Hpx500 ???
- Thread starter JohnT
- Start date
snowleopard
Well-known member
ddh said:
Of course, if you order now, you'll have the HPX550 in about two weeks. With Red, it's a wait until January of 2008.
jonnyh1968
Well-known member
...in a best case scenario.
Back to the SDX comparison. I just rented the SDX last weekend. One day: $375 + $200 for the lens. What's up with that? Still a very popular camera I guess. So if the HPX rivals picture quality then maybe it will be just as popular for ENG? My concern is how many local post houses take P2. It seems many post facilities around here have not fully jumped on the P2/digital workflow bandwagon yet. And many clients (from here to NY) seem to prefer the medium size cassette tape when it comes down to it.
Back to the SDX comparison. I just rented the SDX last weekend. One day: $375 + $200 for the lens. What's up with that? Still a very popular camera I guess. So if the HPX rivals picture quality then maybe it will be just as popular for ENG? My concern is how many local post houses take P2. It seems many post facilities around here have not fully jumped on the P2/digital workflow bandwagon yet. And many clients (from here to NY) seem to prefer the medium size cassette tape when it comes down to it.
Last edited:
Those packages are insane. We're lensing two of those and one HVX for a new travel series. The 200 promises to compliment the 500 nicely and the interchangability of recording media only makes things easier.
With these packages, and a good batching laptop and dual drives at basecamp and you're good to shoot a day's worth of footage.
e
With these packages, and a good batching laptop and dual drives at basecamp and you're good to shoot a day's worth of footage.
e
I've been using the eHD lenses on the XDCams - but those were the 1/2 350s and appropriate lensing. I'll let you know.
e
e
NorthernFilmMaker
Active member
I'm going for it
I'm going for it
I don't know about you guys, but i think i'm sold on this camera.... I was set on getting an XDcam F350, the complete package would have costed 50,000 Can, Tripod and cheap lens included. I didn't like the fact that i would need to drop about 26,000 can on a lens that would give me the telephoto reach and wide angle that i wanted. So i waited and then i saw this camera and it comes packaged with a lens & 4 X 16Gb Cards for about the price of the XDcam F350 body. with both the wide and telephoto lens that i need. (Fujinon 17X7.6 w/2X extender). I know, that the XDcam would probably give me more resolution than the HPX500 but, i'm planning to mainly shoot SD for the next while anyways...and later when all the HD stuff gets cheaper and more available, and possibly then it will be likely that most people will have High Definition TVs and Players then i can start to shoot and distribute in HD, but with this camera i will be ready when that happens. And just maybe, then we will be able to buy 64GB P2 cards for a decent price and then I can start to shoot 4 hours of DVCProHD in 1080 with the HPX, until then i think i will be mainly shooting DVCPro 50 and 720pN......:beer:
I'm going for it
I don't know about you guys, but i think i'm sold on this camera.... I was set on getting an XDcam F350, the complete package would have costed 50,000 Can, Tripod and cheap lens included. I didn't like the fact that i would need to drop about 26,000 can on a lens that would give me the telephoto reach and wide angle that i wanted. So i waited and then i saw this camera and it comes packaged with a lens & 4 X 16Gb Cards for about the price of the XDcam F350 body. with both the wide and telephoto lens that i need. (Fujinon 17X7.6 w/2X extender). I know, that the XDcam would probably give me more resolution than the HPX500 but, i'm planning to mainly shoot SD for the next while anyways...and later when all the HD stuff gets cheaper and more available, and possibly then it will be likely that most people will have High Definition TVs and Players then i can start to shoot and distribute in HD, but with this camera i will be ready when that happens. And just maybe, then we will be able to buy 64GB P2 cards for a decent price and then I can start to shoot 4 hours of DVCProHD in 1080 with the HPX, until then i think i will be mainly shooting DVCPro 50 and 720pN......:beer:
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
I'm saying that there are a few things the HPX500 does better than the HPX2000: dynamic range and variable frame rates, and 24pN/30pN modes. Other than that, the HPX2000 is pretty much better across the board.Sumfun said:
Haven't had a chance to compare across the board. But a better-engineered lens will beat a lesser-lens-with-digital-correction system, obviously. It really comes down to: how much do you have to spend in order to achieve that level of quality?
NorthernFilmMaker
Active member
So, Barry when are you going to release your review on the HPX500? It would be nice to hear in detail what you really think about the Camera.... i'm sure i'm not the only one anxious to hear...:huh:
powervideo
Well-known member
Barry_Green said:
I agree Barry. The HPX2000/HPX2100 is better across the board, except for not having that damned variable frame rate. It has two filter wheels, extra P2 slot, slot-in Wireless, bigger CCD, upgradable to AVC-Intra, HD/SDI inputs, etc. It sounds like I'm trying to talk myself into it. If I do get one of these HPX cameras I'll get the 2000.
Peter
powervideo
Well-known member
Plus I understand that the AJ-series HPX2100 body is more robust and higher quality construction than the AG HPX500.
Peter
Peter
Barry_Green
Moderator
It's certainly heavier! 
I don't know if there's a body construction difference though. Might be, don't know.
But one correction: you said a "bigger CCD", and that's not accurate. They're both 2/3". The difference is in the pixel density; the 2000 is 1 million pixels, the 500 is 620K.
As far as getting the "first look" article out -- you guys have seriously no idea how ridiculously busy it's been! Maybe I'll get it finished up on the plane ride, but there's just no time...
I don't know if there's a body construction difference though. Might be, don't know.But one correction: you said a "bigger CCD", and that's not accurate. They're both 2/3". The difference is in the pixel density; the 2000 is 1 million pixels, the 500 is 620K.
As far as getting the "first look" article out -- you guys have seriously no idea how ridiculously busy it's been! Maybe I'll get it finished up on the plane ride, but there's just no time...
alexdias
Well-known member
I had the privilege to view the camera at NAB with Barry and as usual he was very generous with his time and insightful comments.
I’ll not discuss technical features since you can find all the info you want it on line, but I’ll give my first impression.
The camera looks great; it’s not heavy or big. It handles really well handheld and has an excellent balance. It’s not too different in size from the HPX2000 or the HDX900 but it’s certainly lighter.
The viewfinder is not exceptional but it’s appropriate ($ wise).
With increased sensibility (1 and 1/2 stop if I’m right), more “cinematic” depth of field due to the 2/3 chips, 4 P2 cards slots and variable frame rates “it’s the perfect upgrade for serious HVX users” (Barry’s quote).
Thankfully, Panasonic kept the menu consistent with the HVX, SDX, etc... (which doesn’t look too different from the Varicam).
The price, as discussed here, is extremely competitive and it should be available next month.
For most people, like me, that has not an extensive experience with larger broadcast cameras I suggest a test run and I predict a certain adaptation curve. That said, the HPX500 is an excellent choice for independent filmmakers (narrative or documentary), corporate and any budget sensitive work that aims at high end, tapeless workflow.
I’ll not discuss technical features since you can find all the info you want it on line, but I’ll give my first impression.
The camera looks great; it’s not heavy or big. It handles really well handheld and has an excellent balance. It’s not too different in size from the HPX2000 or the HDX900 but it’s certainly lighter.
The viewfinder is not exceptional but it’s appropriate ($ wise).
With increased sensibility (1 and 1/2 stop if I’m right), more “cinematic” depth of field due to the 2/3 chips, 4 P2 cards slots and variable frame rates “it’s the perfect upgrade for serious HVX users” (Barry’s quote).
Thankfully, Panasonic kept the menu consistent with the HVX, SDX, etc... (which doesn’t look too different from the Varicam).
The price, as discussed here, is extremely competitive and it should be available next month.
For most people, like me, that has not an extensive experience with larger broadcast cameras I suggest a test run and I predict a certain adaptation curve. That said, the HPX500 is an excellent choice for independent filmmakers (narrative or documentary), corporate and any budget sensitive work that aims at high end, tapeless workflow.
ripupthehwy
Well-known member
I don't think the camera is too pricy. I felt it was much more professional ergonomically and feature-wise than the hvx 200, which i do own. I would definately buy the hpx 500. Has tons more pro features than the hvx200 and practically identical looks-wise to the hpx2000. Barry was very enthusiastic about it at NAB. Rich Nation
the hpx 500 & Barry Green at NAB
the hpx 500 & Barry Green at NAB
Last edited:
Ernie Kovacs
Member
Wow, HPX 500 sounds amazing.
I'm interested in a wider lens.
Does anyone know the pricing with a wider lens? I saw the Canon KJ10ex4.5IRSD PS12 on Panasonics list of lens options, but no pricing for that setup. Anyone know $?
I'm interested in a wider lens.
Does anyone know the pricing with a wider lens? I saw the Canon KJ10ex4.5IRSD PS12 on Panasonics list of lens options, but no pricing for that setup. Anyone know $?
jonnyh1968
Well-known member
So what can we expect (image wise) from the higher pixel count? (over the HVX200)?
Zack Birlew
Veteran
Much sharper image. I was playing with the HPX500 today for the first time. It was right next to an HVX200 so I could see a side-by-side comparison. I must say, the HVX200 held up pretty darn well, however, the HPX500 simply had a much clearer and better looking picture overall, immensely film-like as well.
jonnyh1968
Well-known member
sweetness. thanks!
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, it's not really higher though; it uses the same 960x540 technique that the HVX uses.jonnyh1968 said:
THe HPX500 basically does everything that we wish the HVX200 would do. It's got better sensitivity (1.5 stops more sensitive), better dynamic range (2 stops more latitude), shallower depth of field, more telephoto reach, interchangeable lenses, four fully-controllable audio channels on four XLRs, all the same HVX features but also NTSC & PAL frame rates, still does the "frame rate hack", has HD-SDI and TC in/out and genlock, and has a sharper/clearer picture (and, depending on the lens you get, can be much sharper and clearer).
Now, it's of course a lot more money, but it's less expensive than the SDX900 standard-def camera. Very, very, very cool.