I've seen HMC150's going for around $2800 now. I bought mine for $3200 on the fall of 2009. Cost wise it still has a lot of bang for the buck. AC130 is supposed to go for what? $4000? Nice camera but is it really worth the additional $1200 for anyone who is cash strapped?
need advice concerning my possible hmc150 purchase, alternatives?......please help
- Thread starter blake2404
- Start date
Mike Harvey
Veteran
It's not apples to apples. The EX1 is basically using a glorified variation of HDV. The XF300 is using a more robust version of mpg2 (4:2:2, I-frame), so it is a better implementation (though "better" is always subjective).
One thing I've noticed, since you list the Sony FS100 in consideration, is you seem to be overlooking the Panasonic AF100. Costs about the same as the FS100, and generally has more built in features. So if the FS100 is in consideration, you may want to look at the AF. Though from the sounds of it, you may be better off just finding a used HMC150.
@Denwa... the $4k price tag on the AC130 is just the MSRP. The HMC had the same MSRP when it came out and the street price was right around $3,200 - $3,500.
blake2404
Well-known member
So are you saying the retail price will be around 3500, not 4000?.......anyways, i donno, i've seen may clips of the xf300 and the ex1 and the ex1 seems to have more depth, colour information and a tad sharper than the xf300.....but then again i havent seen them side by side.
My only concern is that the hmc150 wouldn't do very well blown up theatrical, where as the sony nx5u (if it is actually full rastor) would be pretty good. Overall the nx5u by the specs should be sharper, but from what i've seen actually seems a lil soft. The hmc seems naturally darker.
is that better?.....worse?.........its 1000 more than the hmc150, hmmmmm.
thsi clip is a good example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grBonQCEywE
Mike Harvey
Veteran
All I'm saying is that the MSRP from most manufacturers tends to be much higher than the street price. Pro camcorders, TVs, cars. I have no idea what the street price of the AC130 will finally be, but the HMC150 and DVX100 where both in the same ballpark, and the street price was significantly less. If you get on the manufacturer websites for Panasonic, Sony, and Canon then cross reference that with B&H, you'll see virtually every camera will probably be a lot less retail than what the manufacturer lists it as.
As far as blowing it up for theatrical release... there were several movies shot in DV that were released theatrically (28 Days Later comes to mind). If you know how to use your camera, the fact that it isn't using full 1920x1080 chips shouldn't be a big deal.
blake2404
Well-known member
thanks Mike, actually that is a great example...any idea what they used for "28 days later". Also i was curious, They used the hvx in the party scene for "cloverfield", anyone know if they went 1080 for that scene. Guess its hard to find the info, just thought id ask.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
Canon XL1
Mike Harvey
Veteran
A great point. If you're shooting something for a bigscreen, and it's well composed, well lit, well written, and well acted with good audio... no one will care that it wasn't shot on the absolute sharpest camera around
I have intercut hpx170 and hmc150 footage with not noticeable difference. If the cams are set similar I beg to see a difference.
Main thing is lighting and composition. People had a tendency not to light video like film.,w hich was moronic. Even higher end video is closer to color reversal film than negative film and with less dynamic range then lighting becomes even more important. Also knowing the technical quirks of video, HD or not, helps. (ie reds tends to blow out easier).
Main thing is lighting and composition. People had a tendency not to light video like film.,w hich was moronic. Even higher end video is closer to color reversal film than negative film and with less dynamic range then lighting becomes even more important. Also knowing the technical quirks of video, HD or not, helps. (ie reds tends to blow out easier).
8string
Well-known member
I just sold my HMC150 for an xf305. I think both cameras are superb. If you really are doing what you say your end delivery points are, then the 150 is a great 'starter' camera, that you likely won't outgrow soon. However, that said, the xf300 is really superb. Great lens, dual cards, 4:2:2 sampling, just a beautiful camera, and I think it goes better with the output of the T2i and 7D which I also use. I'll be posting a multicamera shoot I did with them in the near future, all under controlled studio lights. (I didn't shoot with the HMC150 on this shoot, but did in December at the same venue with the same lighting) I'll try and recut the footage, when I get a moment!, to show the group of them side by side. It's really quite interesting. The 150 tends to be a bit more to the "red" end of the spectrum and contrastier, compared to the xf300 when shooting the same thing. With work, I might have got the settings closer, so I'm not saying that they can't be balanced. But the key to any of this seems to be white balancing first before shooting. When all three cameras are matched to white balance, then the differences are more subtle. Something that we all would see without grading, but the customers seem to be fine with. Ultimately, you get more quality image with the xf300s but heck, the 150 is a great image, and shoots it in both 720 and 1080, so don't let that stop you. Another thing to think about is that if you are doing a lot of green screen, I think the investment in the 300 is worth it, I've not been wild about my 150's footage for G.S. Also, the Canon seems to have better shadow detail, low light ability, and what seems to be better latitude, but it ought to for the price!
Again, if you waited until the fall, then the choices become harder with the introduction of the 250 with AVC-I on the new Pannys, which I likely would have seriously considered if they were out. The Canon is a fabulous camera, just beautiful images, but heck, I was happy with the images on the 150 too!
Good luck!
Again, if you waited until the fall, then the choices become harder with the introduction of the 250 with AVC-I on the new Pannys, which I likely would have seriously considered if they were out. The Canon is a fabulous camera, just beautiful images, but heck, I was happy with the images on the 150 too!
Good luck!