hvx300 or hpx500? Advice

D

dersublue

Member
HI All,

I am going to be shooting a project with a musician. The project consist of shooting the rehearsals for a new work that he is doing and then a live unplugged type concert of the same work. Mixed there are going to be some interviews and some landscape shots of the country side.

I will be using two hvx200, and I am planning to get another for the main camera, the question is: should I get the 300 or the 500? money is not an issue.

Thanks for the input.

D.
 
Well, the 300 is 2.2MP, the 500 is not (i believe). The 500 is 2/3" CCD, the 300 is 1/3" CMOS. The 500 shoots DVCPRO HD as its highest quality format, the 300 uses AVC-I 100. The 500 has 4 P2 card slots, the 300 has 2. The 300 comes with a pretty good lens, the 500 doesn't come with any!

Basically, just make a list of comparisons of specs and the sort. Try to make a list that is completely unbiased toward one camera, so just list specs and not if they are a positive or negative. Then compare. Which one has more features that your going to need/want? No-one in this forum is going to be able to make the right decision for you (but they have a 50/50 chance) based on your needs, only you can do that.
 
I faced the same question a while back. I had been looking at the 500 for ages and I liked it but I couldn't get over the fact that it just didn't look like HD next to any of the true HD chip cameras. I seriously looked at the ex3 but then I had to edit a program shot in XDHD and the long gop was a pain in the **** so I went with the 300, ( 302 in Aus )

Here are my thoughts so far, first of all was the skew. I tested it in the dealers by panning it left and right off the shoulder and yes there was skew but I thought I could live with it. Since I have had the camera skew has never been an issue in any shooting environment.

It was a bit noisy in the blacks but that seems to have been sorted with the latest firmware update as has the Flash band issue.

The only real issue I have is that I miss having a 2/3 inch sensor but I have been able to get beautiful images out of this camera. Watching wilds at the end of a shoot has been a pleasure. I came from having a 2/3 inch chip DVCAM which was nice but to be able to shoot progressive 720 and 1080 has been fantastic. I've owned many 2/3 inch broadcast cams before but I think this is the most camera I have ever bought for the least amount of money.
 
I had the same what to buy a few months ago and ended up with the 500, the cmos issues and me shooting everything from news to sports, some times from the air in heli lead me to the 500.

The 500 will for most be a more expensive kit due to the lens needed. The other cons are the VF which are not very good and the relatively low res chips. But this is still the cheapest 2/3" hd camera around, you have to make compromises to get there. Want 1080p native on ccd's and no long goop...hpx3000/3700 are what you will be looking at.

While the 300 have full hd chips and a very good codec it's still 1/3". That mean that it won't come close to the 500's DOF, dynamic range and abilities in low light. The selection of lenses for 2/3" also are a lot better than 1/3" lens options.

It depends on your needs, need to shoot a lot of low light then 2/3" might be best or a well lit studio might favour the codec and 1080p of the 300. That said I would not judge this to much on the avc-i codec, the old varicam is still going strong as a 720p camera with dvcprohd, the results of some of the Varicam shots in planet earth speak for them selves...
 
I have not owned the 500, but rented it a lot for a client. It's no slouch.

I do own a 300. The only thing I miss with the 500 is the 2/3 inch DOF control. The viewfinder was a big negative, focusing with my HPX 170 is much easier. The viewfinder on the 300 is the cat's pajamas.

I love the size and diminutive weight of the 300, it's near perfect.

As for jello-vision, for many it will be much ado about nothing. If you are shooting 24P and using long lens hand held shots, it could be a concern in some circumstances. I would demo it and shoot shots that you are likely to shoot to see if it's going to be an issue for you.

The AVC-i 100 rocks.

For me, I couldn't be happier with the 300. At it's price point I'm ecstatic over this camera. Panasonic has hit another one out of the ballpark.
 
I saw some great 500 footage in SD, how it looks in HD ?
Do you think 500 is an "old technology camera" ?

Ulisses
 
ulisses said:
I saw some great 500 footage in SD, how it looks in HD ?
Do you think 500 is an "old technology camera" ?
Click to expand...
I think the 500 looks pretty good as the very budget HD camcorder it is, as with the 300 you have to take it for what it is. It's not as sharp and detailed on the large wide shots as say the Sony Ex1 or Hpx300, but handles challenging light much better and have look out of the box that i find much nicer than Sony's xdcam ex.


Some examples of the 500's performance in HD(vimeo HD..):
http://vimeo.com/4439506
http://vimeo.com/4439506

In my opinion about 2 years? for broadcast gear ain't old, allthough the development are accelerating "old" non full hd chipset camera's as the tape varicam and hdx900 are still going strong out there. The 500 might not be the latest and greatest, but then it's at a so low pricepoint that it should have paid for it self in months...
 
Those images are fantastic, that is the best I have seen the 500 look. Did you use prime lenses and an adaptor or is that a stock lens and 2/3 dof ? Great work !
 
dersublue said:
HI All,

I am going to be shooting a project with a musician. The project consist of shooting the rehearsals for a new work that he is doing and then a live unplugged type concert of the same work. Mixed there are going to be some interviews and some landscape shots of the country side.

I will be using two hvx200, and I am planning to get another for the main camera, the question is: should I get the 300 or the 500? money is not an issue.

Thanks for the input.

D.
Click to expand...


Hi, here my thoughts: Because of the better low-light abilities i would choose the 500. I dont know the light-situation, but i can imagine there maybe not so much light in the unplugged scene. And you maybe get more beautyfull images because of the DOF... But stop: If you use the HVX200 at the same time, maybe the 300 is the better choice... Images could be more similar and easier to cut together.... I own the 300 and i love it! But if i have to shoot in low light envrioments, i rent a 500 or a digibeta.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top