HVX200 or HPX170?

Sherman

Sherman

Well-known member
That is the question!
Have been shooting with my trusty DVX100a since it came out several years ago.
It's been a workhorse and I love it like an old horse.
I'll still use it for some projects. Won't put it out to pasture.
But thoughts are turning to the future.
So what is the better choice and why,... HVX200, HPX170 or maybe even the whateveritis150?
Another factor is that my NLE is Vegas Pro 8.
All things considered should I consider cutting with something else if I stay with Panasonic? Though I really don't want to learn another NLE ( I love Vegas) maybe I should,...maybe it's time.
Or is it easier just to take the course of least resistance and go with the Sony EX3$, which I assume is more compatible with Vegas?
 
I don't know about the EX series nor Vegas. I use FCP, had a DVX and now have an HPX and all I can say is wow, what a huge leap forward. I'd pick the HPX over the HVX200 any day for numerous reasons. Would I pick the HVX200a over the HPX170? Hmm, I dunno. There's alot of debate over which of the two produces a clear image.
 
Hi Sherman,

This is just my 2 cents. I just upgraded from a DVX100 to the HPX170. My 20/20 hindsight & unraveling of many "myths" surrounding the 170 & its features, tell me that I really should have gone with the EX1. it would have served my needs better and been more cost effective, multiformat, & better quality in the long run. If I had to choose at this point between the 200a & 170, I would go with the 200A as I think you are getting more camera for your money, and I cannot understand why those two cameras are priced the same... IMHO.........
 
i picked up the 200a back in april before the 170 was out. from what i've read about the 170, if it had been available at the same time i would have gone that route rather than the 200a as i haven't even touched the dv tape part of the camera. the waveform monitors look really sweet on the 170.

while i freakin love my 200a, i won't be purchasing any more cameras that use p2. the release of the 64gig card at a list price of $2600, while a drop in overall price per gig, is way too expensive for media in my opinion. add to that the price of the 16 and 32 did not drop at all. i knew what i was getting in to when i bought the camera, and like i said, i love it. but i expected the 64gig card to bring at least a slight price drop at the 16gig and 32gig level.

have you looked at the hmc150? there is at least 1 person who has jumped ship from the hvx/hpx to the hmc150 and he loves it. take a look at this thread. there are issues going that way as well, but you will save some cash up front, to the tune of almost 2 grand. and that's before you buy additional p2 cards. definitely worth investigating.

again, i knew what i was getting in to when i bought the hvx, and i love the image i get from it. that being said, i'm considering the 150, but more likely it's time to part ways with panny and see how the scarlett pans out. i'm even more hopeful for a nikon d900 or d9, but that's off subject.

CW-35 said:
If I had to choose at this point between the 200a & 170, I would go with the 200A as I think you are getting more camera for your money, and I cannot understand why those two cameras are priced the same... IMHO.........
Click to expand...

not sure why you say this. you get either the tape deck with the 200a, or built in waveform monitors, additional non-hacked variable framerates and a smaller form factor with the 170. since i haven't even opened my tape deck, it would have been nice if the 170 was available back in april. oh well.

best of luck on your camera choice.
 
Well, I'm just getting to dig into using my 170 and yes, it's a huge leap forward from the 100A, like biplane to jet fighter. Don't know about the 200A since I never used it, but the tape drive would be useless for me, not to mention the extra size and weight.
As for Vegas, the Raylight plugins are seamless for bringing in your footage. It is extra cost but I can fly faster in Vegas than Premiere, and the speed offsets the cost easily.
 
Peabody said:
That is the question!
Have been shooting with my trusty DVX100a since it came out several years ago.
It's been a workhorse and I love it like an old horse.
I'll still use it for some projects. Won't put it out to pasture.
But thoughts are turning to the future.
So what is the better choice and why,... HVX200, HPX170 or maybe even the whateveritis150?
Another factor is that my NLE is Vegas Pro 8.
All things considered should I consider cutting with something else if I stay with Panasonic? Though I really don't want to learn another NLE ( I love Vegas) maybe I should,...maybe it's time.
Or is it easier just to take the course of least resistance and go with the Sony EX3$, which I assume is more compatible with Vegas?
Click to expand...

Hi Peabody:

I went for the HPX170, and sold my HVX200. I have been very happy with the HPX170, it is a great camera. Not sure if you have read this article, http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/hpx_170_evolution_brockett.html it does not compare the 170 to the 200A, just to the original 200.

The 150 has a good looking image, but the lack of native support in FCP and the absence of variable frame rates make it a no go for my work, I love P2. Yes, the cards are expensive but they are great. I own two 8GB and two 16Gb cards and I can get by in most shoots.

As most pros know, when you need more P2 cards or bigger cards, you bill them out and pay for them with a job or two, then they are free and you can still charge for them and actually make money off of them.

170 is great!

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top