HXV200a - HPX170: not the same image

G

Gary Senda

Well-known member
The same chip, the same DSP, the same codec but ***NOT*** the same image.
HPX170 is much better: this is my impression after a side to side test.
Perhaps the lens is better?

Regards

Gary
 
not supposed to be the case. but the glass is supposedly the only diff.
could it make THAT much diff?

maybe...

have you screencaps to share your conclusion?
 
I never would have thought the 72mm lens would look better than the 82... Interesting.
 
No screen caps at the moment: I've owned a 201 before and I have had this impression as soon as I've shooted the first clip. So I have performed a quick side to side test in the shop where I've bought the camera. I want to repeat the test in a better situation and I'll post the images, anyway the differences seem significative.
With the same settings 170 seems to have a more equlibrated image, more natural colors, less grain and seems to perform better in lowlight.

This is only an impression, obviously, but in the shop there were other people and all of them had the same words

Regards

Gary
 
Gary,

I have heard this before.

Thanks for the heads up, I'll do some testing this week out in the field for real world situations.
 
Man! You can't do this and not post comparisons! please do! before a lot of us pull the trigger on either camera. :)

Seriously, please post some screen grabs, same lighting same framing same settings... please!
 
It was only a quick test in a shop. I have had this clear sensation as soon I've used the camera. We have decided to perform a controlled test and in taht occasion we will post our results.
Anyway this sensation is very very diffused and solid after only few days the cameras are available

Regards

Gary
 
I've had a 200A and a prerelease HPX170 side by side in the lab, shooting the same stuff, and if there's any difference in the image it's infitesimal. There must be some other factor at work -- either there was a UV filter on the 200A, or the settings were different, or something like that.
 
The images were monitored on 62" full HD panasonic plasma. We have evaluated both the live images and the recorded images. The settings were the same. No filters. We have also used a panasonic video mixer to evaluate the images on the same monitor: for ALL the images were different and HPX170 was better... but it was a quick test. We will repeat it

Regards

gary
 
And you're certain it was an HVX200A, not a 200? They look absolutely identical externally, but the 200's performance would in fact compare to the 170 (or 200A) pretty much as you described.
 
Ted,

You could be on to something. The box my old hvx came in has an "A" for AG infront of the 200 and I'm wondering if some people are confusing that with the new 200A model.
 
Ted Spencer said:
And you're certain it was an HVX200A, not a 200?
Click to expand...

The (quick) test was performed in Italy and there was an HVX201 vs. an HPX171. In july I've bought a 201: I've used it for only 4 hours and I've decided to change with an HPX171. So I've given back the camera to the seller and he has given me an HPX171 without asking other money. Well, the camera we tested was my previous HVX201.
Perhaps this is more evident in 50 Hz footage that has a different resolution (we've tested 1080p), perhaps the lens, perhaps we've made a mistake (and for this reason we have to try again), but the HPX image seemed better to us

Regards

Gary
 
I just put my HPX170 up on charts. I am finding it to be much more similar than different from an image standpoint to an HVX200A. Noise is about the same, no chromatic aberration, same as 200A, 3200 preset is a little plus green, same as a 200A. Image is no sharper, however I am getting better edge to edge focus with my Letus Ultimate than witha 200A. I find the edges of any content to be very smooth, organic, no aliasing or other artifacts that scream video.

Biggest problem is with slopiness between the zoom ring and body. There is a lot of play and with a 35mm DOF adapter, the problem is exacerbated, add a follow focus and the whole camera twists when running to the end of focus range on a 35mm prime lens. Looking at the image, you can see side to side shifting while focusing. I added a second
support for the Letus and this time installed a screw through the support, into the Letus.
The slopiness is much improved, happily, but I am concerned about using a 170 with a clip on matte box, a follow focus, wide angle adapter--this front end play could be a problem.
 
Gary Senda said:
The (quick) test was performed in Italy and there was an HVX201 vs. an HPX171. In july I've bought a 201: I've used it for only 4 hours and I've decided to change with an HPX171. So I've given back the camera to the seller and he has given me an HPX171 without asking other money. Well, the camera we tested was my previous HVX201.
Perhaps this is more evident in 50 Hz footage that has a different resolution (we've tested 1080p), perhaps the lens, perhaps we've made a mistake (and for this reason we have to try again), but the HPX image seemed better to us

Regards

Gary
Click to expand...

Sorry, but it's still not completely clear to me that your HVX was the "A" version. Was it?

It's quite possible that a non "A" HVX could have been bought new in July.
 
Dino said:
Biggest problem is with slopiness between the zoom ring and body. There is a lot of play and with a 35mm DOF adapter, the problem is exacerbated, add a follow focus and the whole camera twists when running to the end of focus range on a 35mm prime lens. Looking at the image, you can see side to side shifting while focusing. I added a second
support for the Letus and this time installed a screw through the support, into the Letus.
The slopiness is much improved, happily, but I am concerned about using a 170 with a clip on matte box, a follow focus, wide angle adapter--this front end play could be a problem.
Click to expand...

Dino, could you please explain where the problem stems from. I don't think I understand. Are you saying that the lens on the 170 has some play?

EDIT: OM(F)G! http://vimeo.com/1873268
Are you kidding me?!? This is not good...
I am sure it won't create that much trouble
but this is a major ball drop for a camera that's
known for being used with DoF adapters....
 
Roberto,

Yes there have been quite a few compaints now that there is a considerable amount of play between the body and the end of the lens, taking place at the zoom ring
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top