Is There a Proper Successor to the HMC 150?

sagedrummer

sagedrummer

Active member
I have been using my HMC 150's since they came out almost 5 years ago. I have bought other higher quality cameras since then but still go to the HMC 150 in certain sitations where I need a lightweight camera. WIth the HVX and DVX series there were always clear successors or model improvements. What do people consider the successor to the HMC 150? I am not interested in the AF100 and think they are totally different kinds of cameras. Is there another camera besides the AC 160 that I don't know about. I would love to hear people's opinions on how some of the newer models stack up against the HMC 150. Thanks!
 
From Panasonic it's either the AC130 or AC160, otherwise it's one of the Sony prosumer camcorders. All of these are CMOS cameras and will have some degree of rolling-shutter that the HMC150 doesn't have.
 
The most direct HMC150 successor would be the AC130A.

The AC160A could be considered a model up from the HMC150, in that it has variable frame rates and HD-SDI, which the 150 didn't have.

The AC90 could potentially be considered a successor to the HMC150 as well, in that the HMC150 was the smallest full-featured pro camcorder in Panasonic's lineup, and the AC90 now occupies that slot. But the AC90 is a bit of a downgrade in several ways too; it's more like a successor to a mythical product that would have been halfway between the HMC40 and the HMC150.
 
I must say I miss my HMC 150 and its ccds often. It was a fantastic camera for me and my clients loved the footage. Easy to transport and fun to shoot with all around. I thought about an AC160 but dealing with the "do you have a dslr?" from clients forced the change. And in all honesty I bought one of the first GH1 cameras in Canada and used it but have never missed dual system since I put down the Eclair a long time ago, so it was my b roll camera. Recently I acquired a Sony HVR V1U that someone didn't want anymore and I strap my older Ninja 1 on it. But I think there may be an AC 160 or the next generation model on my list for next year. Decided to keep my FS100 and not go with a 700 so I can put the funds towards that. But going with SDI rather than HDMI outs would be my choice. I am NOT a fan of HDMI cables and sockets. Nasty.
 
Thanks for the responses. I have my eye on the AC 160A, I think I am going to sell my Sony NEX50-U which I thought would be a replacement for my HMC 150's but I just don't like certain things and the large sensor is a hassle focusing when doing event videography. Is there anyone out there who has owned the HMC 150 and the AC 160? How do the 2 compare? I am assuming the 160 should have better image quality and do better in low light.
 
The AC160A has a much sharper picture, and a much cleaner image. In terms of raw sensitivity, they're pretty comparable, but the gain is a lot cleaner in the AC160A so you can use more gain without the picture turning to a grainy mess. The HMC150 was pretty limited in how much gain you could use.
 
I was asking some the same questions about a year ago. Was looking at the 160a especially.
I ended up buying a couple Hmc 150s because of several reasons. We do a very wide array of work and some of it requires auto functions which are a problem for the 130/130a and 160/160a.
They are sharper than the 150, yes. But the 150 is just barely sharp enough in 1080, and also is immune to rolling shutter.

I frankly like the 150 better. I just wish it had the focus in red like the 160a and 1080 60p.
The 130/160 were supposed to be the successors but couldn't quite do it.
Look at the reviews on BH and amazon for how many people are still buying 150s and giving it steller reviews despite it's age.
 
Last edited:
Hi Firehawk - Glad to see you still like the 150's IMHO the 130/160 are still nowhere near the 150's overall. The image might be sharper but the auto functions as you already have said are just not up to scratch and many other things too..the audio was truly disappointing for me as well as very limited auto iris too. I still love my EA-50's ... I'm finding it very hard to fault them and after over 100 hours on each camera they have been awesome!! In low light I just snap my Nikon mount lenses on the cam and I can do wedding receptions almost without a video light. They too, as you know have focus peaking so using manual lenses is so easy!! .. I always wondered why Panasonic didn't simply keep as the good stuff on the 150's and just give the cameras a better sensor instead of a total re-design??
 
Wow, now I am confused (-: Keep my HMC 150's or at least one and buy a 160A? I see that the 160's are not as lightweight as the 150's and if the image quality is not a significant step up, then maybe I should just hold on to the HMC 150's. What to do...
 
The image quality is a noticeable step up. However, the AC160A is much larger than the HMC150. It has a way bigger zoom lens, and that makes the overall unit much bigger. The AC160A has a few other features that the 150 doesn't have, such as variable frame rates, uncompressed audio, and SDI output. It is a nice step up in many ways, but if you're used to a handheld camera of the HMC150's size, be aware that the AC160 is noticeably bigger.
 
Why not rent one and see if you like it?

I used one AC160A along with my 2 HMC150's for a Wedding last summer and I liked the AC160A a lot. It wasn't a HUGE difference in quality (I was shooting at 720p60 btw) and I was able to mix the two cameras without even really being able to tell the difference. That's not to say that the AC160A doesn't have all the advantages that Barry pointed out, but I was happy with how they mixed. So yeah, I'd recommend renting one and forcing yourself to use it for a project. It's laid out like an HMC so it's easy to get used to. The extra zoom was really helpful for me. That was a huge plus. I like the 1080p60 but because I was mixing in with HMC's we kept it to 720p60 for our shoot. Honestly, I didn't notice a whole lot of difference in low light shooting the wedding. I did also rent an HPX250 that day (I had two weddings that day, one at day and one at night and they overlapped a bit) and that evening I put all 3 cameras together and shot in low light when the party was almost over, adjusting the gain up gradually on each. I figured why not do a test while I had them. I saved all that footage but haven't gone back since to really compare. Work never stops. You'd get a lot out of doing the same though in my opinion. Like Barry says, the size and weight of the AC160a is noticeably bigger/heavier but I managed just fine. I personally love my HMC's. I'm in a business where DSLR's and large sensor cams rule and I feel like I've been able to manipulate them to get comparable images with shallow DoF when I want it and clear, deep DoF when I don't. That's not to say I haven't been looking for new cameras for the last 15 months (ps. just got your PM message, thanks!). :)
 
I believe the HMC150 is actually more low light sensitve at 0 gain without any extra features in use than the AC 130/160 and also HPX250 (Another one I was going to buy). Barry can say for sure. But like he said the newer cameras can get a cleaner image and can gain cleaner.

The 130/160 look like handheld cameras in the photos but are super-sized. They are as big as my shoulder mount DVC60 and NEX-EA50U. They are well balanced but I think most people use them with a tripod or a shoulder rig rather than handheld.

If you need the extra sharpness at 1080, manual focus most of the time, need SDI out, longer zoom, uncompressed audio, variable frame rates and 1080/60P then I'd say go with the 160a.
It just all depends on what you need.
The HMC150 in my opinion looks a little mushy at 1080 when shooting wide outdoor scenes, and it's difficult to manual focus with the lacking LCD. But for weddings and true run and gun events it has to be arguably one of the best out there STILL.

I think Panasonic took some flack marketing their HMC150 and HPX170 as 1080p cameras since they didn't have full raster chips and only achieved 1080 by spatial offset (pixel shifting). Apparently it's hard to get full raster from 1/3 CCDs.
So when the replacements were planned (AC 130 , AC160 and HPX250) they made sure they used full raster sensors and also wanted to make a big wave with their industry leading 22X zoom. But in order to get it they had to compromise lens quality in order to reach their price point and at some point realized their auto functions weren't up to snuff but were so far along in developement they went ahead and released them anyway. Huge threads soon erupted about the problems so Panasonic quickly released the "a" versions to help deal with autofocus shortcomings by means of assist tools.
The result are quite large cameras with better LCDs and bigger zooms, but not quite able to replace the old tried and true HMC150. Too bad you can't take take a 150 and give it a little some of the 160 improvements. :)

Hey Chris! Yeah I still like the HMC150s. And I like the NEX EA50U a lot. I'm glad I bought it. Shot two weddings, one reception and two dance recitals so far with it. Thanks for telling me about PP3. It's actually easier to match to the Panasonics than I thought it would be. Outdoors it's right on. Indoors it sometimes is, depending on the lighting and colors. I still say Panasonic would do well to take a close look at it.
 
FYI re sensitivity: I posted the following in 2011 when I got a HPX250.

"This is just to confirm the HPX250 sensitivity is roughly similar to the HMC150 and Cannon XHA1. I tested with a grey card evenly lit with two Cool Lights LED600 (5600K lights, with cam daylight balance), and measured the required f stop to bring the grey card to 100% on the waveform monitor (and Small HD DP6 in false color mode). The HMC150 was technically the most sensitive, with the HPX250 and XH A1 following at about 1/3 f stop lower. The HMC40 of course was about 2 f stops lower given some uncertainty in its gain structure.
So there is no surprise in the inherent chip sensitivity, and nothing to compromise the gains in pixel resolution and codec."

The HPX250 was set to PAP2 for that test, and it would be more sensitive at PAP1.
 
This Video was shot with an AC130, HMC150 and GH2 and i find it difficult to see the dreaded rolling shutter exaggerated on the two CMOS cameras compared to the CCD when the instrument is being played on high tempo.
https://vimeo.com/65997507
 
Thanks for all the great responses!! I think I am going to rent a 160A and see how it performs.
BTW I am selling my barely used Sony NEXEA 50U if anybody is looking for one.
Cheers
 
Wow! Selling your EA-50 and getting a AC-160??? I did the complete opposite and sold both 130's due to all the issues and got 2 x EA-50's and never regretted the move ..big sensor, I can use any lens I want and many more features than the Panny camera has and more importantly no issues whatsoever ... Maybe I missed something?? I would hang onto the 50 for at least a while until you have actually given the 160 a full test ... you might just keep the Sony
 
I was never totally thrilled with the 150's 1080 image - had a squishy softness that seemed due to the pixel shift.

My only problem with the bigger 130/160 was that none of my cases would fit it. But the cleaner image, cleaner gain, and the higher quality keys I can pull with the thing - never regretted it. And dual cards, man. Dual cards. Those little cards scare me.

I would love it if the "push auto" switch could be triggered remotely though, would love to have that on my shoulder mount!
 
Had my HMC151 since it came out. it's been a great camera, super reliable, great image quality, a real workhorse. Still haven'e seen any camera that could fill that roll as well with a similar size and weight. My ideal replacement would be the same camera, with a higher resolution sensor, better low light performance, 1080 50P, and an option to record in Pro-Res.

Don't think it'll happen though, so I'll probably keep using my 151 until it falls apart, or until 4k becomes a necessity for my type of work (at least 5 years off I reckon).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top