HVX200A - First Look

A nice update, but I don't know how much of a hit I'd like to take on the trade-up. Where is the HD SDI out? Where is that?

e
 
Great to hear Barry, nice article. That comparison of the two cameras (the mp4) suprised me...the image was way better. Its always tough to tell when they simply say its a 'better' chipset. Nice to see its much better than I thought.
 
Over on the Panasonic site, there's a short video presentation with Jan Crittenden wherein she says the new CCDs have 1.1 million effective pixels, which is almost twice as many as in the old ones (960 x 540 = 691,200).

EDITED -- Oops, that should be 960 x 540 = 518,400.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit of a conundrum for Panasonic - the way P2 has taken off. It leaves the first P2 camera - the HVX200 - to continue to shoulder the burden of being a hybridized DV/P2HD platform.

With the requisite (and in many cases, unused) MiniDV tape system, the resulting price point must, theoretically, remain higher than the significantly better specification HPX170. At the same time, they can't simply eliminate the DV25 camera, because they no longer have the DVX in the line-up.

The HVX200, in my opinion, becomes the red-headed stepchild of the P2 family - which is an unfortunate outcome.

e
 
1280x720 is 921,600. So with overscanning/underscanning I think we can safely say that these camera's have 1280x720 CCD chips.
 
And people seem to forget that the HPX-170 has a HD-SDI output. I am not sure how much difference a tape mechanism vs. hd-sdi out is in terms of costprice but I suppose the HPX-170 can still cost more. Also, the HPX-170 carries the HPX label (like the HPX-500) and not the HVX label, so I am not sure why people believe it will be cheaper.

If the HPX-170 is like $4,999 that would be a very nice price.
 
hpx170 VS hvx200A

hpx170 VS hvx200A

Do they use the same image block? Looking at the HPX170 as a second camera? What are the improved refinements in the HPX170?
 
florisvaneck said:
Also, the HPX-170 carries the HPX label (like the HPX-500) and not the HVX label, so I am not sure why people believe it will be cheaper.
Click to expand...

From what I can tell, the V in HVX is for videotape and the P in HPX is for P2.
The model numbers designate it's position and price point. The 170 still being lower lower than the 200 and the 200a being higher than the 200.
 
Aaahhhhhhhh yessssssss.

Very clean test from the A camera. Those few things will go a LONG WAY to producing a more High Definition image as opposed to SD uprezzed really well images.

Thanks for the pre-test, Barry! Even more excited about the 170.

Did you see if the cameras had the Dynamic Range menu option thingy?
 
I have the feeling that in the mid and dark grey tones the noise is about the same but in the light grey tones it is substantial better. The HVX200 is somewhat greenish (at least on my screen).
 
bilgami said:
Is the HPX170 more of a dvx or hvx upgrade or in between?
Click to expand...

For what I've seen is a new line with all the advantages of the hvx (except the tape drive) with more added features, like the hd-sdi.... so for me this camera (if priced below the hvx) is the hvx but for lower budgets.
 
Yeah, but doesn't anyone care about 1080/24pN... as in NATIVE. That is a big feature in my book.

e
 
I do care about it. Absolutely. Doesn't the HMC150 do 1080/24pN? One of these cams does it, can't remember which.

That's somethin' to be pointed out as well.
 
Tzedekh said:
Over on the Panasonic site, there's a short video presentation with Jan Crittenden wherein she says the new CCDs have 1.1 million effective pixels, which is almost twice as many as in the old ones (960 x 540 = 691,200).
Click to expand...

"Effective Pixels" is sort of an unclear term. How one gets a number of "effective pixels" from the sensor array is complicated, and arguable... pixel-shifting, e.g., increases the number of "effective pixels" for the same number of elements in the sensor array.

So, any claim about the number of "effective pixels" can't rerally be used to evaluate the number of elements in the sensor array unless you're told exactly how the "effective pixels" are derived.

If the Green Barry sees significant improvement in sensitivity and noise performance, but none in sharpness, then it would seem the sensors are similar to the original 960x540...
 
Erik Olson said:
A nice update, but I don't know how much of a hit I'd like to take on the trade-up. Where is the HD SDI out? Where is that?
Click to expand...
That's on the HPX170.

Honestly guys, I think the 170 is going to be what you all were expecting the 200A to be. The 170 looks like where the fun is (waveform, HD-SDI, 6-pin firewire, 8-position scene file dial, additional ND filter, 20 frame rates instead of 11, and who knows what else is lurking under the hood.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top