AC160 My Search for a new Camera begins here - experienced 160/130 users appreciated

T

True North

Well-known member
Hi Everyone

This is my first serious post here. Thanks to everyone who has shared their experience thus far! It has been helpful and greatly appreciated. To get up to speed quickly, I'm going to go over a little bit about myself and my situation. I have been shooting for the past 4 years. Started out shooting my kids hockey games on consumer gear and then caught the gear bug. I have been offered to do a couple of money making things with my equipment but have so far resisted. Recently I have been inspired to do a video project/documentary on competitive minor league hockey, so my personal interest and goals with this hobby have steadily grown into something bigger.

I am now on my fourth camcorder. I am currently shooting on a Canon HF-G10 which is about as good as you are going to get in the consumer realm. By consumer standards, my Canon does allow for lots of manual control but many important manual controls are menu driven and it's just not laid out as well the pro camera's. I am also hoping to get better overall image quality from my new purchase.

My primary focus with this new camera search is on covering my core needs first and right now I am shooting lots of minor league hockey footage, which by studio standards means, always shooting in very diverse lighting situations ranging from hideous to worse. Needless to say excellent low light performance is very important for my purposes. I also need a camera with excellent auto focus, which I need when shooting game footage. I know auto-focus is not considered a very pro feature, but it is important in my case.

With game footage I am dealing with very high contrast shooting scenarios. I am most often shooting bright white ice with fast moving players in strong dark contrast colored uniforms. I can often shoot from an elevated vantage point at or near centre ice in most cases. More challenging vantage points are when I am shooting at one end of the ice tight along the boards through the protective glass. I want a camera that can handle the aforementioned scenarios with very high degrees of sharpness and clarity.

So this has all lead me to look into getting a pro camera/camcorder and my hope in posting here is to get some honest feedback from users on some of the cameras I am looking at. My current list of potential cameras is as follows.

1) Panasonic AG-HPX250P -&- Panasonic AG-AC 160

I now these are different cameras but from what I understand they have the same sensors and lens. I think I understand the technical differences between the two. I was pretty set on trying these out but then came across a YouTube comparison between a 250 and a HVX200a. The video hi lighted poor low light performance from the 250. While sharpness from the 250 was better than the HVX200a, the large 22x lens seemed to be doing it best impersonation of a black hole, sucking away all of the available light. I was pretty disappointed with the posted results to say the least. It's still in the running but I am a little gun shy. I would love to hear some feedback;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOW-T_sg5EI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

2) Sony PMW-200 XD Cam


After witnessing the some of the weaknesses on the Pannys I started to take a closer look at the Sony PMW-200 XD Cam. I figured that the larger sensors and smaller zoom lens (still plenty for my purposes) would on paper yield better low light performance. The only downside at this point is that the camera is new and their isn't much real world experience to draw on. This might be a good rental option to test out. I would appreciate any feedback on this camera

3) Sony NEX- FS700


This was an easy option to be wowed with early on, but while most of my shooting isn't 'run & gun' in the strictest sense, it is closer to that method of shooting than anything I can think of. I drooled over the slo-mo options on the NEX- FS700, but I figured I could over crank or shoot 60p on the other cameras I was looking at. It's not as nice as 120 or 240 fps but I realize their is no perfect camera for me. Other bonuses for this cam was good low light performance and the best depth of field on paper out of all the cameras I was looking at. I had pretty much written this camera off as it seemed too complicated for my purposes and experience level. That being said I don't need to be up and running out of the gate with this camera, I have time to learn it. I also came across a posted video showing off the auto focus capabilities of the Sony Alpha lenses....and just like that, this camera was back on the list.

3) JVC GY-HM650 ProHD

This camera is even newer than the PMW-200, I think it gets officially released today (Dec 31). Given that the release date is today, their is little to no real world experience or feedback to draw from. I am not in a huge rush to make a decision on this camera, so I will wait if this option shows promise.

Finishing Points

If anyone has any feedback or suggestion I am all ears. If you need any further information please feel free to ask.

As a further note, I live in Toronto so I will have good access to these items through rental. I don't know what the site protocol here is but I would like to post this question in various parts of this forum as they relate to my different camera choices. Not sure if this breaks some forum conduct rules but I think my question is relevant to various parts of this site as some users who may be able to give feedback will not come to threads related to other gear they don't use.
 
Given your scenario...I'm going to suggest a camera that isn't on your list:
The Panasonic AC90. It's pro, 3 rings for controls, custom function buttons, etc. The reason I suggest it is from Barry Greens review of it. It's super sharp, great picture...but more importantly the OIS is supposed to be incredible, the AF is very fast and reliable and the camera is about as seamless as you can get for going through different levels of light. According to Barry it's a very good all auto system (better than the more expensive models) for situations that call for it...which sounds like you really need more than you need 1/3" chips. Now..the low light- it's not a super sensitive camera with the 1/4" chips...BUT it has a back lit design and a very very clean gain - so that you can shoot in challenging light without introducing lots of noise. 1080 60P for slow motion as well.
Now if you were shooting a narrative or something where you could set up the shots, the others might make more sense for their added features- but the AC90 seems like a real winner for doing a lot of "need it now" footage.

Barrys Review:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?297200-AG-AC90-Review-in-the-Dominican-Republic
 
Hi True North, welcome to the forum and a Happy New Year.
Firstly let's get this nonsense about autofocus out of the way: There are some who say it is non professional: Ignore these comments- it is a snobbery that we could do without. Auto focus is a godsend in fast sports and live action and like other functions it is another tool in the box and should be used when necessary.

I have a 160A ( much dialogue about it on this forum). I will comment on this camera first:
Pros: For the work you are describing its low light performance appears excellent. The long zoom is superb for those intimate action shots. It has a full set of totally manual controls for fine tuning every aspect of your shot. It has a waveform monitor.

Cons: The autofocus is very slow when compared to the AC90. Auto white balance in changing light can be slow. It is a difficult camera to hand hold without a rig and is quite weighty so in my book definitely a tripod camera. ( Your work would obviously be shot on a tripod anyway I would think).

There are many here who shoot sports and livestock here, who will give you more info on these fields: ELN614 shoots horses (camera not rifle!) and Walter covers a lot of sport. Chris covers weddings ( another moving livestock subject!)

Personally I am VERY interested in the JVC with the long zoom: This is very similar to the Panasonic: They have already issued software updates for this a month after launch. These "improve auto focussing" and add a few other tweaks. If the accuracy, repeatability and speed of the autofocus is better than the Panny , then it should be worth a serious look.

The FS700 is definitely a superb tool but I guess this would be more an issue of budget for a range of lenses. Slomo to die for though!

Anyway, have fun and I guess you will be hearing from the "team" shortly!
all the best
Rod
 
Thanks for the response Pulpfiction. I have followed Barry's review of the AC 90 with great interest. The sharpness and detail aspects of the camera really appealed to me, the low light performance kind of threw me off the scent of this trail. I was aware that this had virtually noiseless gain but maybe it still worthy of good try. I am completely open to other opinions and options, I should have noted this in my initial epic post. I have had issues with backlit cameras and shooting hockey games, but I have a sneaking suspicion that if the gain is as flexible as some are saying I can probably get the picture I need without using the backlight function......assuming that is I can turn it on and off, which i can do on my current camera. I will have to look into it further but I was also wondering if the 90 can be controlled with a lanc. I need only basic lanc controls I.e zoom and stop/start record.

Thanks very much for the response, greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
I'm in a similar boat, looking to upgrade my video camera, primary use is low light indoor action.

I followed the introduction of the AG-AC90 with great interest but found the posted low light footage unimpressive. My impression is that the AC90 aggressively applies noise reduction at higher gains which results in a significant loss of detail (the "spray-on hair" effect). The sensor on that camera is only 1/4.7", which is less than 1/2 the surface area of the 1/3" sensor in your Canon HF-G10. The sensor in your Canon can potentially capture twice the light. There is likely a low light benefit to the BSI technology in the AC90 sensors, and the AC90 has a slightly faster lens than your G10 (f1.5 vs f1.8), but that's a lot of lost light to make up. So as things stand, I wouldn't buy the AC90 without trying it out first myself.

Regarding the JVC GY-HM600/650, I don't see what the benefit is versus the AG-AC130A. They both have 1/3" sensors. Neither shoots 1080p60. The JVC has a slightly faster slightly longer lens at the long end, but really only a tiny bit faster and longer. The JVC might have some tremendous benefit vs the AC130, but I haven't found it in the posted footage or the spec sheets.

For the FS700, you're going to give up image stabilization and reliable autofocus for great slow motion shots and better low light performance but only if you spring for heavy expensive lenses. And even then, you're going to have to give up zoom range. Hockey action is sufficiently fast and unpredictable (at least to me) that I suspect I'd end up with a lot of out-of-focus footage.
 
Hi Rod


Thanks for the response and happy new year to you as well. I have come across some of the comments about the autofocus on the 160 and it was also a concern of mine. I am wondering if it would be an issue for what I am doing or if it would be good enough. I might rent one and give it a try. I currently work with a 10x optical zoom and it is enough. 22x is way more than I need, but who knows maybe if I get into wildlife shooting or something else, it will come in handy. Thanks for the vote of confidence on auto-focus, I don't really care what other people think of it. I am a one man show so I don't someone to do pull focus operation while I am filming :)

I should have mentioned that although I am working with a handheld camera, I almost exclusively shoot on sticks. I am using a 504HD Head w/546B 2-Stage Aluminum Tripod System, I am very happy so far but may try a more light set of sticks in the near future.

Nice to hear that you share a similar interest in the JVC as I do. Let me know if you come across anything interesting on that camera. You are probably more keyed in than I am but if I come across anything interesting on the JVC I will be happy to return the favor.

As for the FS700 it is certainly on the upper range of what I want to spend. It appears to be a little more 'future proof' especially with the promise to accommodate 4k output. I am also watching with interest whether the new Sound Devices 3G HD-SDI recorder will allow one to record 444 10 or 12 bit from the 700. I obviously don't 'need it' but its nice to know its there for me in the future if I ever feel I do.

Thanks for the leads on other forum members who might have experience relevant to my goals. I come from an audio recording background and I must say the overall civility and helpfulness on these forums is light years ahead of what it's like on the recording forums.
 
Hi Noirist

I haven't seen that much low light footage from the AC90. I saw some night footage which looked pretty good at high gain settings. Still I agree if the image becomes less sharp and detailed with the gain settings I am going to need shooting in arenas than there really isn't any point. The other mino issue that I had with the AC90 was that it didn't have an HD-SDI out, which isn't an immediate need of mine but I like having that option available to me if I ever want or need it in the near future. I really like the price point.

As far as the JVC was concerned I realize that the lens is large, but I was interested because maybe they had designed it better than the Panny's to better manage low light situations.....its a long shot I know. Auto focus functionality seems to be largely dependent upon the manufacturers ability to properly design the functionality, so once again I am reserving judgement until i see and hear feedback from the field. You are right about the 60p but I seem to remember that you could overcrank to 50fps.....I could be wrong on that point.

Regarding the FS700 I am not sure what you mean when you say I will lose image stability, maybe you can expand on that for me. I used to agree with you on the autofocus point until I saw a Vimeo or YouTube video of someone showing off the Sony Alpha lenses which use a parfocal autofocus that is fast and very reliable. I forgot to mention that my wife has about $6000 worth of Canon glass that she rarely uses.....:). She has a particularly nice 70-300mm f2/2.8 sigma lens which with an adapter that might work quite nicely for what I am trying to do. I don't really need a big lens, even an 8x optical zoom would probably do. I do have a healthy does of skepticism when it comes to this camera but I haven't ruled it out entirely.

This again all leads me to wonder if the Sony PMW-200 might be a viable option with its 1/2" sensors and smaller zoom. One person in the Sony part of this forum has noted that he feels the image from the PMW-200 is 'soft'......not liking the sounds of that, but, I can't really see how that can be the case given that it was meant to be the successor to the widely popular ex1 . I wish Canon would bring in a successor to the x300, if they didn't screw it up, that could potentially be interesting as well.

Thanks for the response. Let me know if you come up with any other interesting alternatives or suggestions that might apply to my situation.
 
RE the FS700, I mean that you will loose optical image stabilization (OIS). Some lenses you attach will have it but most won't, and it won't be as effective as the OIS in the ENG-style cameras (eg., AC90, AC130, AC160, PMW200). Your wife's Canon lenses won't autofocus anywhere near as well on the FS700 as they do on Canon bodies.
 
noirist said:
RE the FS700, I mean that you will loose optical image stabilization (OIS). Some lenses you attach will have it but most won't, and it won't be as effective as the OIS in the ENG-style cameras (eg., AC90, AC130, AC160, PMW200). Your wife's Canon lenses won't autofocus anywhere near as well on the FS700 as they do on Canon bodies.
Click to expand...

Ok , I understand now. I shoot mostly on sticks so the stabilization isn't that big an issue. The AC90 stabilization seems pretty amazing. The only cameras I have come across that are potentially better are the new Sony camcorders with the gyro lens stabilization. Still It does make any shoulder mount work with the 700 less eeffective than shooting with a camera with good image stabilization

I know my wife's lenses won't have the same capabilities as native lenses but it does offer me some alternatives and options for other uses, which I consider sort of a free and added bonus.

Thanks for the links to low light files, greatly appreciated. I am pretty sure I am going to rent the AC90 and at least try it out. If it gets me a better image than what I have now with the added pro features than there is a decent chance I might get.

Have a happy new year!!
 
I was going to get an hpx250 and ac 160a but ended up getting some hmc150s after someone on here recommended it.
Autofocus works. Good low light. CCD chips (no rolling shutter) Only cost about $2700 new now.
Not as sharp as the afore mentioned cameras but it looks good. Not as big and bulky either. Can't do 1080 /60p like the ac160a and ac90, but neither can the hpx250.
It does beautiful 720 /60p though and 1080 30/24p and 60i.
 
Hello True,

so I can only comment on the camera I have about how it works in low light the 250. I do live events (Theater) and I am able to get more than enough light as I run it in PAP1, not PAP2 which give me one extra stop. I looked at the test you had from youtube and I have very different results (I do not use the out of the box settings I have made a few adjustments) all of my footage looks great. I am normally about 80-100 feet back from the stage and I do need the 22X lens. I love all my manual controls, all at your finger tips no menus to change on the fly, just the push or turn of a dial. Also you get 4 channels of audio, in camera 10bit (do-sent sound like you would really need it, but you never know green screen). Solid media P2 cards, no worries about losing data. SDI out and gen lock in and out (multi cam sync). Best of all you can use DRS to help with dark areas if you need it, works great.
So I love my 250, however its not a point and shoot camera. You must take time to learn how to make it do what you want, otherwise you will not be happy if you want to use full auto in my option. However I am looking at a 90 as a second B roll camera, I think that might fit your bill very nicely.

What ever you do, rent each on first, some places will deduct the purchase cost of the camera from the rental. The place I got mine did and I went into their showroom and spent 3-4 hours with each to make my final choice, made all the differance. DONT BUY A CAMERA BECAUSE SOMEONE SAID IT WAS GOOD! Try it yourself, and see what you like based on your comfort level with each camera.
 
Ran into a potential roadblock with the AC90 as Vistek doesent rent it

Its not an overly expensive pro camera but I would rather try it out in its intended environment before buying

Any suggestions on where I might be able to try the AC90 before I buy it?
 
I wonder how that would work with me being in Toronto and them being MN based? I guess I could just give them a call to see if they would even entertain renting me one in Toronto.
 
Here is a company I would call them and speak directly to their rental dept, this is were I got mine at and they do deduct the rental price if you buy the camera. Dont go buy what their online rental shows, they have allot of stuff, just isnt shown online. Also their prices are lower when you call. Family owned company really nice, they have grown allot but still great people to work with.
 
Rzr219

Thanks for the heads up. I am familiar with Full Compass from my audio background. I didn't know they were into video as well. Maybe you can PM me a good contact that you might have there

My only concern on the rental front is if they are willing to ship cross border rent me something.

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top