HVX200a vs. HPX170 -- Purchasing?

Shoota33

Shoota33

Member
Im in the market to buy a new (or "new" used) camera...I've been shooting on an HVX200 through the production company in which I work for the past year and change, and while I love the camera, Im curious to hear some opinions as to whether I should be steering toward the HVX200a or the HPX170...or if there is another comparable camera I should be looking into...?

Any insight or personal experience would be greatly appreciated...!

Thanks
 
I think one of the most obvious considerations for you would be "Do you see any value/need to be able to have/use DV tapes?" Many here still find that its very helpful to have that feature available for a number of reasons ... some don't. It depends on what kind of project you do and the clients you have.
 
200A has the cleaner image.

170 has the better picture.

I still stand by the former comment. I've done a lot of 200A and 170 side by side and it's so obvious to me. That's my story, sticking to it.
 
Kholi said:
200A has the cleaner image.

170 has the better picture.

I still stand by the former comment. I've done a lot of 200A and 170 side by side and it's so obvious to me. That's my story, sticking to it.
Click to expand...
Care to elaborate a little? I'm not saying your wrong or anything but I would love to see the difference. Do you have any shots for comparison?
 
I had some, but just deleted the actual comparisons after a while to make myself feel better. I've actually got a lot of HVX200A footage, though, from when I had one and I go back often to look at it.

It's clean, man. And my 170 footage even with Details and Coring dialed down to -7 is still not as clean. 170 has by far the best features, but lacks in image quality.
 
Kholi said:
200A has the cleaner image.

170 has the better picture.

I still stand by the former comment. I've done a lot of 200A and 170 side by side and it's so obvious to me. That's my story, sticking to it.
Click to expand...



Hey Kholi,

I recently bought a 170 (really liking it so far). While I find it sometimes tough to articulate why, I definitely agree that there is in fact a visible difference between the two cameras. Both very nice but different. I've tried to describe it like a thin "veneer" that appears to cover the image - sometimes it effects chroma contrast, the organic look and feel, the highlight roll-off, etc.

Can you describe what you mean by "better picture" of the 170? (More accurate, more pleasing, better mojo?)

As I said, I pretty happy with my decision on the 170 but it was a close call between that and the 200a.


thanks,


dmc
 
The 200A seemed to be a lot less "grainy" than the 170. That's as best I could describe it. There's always this persisting layer of grain over the 170 footage, I can spot it even in web video.

With the 200A footage (http://www.vimeo.com/1093520) it was always clear and crisp, more Varicam like than anything else.

The 170's feature set is pretty badass, and I get a lot of requests for rentals which helps the ROI so I kept it. Was going to go HPX300, then had a change of heart. So I still have my HPX170 but I'm unhappy with the image. Guess you can't ask for much out of a 5K Camera.
 
Going to go a little old school here, back to pure SD...and say that personally, out of the DVX family, Ive always found the 100 to have the cleanest and most polished look...even when using the same or similar scene settings, side by side, I prefer the 100 to the 100a, and/or 100b...

Kholi, if you agree with my above opinion, would you say the same is true with the image quality of the HVXa over the HPX with regard to HD...? Trying to get a sence of what you mean in terms of image quality...beyond crisp and clean...

Thanks
 
has the 170 the same improvements as the 200a over the 200?
Hard to choose between the two, the 170 is al ittle cheaper, but the 200!A! has better image quality than the 200 ,has the 170 the same improvements as the 200a over the 200?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top