HVX 200 successors

R

rubberjohnny

New member
I wanted to get an HVX 200 a couple of years ago to shoot music videos, but then went to university instead. Now it seems that the HVX 200 has been superceded, and I would like some help re: which cameras are the worthy successors or would it be better to get an HVX 200 for cheap. The most important thing for me is variable frame rate capture (aside from image quality: HD and not HDV etc.) I would greatly appreciate any advice.
 
HDV is HD.

The HPX170 and HVX200A are the "successors" to the HVX200. They do all the same things, and in the case of the 170, a few more -- different/better focus assist, video scopes, electronic keyboard for metadata, etc. Both it and the 200A have improved optics over the 200.

Functionally, though, the original 200 is 98% the same.
 
David Jimerson said:
HDV is HD.

The HPX170 and HVX200A are the "successors" to the HVX200. They do all the same things, and in the case of the 170, a few more -- different/better focus assist, video scopes, electronic keyboard for metadata, etc. Both it and the 200A have improved optics over the 200.

Functionally, though, the original 200 is 98% the same.
Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree here. In addition to the new "optics" (if I can assume that you meant the lens), both the HVX200A and HPX170 have significantly improved low light capability and much less noise. If you were including the sensors in the "optics" category, then this would be more of a clarification than a correction.

And while the 170 does add all the nice features you mentioned, it also deletes the MiniDV tape drive, which is important for some people. I recently designed and built an audio/video production studio for a corporate client based around an HVX200A, and the tape drive has already seen almost as much use as the P2 cards. YMMV...
 
Ted Spencer said:
I'd have to disagree here. In addition to the new "optics" (if I can assume that you meant the lens), both the HVX200A and HPX170 have significantly improved low light capability and much less noise. If you were including the sensors in the "optics" category, then this would be more of a clarification than a correction.
Click to expand...

That is indeed what I was referring to. :beer:
 
Hey,

You should also consider the Sony EX1. Better lens and full raster HD. I was afraid it wouldn't look as "filmic" as the HVX/HPX, but after color grading EX1 footage in Final Cut/Magic Bullet Looks, I'd say it looks great.

Here's a link to some footage I shot on the first day I used the camera:
http://vimeo.com/4948437

Mike
 
thanks

thanks

thanks guys, my concern is: though the Sony EX claim variable frame-rate capture as a feature, is it as flexible/adjustable as the HVX series?:huh:
 
The Original 200 can still produce some great images. But as mentioned above the A and the 170 have improvements. You really can't go wrong with any of them including the EX1.
 
There are long long long threads on DVXUser and several other forums which discuss which cameras are better, presumably for which needs.

"The PMW-EX1 can capture images at frame rates selectable from 1 fps (frame per second) to 60 fps in 720P mode and from 1 fps to 30 fps in 1080P mode, in increments of 1 fps."

I am not sure how the incremental settings of under/overcrank compare between the two, but I do know all of the cameras in question do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top