HPX500 vs. HDX900 vs. Varicam HDC27

[Spartacus]

I´m trying to find out about the differences in picture quality from these cams.
The 500 uses pixel shift to get a HD image AFAIK, how do the others produce their image?
The old Varicam is 720p only, how does this hold up against 1080 from both the 500 and 900?
Which of the three technicaly produces the "best" image?

I consider buying one of these used and pairing it with a Nanoflash, any experiences with such a setup to share?

 

[Dino]

None of the three cameras has native 1080X1920 CCD's. The 500 pixel shifts, the Varicam and HDX900 uprezz. The early Varicams used lower bit depth processing and were noisier. Varicam H was the final version with higher processing.

The 900 is similar to the last Varicam series except they add 1080 modes and lose Film-Rec gamma and variable frame rates and frame rate ramping. The 500 has some variable frame rates, no ramping, plus adds SD modes.

The Varicam and 900 have better tonality, native HD sensors, more image control. The 500 does not have the sophisticated look and image control of the native 720P higher end cameras.

My first choice for around the $14K price point would be a used HPX2000, this offers 5 P2 card recording, AVC-Intra option, no need for external deck, which in the case of the nanoFlash is limited to 8-bit, unlike 10-bit internal AVC-Intra. It will not do variable frame rates, it is more like the HDX900 in that regard.

 

[Spartacus]

Thanks for the great insight Dino!
The 2000 sounds nice, but I also wanted to get rid of expensive P2 recording.
10-bit AVCintra would be nice too, but it would mean pimping the 2000 with a card, wouldn´t it?
Anyways, the Nanoflash seems like a good option of making use of older, and thus cheaper, tape-based HD cams.
So focusing on the HDC27 and the 900, who is the winner?
Variable framerates is an option sth I have only palyed with, but never used in a project.
I rather used Twixtor to get slowmo in post, if I found it necessary.
FilmRec Gamma on the other hand seems sth I would use - how limited is the 900 compared to that?
Right now I´d probaly say 1080 is the selling point for me, but maybe uprezed Varicam footage will look similar...?

 

[Dino]

HPX2000's came bundled with the AVC-Intra board for awhile--that's the one to find! Five 32Gb P2 cards cost the same amount as a nanoFlash, and the latter is limited to 8-bit. I much prefer internal recording. You can always add the Intra board later if you find a good deal on a 2000 without the board.

An HDX900 used is similar in price to a used HPX2000--I see no reason to buy an HDX900. Yes, you might be able to get a lower price on a Varicam, but stay away from the F models, only look at H series. Varicam has variable frame rates and Film-Rec, but no 1080 modes. Uprezz in post is fine, unless you have clients demanding 1080 field acquisition.

Filmlike 3 gamma in a 900 or 2000 is close to Film-Rec, without the dynamic range percentage options. 900 and 2000 have DRS(dynamic range stretcher), which is a useful circuit for high contrast scenes, Varicam's Film-Rec will provide similar performance with highlights, but won't offer the dynamic shadow detail stretching.

The 2000 is the newest camera of the ones mentioned, it is available for a similar cost to a 900. With a 900 you'd have to add a nanoFlash, so other than the possible cost of an Intra board, adding five P2 cards will be a wash.

It is possible to find a Varicam H model for a bit under $10K, so with a nanoFlash, it could be less expensive or similar to a 500 with P2 cards.

Anyway, the 2000 is my first choice if found for $14K or less plus $2850 for P2 cards. If that's too expensive, then I don't think a 900/nanoFlash will work either.

 

[Spartacus]

The 2000 basically seems to be non-existent on the used market where I live.
German broadcasters haven´t even switched to HD yet, so anyone who bought into P2HD will probably have another 3 years of return of invest without the need for an upgrade...
A used Varicam or 900 with Nanoflash will end up at around 13K, Euros that is and without glass of course.
Still not sure if this investment would make much sense for me, the attitude towards freelancers with "handycams" instead of shouldermounts has shifted completely, everybody knows that those little thingies are capable of producing excellent looking footage, at least for everything besides primetime documentary...
I´m actually only bothering with a new cam, since I´m preparing a longer piece (documentary) that could end up being projected at festivals...
Thanks again for your input, Dino!

 

[Christian m]

The 2000 sounds nice, but I also wanted to get rid of expensive P2 recording.

Unless you're going to run the cameras as a deck, P2 is way cheaper than tape. Tape might be easier than P2 for longer documentaries where the option to offload ain't to good. Apart from very long documentaries shot at places where offloading is impossible i would NEVER go from P2 to tape...but that's my personal opinion though.

As for HPX500, if you're used to higher end cameras there might be some "issues":
-The stock VF ain't to good, the AG-VF20 is way better but not as good as HD VF's.
-Not close to as many image tweaking options in camera, it's like a hvx200
-Only 8-bit HD-SDI
-Not Native HD chips, the pixel shifting do a decent job...but it can't match the sharpness of native 720p or 1080p. I still think my Hpx500 do a decent job with 720p images.

Since I shoot a lot of action sport with my gear I find VFR important, or at least 720p50 option. If clients request 1080 in any form the 900 or 500 will do that, in addition to 720p50 and 25p.

 

[Dino]

The 2000 basically seems to be non-existent on the used market where I live.
German broadcasters haven´t even switched to HD yet, so anyone who bought into P2HD will probably have another 3 years of return of invest without the need for an upgrade...
A used Varicam or 900 with Nanoflash will end up at around 13K, Euros that is and without glass of course.
!

It would be the HPX2100 in Europe. 2000's are not too hard to find in the US, and not very much more money than a Varicam 27H.

A 2000 and just one 64Gb P2 E series card will give you 160 minutes of record time in 720/24PN.

 

[Spartacus]

Unless you're going to run the cameras as a deck, P2 is way cheaper than tape. Tape might be easier than P2 for longer documentaries where the option to offload ain't to good. Apart from very long documentaries shot at places where offloading is impossible i would NEVER go from P2 to tape...but that's my personal opinion though.

As for HPX500, if you're used to higher end cameras there might be some "issues":
-The stock VF ain't to good, the AG-VF20 is way better but not as good as HD VF's.
-Not close to as many image tweaking options in camera, it's like a hvx200
-Only 8-bit HD-SDI
-Not Native HD chips, the pixel shifting do a decent job...but it can't match the sharpness of native 720p or 1080p. I still think my Hpx500 do a decent job with 720p images.

Since I shoot a lot of action sport with my gear I find VFR important, or at least 720p50 option. If clients request 1080 in any form the 900 or 500 will do that, in addition to 720p50 and 25p.

Thanks for the info Christian, I didn´t want to use tape though but record to a Nanoflash via SDI.

 

[Spartacus]

It would be the HPX2100 in Europe. 2000's are not too hard to find in the US, and not very much more money than a Varicam 27H.

A 2000 and just one 64Gb P2 E series card will give you 160 minutes of record time in 720/24PN.

Again, thank you for your insight, Dino!
Yeah 720/24PN is an interesting format recording length wise.
Still I think, when demand for HD really starts here, it will be 1080 only.
Maybe they will even make the jump right to 1080/50p...

Anyways, I will try to hunt down a used 2100, but as said, the original owners are probably still earning back their investemnt, so there won´t be many offers...

 

[Christian m]

I came across one Hpx2100 in Norway recently, not sure what their asking for it or if it has the avc-i board. A HDX900 with nanoflash seems fine, but as Jeff said a 2100 with avc-i board is capable of 10bit. How relevant that is for your shooting is another story.

I thought 720p50 where kind of what EBU recommended it's members to go with for HD broadcast. I know BBC is 1080i50 or 25psf though, NRK in Norway is 720p50 so there might be some different choices around after all.

 

[Dino]

A cool thing about AVC-Intra 100, besides full sample, 10-bit recording, is that it's a progressive, native codec--no legacy limitations due to tape formats. So, even when recording in 1080, you will be using a Native mode for 24/25/30P. This will give you about 15% more recording time in 24PN. DVCPRO HD only records Native frame rates in 720P.