Looking to up grade from DVX100

P

pirate40

Well-known member
I have just finished my first feature with a DVX100 and will be shooting a second one next year. I would like to up grade to an HD camera and HVX200 or HPX170 seems to be the obvious choice. Is there any other options that would make since that I should look into? I know I don't want to go DSLR, other then that, I'm pretty open.

I am shooting adventure comedy type stuff, if that matters, and will probably buy a used camera.
 
HPX170, you can't go wrong, or a used HVX200. But it is a lot heavier. You will not find a more balanced camera for hand held shooting that the HPX170. It's an absolute dream to operate. The HVx200 will pull your shoulders out of their sockets after a time.
 
if you can wait until end of this year, the af100 looks really interesting. its about $6k for body only. with lenses and all youre probably looking at around $10k for a basic functional rig.

and depending on the kind of work you do. a DSLR might be an option. though i would ONLY suggest that if controlled feature work is the ONLY kind of work you do. they SUCK for anything ENG like.

and if you REALLY want to wait around, you can hold out and see what the fixed lens red scarlet ends up being...
 
I have the Hvx200a and I love it!!!... it is heavy but the quality is well worth it. If you use a shoulder rig its just fine , its always good to tone up those muscles with free hand too.

both of those cameras are very similar to the dvx100 so either way you will be comfortable just depends on how much you are willing to spend.

good luck with your camera.
 
Thank you Peabody,WGZN, and Burn2Earn. It sounds like I am on the right track, I don't do much hand held, usually I'm on a tripod or dolly, so weight is not a big concern of mine. The af100 would be great, but it's going to be out of my price range.

On the third day of my first feature (a 35 day shoot) I dropped my DVX100 on the asphalt from about four feet high. I picked it up, looked it over, and turned it on. It still worked, this may seem like a silly reason, but because of that, I would like to stick with Panasonic. Ha ha.
 
if you can afford the extra few dollars for the hpx170. you wont regret it. WAY better in low light than the 200 and many more very handy features then the 200A
 
pirate40 said:
Thank you Peabody,WGZN, and Burn2Earn. It sounds like I am on the right track, I don't do much hand held, usually I'm on a tripod or dolly, so weight is not a big concern of mine. The af100 would be great, but it's going to be out of my price range.

On the third day of my first feature (a 35 day shoot) I dropped my DVX100 on the asphalt from about four feet high. I picked it up, looked it over, and turned it on. It still worked, this may seem like a silly reason, but because of that, I would like to stick with Panasonic. Ha ha.
Click to expand...

I film skiing and my HVX has been to hell, turned around came back, then got sent back to hell, and then took a year away from hell before it got sent back and easily fought its way back.
To make a story out of it... someone fell with my HVX following someone else off an 80 foot jump (shots in my first movie) and slammed the snow with the HVX. He kind of protected it, but it was still a hard hit and it put the HVX in this mode where whenever it was turned on it was stuck in record and the only way to turn it off was to take the battery out. Got home and it started right up (I wasnt nervous because the kid that fell with it on the jump said he would give me his subaru if he broke it).
The VERY next day, my friend was just doing basic follows (not off jumps) and someone landed on him while filming with my camera. Same thing happened, except this time when I got home, I opened the car door and the camera fell right out of my backpack onto the asphalt. Perfectly fine STILL.
Then a year later, someone tackled me off my snowmobile when we were well intoxicated and my HVX hit the rock hard midnight icey snow and it kind of broke the part that holds the battery in place.
The HVX may not look like it is that strong, but man mine has taken a beating and it still lives on... KNOCK ON WOOD!

With that said, try to get the HPX170. If im not mistaken doesn the newer HVXs have the same chip as the HPX170s? I know the 170s do have a different chip then the original HVXs which are superior in low light/night and also less noise.
Also, since you dont have an external monitor, I would also recommend the 170 just because the screen on the HVX is god awful. Its terrible, nothing else to it hah.

Another HPX advantage I heard is that they have histograms I believe, which would help a bunch. I prefer them over zebra.

You really cant go wrong with either. :)
 
Last edited:
Just want to point out that the AF100 will be less than 5K for the body only, not 6k as mentioned earlier.
 
I went through nearly this exact same search and decided to buy an HPX170. Because of the DSLR frenzy, and approaching AF100, you can find good used ones pretty cheap, as you say you're okay with that.

I would say if you're shooting a lot of films (movies) then I'd consider saving for the AF100. I only do films for fun mostly and needed an all-round camera to grab and go, but still get great footage, and the HPX170 was it.
 
Thank you all for the informative input.

I think I will end up with a HPX170, from what I understand, the main difference between it and the HPX200 is weight and the HPX170 is better in low light conditions.

I am not the most technical guy in the world so I like the idea of being somewhat familiar with the camera, because it is similar to the DVX. I would not have that advantage with the AF100.

I am basically a writer who got tired of hearing people say my novels should be made into movies. Two years ago I didn't know the first thing about cameras, lighting, ect. Now I have a feature film that premiered last month at Fort Lauderdale International Film Festival. So I think I did a lot of things right, but I don't want to get left too far behind. I feel that it would be money well spent to upgrade to HD for my next project.
 
Good little story there. One of the weakest aspects of low-budget filmmaking is poor writing, so it's good to see someone with a writing background get somewhere.

Good choice on camera. While I only played with the HVX200a and now own the HPX170, I didn't feel as though the HPX170 was THAT much better in low light. I still think it may not quite equal the DVX100 or old Sony PD15a which seemed to be a little king in low light. I also feel that the HPX170 isn't as "bright" in low light as the Sony EX1. However, when increasing the gain there seems to be very little noise in the HPX170, even at +12db. This is a very impressive aspect to me and where they have Sony beat. The colors are also superb in the HPX, better than the DVX, better than every single camera in this class, all of them. It also has CCDs, like your DVX100, so you won't have to worry about any CMOS issues. The DVCPRO HD is easy to work with in editing, no conversion needed.
 
SNOWLEOPARD,

You bring up an interesting point in the last line of your post that I had not given any thought to. I edit with Vegas Pro 8 and transport from the DVX with a firewire of course. Is transporting from a HPX as simple as this?

Actually an answer from anyone would be appreciated, thank you.
 
Is transporting from a HPX as simple as this?
Click to expand...
absolutely! only probem is that it renders your camera dead in the water during the process. but im sure you already know this.

there are a variety of viable transfer options out there.
 
Last edited:
have used just about every "DV" camera in every size and from every vendor, a host of old betaSP stuff, many HDV offerings and a couple HDSLRs. i can say that my hpx170 is about the best "budgetHD" camera i have used.

i owned an hvx200 for a couple years. it was good. but the weight (200a will suffer from this as well) and low light issues werent cool. the variety of sony stuff is nice. but the ultra-crisp "sony look", IMO - is more suited to ENG stuff or tv shows.

i had a brevis / nikon 35mm adapter rig that i sold a few months ago. with the intent of going with a 5Dmkll. but after using one. i TOTALLY reconsidered that. and very much wish id NOT sold my brevis rig. as good as an HDSLR may be in some areas. it is WOEFULLY lacking in many others... some will debate that. and its a discussion of "horses for courses"...

if you want to make "filmic" productions on a budget. you simply WILL NOT beat an HPX170 with any of the variety of (brevis, letus, sgpro, redrock, cinemek, etc...) 35mm adapters.
 
Last edited:
Owned my 170baby for 4 months and counting. It is a true joy to operate this light mothernature. This is coming from a dsr250, shouldermount pd150, which I still own and use. Low light is a big bonus. CCD is a must. The fine precision of the scene files is nice too, you get +100 to -100 in most settings. One thing is a minor minus to me is the servo zoom is kind of weak but the manual zoom makes up for that tenfold.. freaking awesome. My only real issue with the servo is the hiccup it has at the top and bottom of those mechanical zooms. So sony wins with its servos, but loses even more so not having that manual function. All in all, this camera is a video assasin, the hot femme fatale type. Damn, she's fine!
 
Is there any lenses or adapters that any of you would recomemend to use with the HPX170? As mentioned earlier, I am shooting feature lenthened adventure comedy type stuff. Some interior, some exterior, and with a very small, inexperienced crew. With my first project I simply used a DVX100a, and had a set of UV filters. If so, what are the advantages of using them?
 
If you were going to buy an adapter, the only one I personally would go with would be the new redrock M3. However, if you can buy an HPX170 and the new M3, you might be better off going with the upcoming AF100. If you're only experience is using a fixed lens camcorder, I would not suggest jumping to HD and interchangeable lenses simultaneously on a fixed budget. The reason you change lenses and use the adapters is to achieve a much more shallow depth of field than possible from the 1/3 CCD's of the HPX170. Using different lenses and lighting allows a cinematographer to comment on the emotional state of a character, or to draw audience attention to a specific point in your composition (sending everything out of focus except the person talking in a dialogue scene).

Like I said, if the AF100 is out of your price range, so is the 170+adapter. Remember P2 media is expensive, you need more hard drive space for HD editing as well, and.... you must have light for HD. DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT expect to buy any HD camera in your purported price range and plan to use it without light. The HPX170 ISO is ~500, so you must use lights on your interiors. I would invest in a light kit before I bought anything else including additional P2 media and batteries. Photography means "painting with light," and light can do much more for a scene than shallow dof IMO.

You will love the results this camera can achieve with good lighting and a talented cinematographer. The 170 gives you more variable frame rates than the HVX200a, and is still one of few budget cameras that give you variable frame rates and may be the only one that will record variable frames over 24pn meaning you don't have to take your footage through a telecine process. The waveform monitor/vectorscope that are included are a must have if your working without a light meter. HD/SDI with 10 bit 4:2:2 capture possible with a nanoflash or ki pro... and much higher data rates than the af100 will be capable of, and the robust P2 media with DVCPROHD instead of anything h264 based.

Plus those adapters have done a terrible job at holding their resell value, while light kits depreciate rather slowly.
 
We've got a 200a and love it. We own a video production company, the 170 was just coming out when we made our decision...we picked the 200a 'cause we thought we might need the tape drive sometime. It has never had a tape in it -- so much for my ability to see the future.
When we started playing around with a little experimental film idea, we added an inexpensive lens adapter. We have since shot it side-by-side with a D7, and have found that we prefer the 200a/lens adapter for most things for this particular project. The main prob is the light loss in the adapter -- we're doing a project called 'Dreamer,' and as you might guess it has a lot of dark scenes. We're working on solutions there, wish us luck.
My wife and I have been doing video for over 30 years and are just now playing seriously with 'film,' even though we've wanted to be making movies for most of our careers. This is a great time to be doing this -- so many breakthrus happening all at once. In the mean time, we'll still be using our 200a/lens adapter combo a fair amount. Kinda hard to go wrong there.....
 
if the AF100 is out of your price range, so is the 170+adapter
Click to expand...
thats untrue. last i heard. you could pick up a 170 for right around $4000. a decent 35mm adapter can be had on the used market now for as little as $400. even adding rails, a couple decent lenses and a budget follow focus. youd just barely get beyond the base price of an af100

Is there any lenses or adapters that any of you would recomemend to use with the HPX170?
Click to expand...
you can get a variety of screw-on adapters for wide, tele or effect stuff. but the cheap ones look cheap and the good ones are UBER expensive.

the "adapter" i was referring to is a 35mm adapter. if you arent familiar with them. just google any of the brands i mentioned in the last sentence of my above post.
35mm adapters allow you to use 35mm still photography lenses. thus giving you the depth of field and "look" of film.

a 35mm adapter rig used to be pretty pricey. but with the videoDSLR craze and the af100 on the near horizon. the prices of the adapters on the used market have come WAY DOWN!
 
If cost is a concern, consider the HMC150 too. It's basically the same imagery as the 170/200a, with cheaper media and longer record times.

You lose the in camera variable frame rates, HD-SDI out of the 170, and it takes a considerably beefier computer to edit AVCHD natively as opposed to DVCHDPRO, but you will save some $$$
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top