Lack of wireless mic slot

B

BradFu

Well-known member
Does this seem odd to anyone? The 300, 2000 and 3000 models have them, why not the 500?

I'm literally filling out lease paperwork right now. Big purchase for sure, yet very affordable. This is the only issue that I can find fault with as I go over the specs again and again before I pull the trigger.
 
BradFu said:
Does this seem odd to anyone? The 300, 2000 and 3000 models have them, why not the 500?

I'm literally filling out lease paperwork right now. Big purchase for sure, yet very affordable. This is the only issue that I can find fault with as I go over the specs again and again before I pull the trigger.
Click to expand...

Easy answer, its a CHEAPER Camera, if you want bells n whisles Just get the next model up...
"500 is built to a cost"
Inbuilt receiver is well worth the extra if you do plenty with radio mics. and get the sennheiser receiver and adapter, well worth the cost too. I have an Azden which in my opinion is not as good as the Sony radio Mics I also use.
Having more stuff dangling from the back of the camera is not fun.

cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
Last edited:
Agreed, but still odd to me that they'd put it on the 300 and not the 500 (granted I don't think like a salesperson or marketer).

I'm shooting part of a doc in Uganda soon, and yes, dangling stuff from the back, or using velcro, although do-able, isn't the best scenario.
 
Uganda,

Take some protection over there, a fun place.. best thing about shooting in a country like that , is when you get home, you "Kiss the Ground", like the Pope does.
There's only one thing better than travel, and that's the wheels touching down on home soil....
Put on 300 probably because of user feedback, 500 is now old design and built to a price point, yeah so is 300 I hear you say.. Ask Panasonic...

My advice is get the bigger/right camera to do the job, you will not regret it...

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
Tom 4 said:
Put on 300 probably because of user feedback, 500 is now old design and built to a price point, yeah so is 300 I hear you say.. Ask Panasonic...

My advice is get the bigger/right camera to do the job, you will not regret it...

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
Click to expand...

Don't listen to that guy for sure. The 500 is a much nicer camera with 2/3" chips, better depth of field, better lenses to put on, great low light, etc. The 500 is a bigger and better camera with great features. It's an industry standard size and format. Get a decent SD lens off fleabay for it and you'll be more than happy.

You can get an inexpensive bracket for your wireless.
 
Protection, yes. Security, and a, "fixer": the guy that just pays people when we're in sticky situations. Lucky I'm not footing the bill for that one.

But I am footing the bill for my own camera, which I was going to get regardless of Uganda. On features and price point, the 500 actually is pretty good for the doc and other work. I really like shooting with VFR's, which the 2000 and 3000 don't do. The pixel-shift doesn't bother me, and I like 2/3" low light capability as well as larger lenses, so up front, this camera is about 90% of what I like. It's the remaining 10% that gives me pause: I hate overlooking audio, and running and gunning with a self-contained receiver would be great.

Thanks for the advice on a bigger camera. If I had more $$$, I would.
 
BradFu said:
It's the remaining 10% that gives me pause: I hate overlooking audio, and running and gunning with a self-contained receiver would be great.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what the big deal about this is. So you get an IDX or A/B mount for the receiver. What's the big deal? You're going to sacrifice the rest of the camera feature because you don't have a built in holder for a microphone? C'mon, that's just silly. I don't see at is overlooking audio at all - the 500 has 4 channels of VERY clean audio with lots of control over them.

Maybe you should choose a camera with a built in battery system, or matte box, or tripod, or rails/baseplate, or 7" HD-SDI monitor or lens for that matter. Does the 300 even have a built in hard mic? Nope, external. Do you need a wireless microphone for every shot that you do? Probably not.

I still believe that even though the 300 is a nice camera for what it is, you're sacrificing much needed tools of the trade. And I think the 500 will be much easier to cross rent gear for, lenses especially. To me, they're close enough to the same price that I would make the step to the 500 which I believe is a much more professional camera.
 
Hi Kit,

We all give advice freely here,and this advice is gained from our experiences, I have a Sony DSR570 with all the add on mic/batts HDD's etc on the V-mount.
They in my experience are a pain in the Butt.
I also Mainly use the Panasonic SPX800 it's an old P2 monster and has slot-in mic and V-mount batts. It great to use, I was just passing on that experience to Brad, sorry my experience's don't agree with your viewpoint.

Brad has two choice's , Buy what he can afford or Buy what will do the job, simple, don't we all do it this way..

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
I too give my viewpoint, and no, we're not always going to agree. But to say that "I hate overlooking audio" implies that there is something wrong with the audio on the 500 in general, like you're making some huge sacrifice in the audio department.

What I'm saying is that I feel the 500 is a much better camera and they are close to the same price if you use a SD lens. I wouldn't let the "not having a wireless receiver holder built in" hold Brad back from getting a (what I think is) better camera. IMO
 
BradFu said:
Agreed, but still odd to me that they'd put it on the 300 and not the 500 (granted I don't think like a salesperson or marketer).
Click to expand...
The 300 has lots of things the 500 doesn't. It has an HD color viewfinder, a high-def LCD, a wireless slot, and AVC-Intra. And a free lens. And 10-bit SDI output.

The 500 has some things the 300 doesn't, like 2/3" chips and four XLRs.

If you're curious as to why the 300 has things the 500 doesn't, I'd suggest that a) it's a year and a half newer, and b) I suspect that NBC had a hand in suggesting what features the camera was developed with, because when they announced the HPX300, they simultaneously announced that all NBC owned-and-operated stations were going to be using them. So I can easily see why the 300 would have a wireless slot, if NBC demanded it. (of course I don't KNOW that to be true, but it seems like a reasonable observation).
 
You stole my thunder, Christian! I just saw this last night.

Tom, Kit, thanks for your input.

Kit, didn't think I was making a big deal here but I agree--the 90% of what I like vastly outweighs the few nitpicks I have. I was just fishing for some opinions and experience before I go forward. "overlooking audio" may have been the wrong term. Form factor is big though when creeping around in the dark in Africa.

I'm good, thanks guys.
 
I have both Lectrosonic and Sennheiser wireless units that I use regularly with my 500. I bought a $1 piece of self-adhesive Velcro almost 2 years ago and stuck it (neatly) to the camera right behind the P2 slots... It looks fine, has worked flawlessly, allows me to interchange units quickly, and, if the Velcro weakens, I can replace it by walking in to almost any hardware store and buying more.

I shoot handheld and am on the move constantly - I have never had a receiver come off even when banged against a door frame.

There is no internal wiring, and both wireless units are powered by AA batteries that are easy to change, last a long time, and are also available anywhere.. This is not a big deal, believe me...

I like a lot of things about the 300 (particularly the viewfinder - I shelled out a lot of cash for a sharper 16x9 B&W finder) but I wouldn't sell my 500 to get one.
 
Sorry if I sound worked up sometimes, just trying to get people to look at different points of view. Coming from someone that has experience with both cameras (albeit very short with the 300), I still like the 500 better. The 300 is a nice camera, then again, so is the 200 and 170, but the 500 fits the bill, is fairly universal and easy to get nice accessories, such as lenses for. To each their own.
 
You could save one of those Clip-on's with a Slot-in Mic , not to mention the added weight, No fun, just extra weight and length.
If it's on the sticks , no worries, off the shoulder, better you than me, I just came off an 18hr wedding shoot yesterday (with my SPX800 with slot-in), man, I would have been crippled with that set-up on my shoulder..
Sure, it will suit some shooters and suit some situations, but not good for one's spinal column. Just my opinion...

Cheers
Tom K
olinevideo.com.au
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top