult /easy it is to circumvent the rolling shutter issues with a CMOS cam? For what kind of shooting a CMOS cam can not be used at all.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by "can't be used at all". CMOS cameras can be used to record footage in all circumstances, but it's up to you to determine whether you're satisfied with the way they perform under certain circumstances.

For example, if you use a CMOS camera under magnetic HMI or fluorescent or sodium-vapor lights, you may get an effect which ranges from subtle rolling waves to huge scrolling orange bands running through your footage. I think most of us would find it completely unacceptable. But the camera would still have captured footage, so it's not like it couldn't be used at all, it's more a case of "do you find the results acceptable"?

Vibration is probably the worst, as it turns CMOS footage to "jello". Telephoto panning is bad as it exaggerates the skewing. And flash photography causes partial exposures, the same thing will happen in any flashing environment whether it's strobelights at a nightclub or news footage with a police car's lights.

Those are the areas where CMOS will affect the way the camera acquires footage. The question you have to face is: how much do you care? Some people don't seem to care at all about the skewing, and much of the fluttering/rolling bands can be overcome with careful shutter speed selection. There's nothing you can do about the flashing issues, but if it's highly infrequent it can be fixed in post, and sometimes people just don't care at all anyway.

The skew/wobble cannot be fixed and it cannot be avoided; the circumstances it happens under will always happen. All you can do about that is minimize the relative motion of the subject. Normally that's by stabilizing the camera and shooting at wider angles. Handheld at telephoto will be pretty much impossible on any rolling shutter camera unless you don't mind the rubbery jello look that comes with it.
 
Hmmm maybe the clients won't mind but I know myself and will be irritated by wobble, skewing, partially exposed footage. It is a pity because I was so excited about the HPX300 (AVC-intra, nice EVF and LCD) but I think I will wait until the HPX500 gets these upgrades (but keeping the 2/3" pixel shifted ccd's).
 
Cees Mutsaers said:
Hmmm maybe the clients won't mind but I know myself and will be irritated by wobble, skewing, partially exposed footage. It is a pity because I was so excited about the HPX300 (AVC-intra, nice EVF and LCD) but I think I will wait until the HPX500 gets these upgrades (but keeping the 2/3" pixel shifted ccd's).
Click to expand...

Again...i'm with you all the way.
I just hope our concerns don't fall on def ears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top