New Panasonic AG HC-X2 (HC-X1/UX180 successor)

Doug Jensen said:
That is my point. The lingo matters.

You said . . .


No. There is no such thing as "60p @ 23.98p" Both numbers can't have a "p" in them. The "p" indicates that the preceding number refers to a progressive record/playback format, so you can't have a 60p format that was captured @ 23.98p. But you can have a 24p clip that was captured @ 60 fps. Note: "fps" not "p".

It seems like I'm splitting hairs, but I had it correct in my first post and your "correction" of my post is wrong. Its not a matter of agreeing to disagree. One is right and one is not.
Click to expand...

I swear, every time you get into it with someone on the forum, your ending argument always ends up slightly different. EVERY TIME. lol

How in the world did you ever get to the 'p' part?

We have been discussing @ and over/under for the last 5 pages.

The added 'p' is inconsequential to anything written here or the argument itself. It was added by habit because I write it like 20x a day, and not added to correct you. I never once thought about the 'p' as a correction.

Sure, yes, drop it, fps, frames per second, all good.

Absolutely nothing to do with my argument whatsoever.

This is about you not understanding the terminology that was carried over from film to digital cameras and using the word over to immediately clarify you are overcranking a high frame rate over a lower one to produce slow-motion.
 
Going back and reading through the posts, I can wholeheartedly see how this might have been an epic miscommunication between us.

And it's completely my fault.

Because every time you wrote fps I wrote back the number with 'p' but that was a complete accident, ha. And the one time I used fps, it wasn't in a post to you.

My main point was how I would describe choosing a framerate to produce slow or fast motion and personally wouldn't use the word "@".
 
NorBro said:
Going back and reading through the posts, I can wholeheartedly see how this might have been an epic miscommunication between us.

And it's completely my fault.

Because every time you wrote fps I wrote back the number with 'p' but that was a complete accident, ha. And the one time I used fps, it wasn't in a post to you.

My main point was how I would describe choosing a framerate to produce slow or fast motion and personally wouldn't use the word "@".
Click to expand...

All good. I'll take a chunk of the blame myself for not being as clear as I might have, and not reading between your lines to see what you really meant.
 
ha, I would have been okay if you ripped into me...big fail on my end, perhaps because right before us, Ken and I were going back and forth on framerates by referring to them as 'p' as interchangeably - and incorrectly - done so often.

But, no, of course it's fps, indisputable.
 
Are there any extra scene files that have been published for the HC-X2/HC-X20? I'm trying to color match the X20 with the UX90, and using the few scene files that are identically named on both cams, am not getting a good match out of the box.

At first glance the X20 image does appear to be an improvement over the UX90. And I like the built-in streaming engine, but one thing that has me getting to return the cam is how the AUTO/MANUAL mode works. On the X20, it is all or nothing... a true idiot switch (with focus, iris, gain, shutter, and WB automatically adjusted). On the UX90 you can select what functions you want to have automatic, and all others remain under manual control. I have auto iris and auto gain only selected for auto mode (which functions just like the AGC of the old AC90s). Unless there is another way to do it, I don't see how to toggle on and off just those two auto functions using a simple flick of a switch. And auto gain is limited to 24dB, while on the UX90 you can set set up to 30dB gain in AUTO mode. I'm going to poke around a bit more, but I already have my B&H RMA.
 
bluesgeek said:
Are there any extra scene files that have been published for the HC-X2/HC-X20? I'm trying to color match the X20 with the UX90, and using the few scene files that are identically named on both cams, am not getting a good match out of the box.

At first glance the X20 image does appear to be an improvement over the UX90. And I like the built-in streaming engine, but one thing that has me getting to return the cam is how the AUTO/MANUAL mode works. On the X20, it is all or nothing... a true idiot switch (with focus, iris, gain, shutter, and WB automatically adjusted). On the UX90 you can select what functions you want to have automatic, and all others remain under manual control. I have auto iris and auto gain only selected for auto mode (which functions just like the AGC of the old AC90s). Unless there is another way to do it, I don't see how to toggle on and off just those two auto functions using a simple flick of a switch. And auto gain is limited to 24dB, while on the UX90 you can set set up to 30dB gain in AUTO mode. I'm going to poke around a bit more, but I already have my B&H RMA.
Click to expand...

Hi, I previously owned the UX180 (which is identical to the UX90, apart from having some advanced features). The LCD screen and colors on these cameras are quite poor, making it very difficult to color match with other cameras. I now own the HC-X2 (which is identical to the HC-X20, but with some advanced features), the LCD screen and colors are a lot better than the UX series. So color matching the UX90 with the HC-X20 will be a little more challenging with the scene files either way.
Yes with the autoswitch options are the same with the UX180 too the HC-X2, they left out the Auto-SW option in the HC-X2. Silly, I don't know why?! The CX350 has it, which has the same menu interface as the HC-X2/X20. The only thing you can change to manual are the audio levels (if you assign the buttons) in automode, also you can only get face detection in automode :-((((((((((( Panasonic really need to make these changes on a firmware update. Other than that I like the camera. If I was you I would work with manual mode and assign auto/manual buttons for now, then hopefully they add back the Auto-SW to the menu on a firmware update and also add face detection to manual mode.
 
I have been using Panasonic cameras for corporate shoots for over 10 years, when I got my HC-X2 I was puzzled too to see some of these features are missing. They even took away MP4 1080/29.97. Did the HC-X1 have some of these issues with the Auto SW? I do not understand why would Panasonic produce a broadcast camera under their Lumix consumer division and strip it from basic features. I don't know if they just expect us to buy the CX350 or what. But then, why manufacture the HC series as armatures are not going to buy them. They do not even try to educate buyers about some of these hidden shortcomings so we can consider instead the CX350. Very bad for business, especially if they do not update those features in a firmware update soon.
 
Ken1212 said:
I have been using Panasonic cameras for corporate shoots for over 10 years, when I got my HC-X2 I was puzzled too to see some of these features are missing. They even took away MP4 1080/29.97. Did the HC-X1 have some of these issues with the Auto SW? I do not understand why would Panasonic produce a broadcast camera under their Lumix consumer division and strip it from basic features. I don't know if they just expect us to buy the CX350 or what. But then, why manufacture the HC series as armatures are not going to buy them. They do not even try to educate buyers about some of these hidden shortcomings so we can consider instead the CX350. Very bad for business, especially if they do not update those features in a firmware update soon.
Click to expand...

Do your best to work around that, shoot in the 4k 29.97 and downscale to 1080p or convert the MOV to MP4. I know in some cases you want to shoot an pass on the file(s) as is. Panasonic have shot themselves in the foot with all these missing features that were in previous HC/UX/AG series, they really need to make ALL these changes in an update. I don't regret buying 2 of these X2s (replacing my older UX180 and DVX200) as it is a nice upgrade, but still very disappointed at the same time with taking out some features unnecessarily..

Add back missing framerates options to MP4 formats
Add back Auto-SW to the menu
Add back Auto gain max from 24dB to 30dB
Enable face detection in manual mode

Please add more as I can't remember them all right now.
 
It seems that the CX350 is the best purchase. It is odd that the pricing is so similar. I would pay more ($4,500) for a CX350 II with better image quality (highlights).
 
Mike Chang said:
Do your best to work around that, shoot in the 4k 29.97 and downscale to 1080p or convert the MOV to MP4. I know in some cases you want to shoot an pass on the file(s) as is. Panasonic have shot themselves in the foot with all these missing features that were in previous HC/UX/AG series, they really need to make ALL these changes in an update. I don't regret buying 2 of these X2s (replacing my older UX180 and DVX200) as it is a nice upgrade, but still very disappointed at the same time with taking out some features unnecessarily..

Add back missing framerates options to MP4 formats
Add back Auto-SW to the menu
Add back Auto gain max from 24dB to 30dB
Enable face detection in manual mode

Please add more as I can't remember them all right now.
Click to expand...

That's exactly it, occasionally I will get a client who will request 1080/30p in MP4 but does not want editing and needs quick delivery. Now, I either have to convince them to go with .mov or go back and convert the file/s. This makes me leery buying anything produced by the Lumix consumer department in the future. Wen recording conferences, auto focus is the only setting that I have set to auto, everything else is manual. So, for me the auto face detection in manual mode is extremely important.
 
Last edited:
Shoulda grabbed that C200B, Ken...I know no servo but you could have made it work...and the clients' jaws would have dropped after seeing the footage :happy:
 
NorBro said:
Shoulda grabbed that C200B, Ken...I know no servo but you could have made it work...and the clients' jaws would have dropped after seeing the footage :happy:
Click to expand...

The new pricing is tempting but it's not ideal for single camera conferences. For multi-cam with a live switcher it will be a great camera. Most of my event recordings are single cam. It is a great cam for interviews though. The new price on the complete kit is $3500 which means Canon will most likely release an upgrade in couple months for the NAB. I am interested to see how much of an upgrade the new model will be. The RF will be the key feature and probably a 10bit. They might do 6k but do not think they will do 8k in a full body cinema line for under 10k. We wait and see!
 
I think they'll have something good but if it's that higher-end cinema level we might not see it shipping until the usual late summer time.
 
Mike Chang said:
Do your best to work around that, shoot in the 4k 29.97 and downscale to 1080p or convert the MOV to MP4. .....

Add back missing framerates options to MP4 formats
Add back Auto-SW to the menu
Add back Auto gain max from 24dB to 30dB
Enable face detection in manual mode

Please add more as I can't remember them all right now.
Click to expand...

Everyone please contact Panasonic with your requests and they might implement them. I agree with all the above. I too was disapointed in the loss of 1080 at 29.97 in mp4 and AVCHD and reduced MP4 options. The cameras are overall better than the HC-X1 / UX180 but those few strange decisions are frustrating. I'm still keeping mine because the better LCD alone is worth dealing with the UX180 but if they make the fixes discussed they will be pretty great cameras
 
I do not think encoding is an area that gets new features via firmware. Just an educated guess though. The hardware has to already be capable which makes one think it would be there already.
 
Cameras are capable of much more than they offer off the shelf.

There have been a handful of cinema cameras which had FW updates for more framerates & resolutions, but I don't think ever a camcorder.

Once I found out - years ago - that purchasable licenses existed for more features in cameras, my mindset changed on how these people built them and what they initially offered.
 
firehawk said:
Everyone please contact Panasonic with your requests and they might implement them. I agree with all the above. I too was disapointed in the loss of 1080 at 29.97 in mp4 and AVCHD and reduced MP4 options. The cameras are overall better than the HC-X1 / UX180 but those few strange decisions are frustrating. I'm still keeping mine because the better LCD alone is worth dealing with the UX180 but if they make the fixes discussed they will be pretty great cameras
Click to expand...

I sent a request for these changes to be made, but was asked questions about my serial number and replacing it? If somebody knows which number/email is best to address these changes please let me know.
 
NorBro said:
I think they'll have something good but if it's that higher-end cinema level we might not see it shipping until the usual late summer time.
Click to expand...

I agree or even forth quarter, it all depends on their current cinema cameras stock that the new model will be competing with and of course any releases from Sony.

Have you tried listing your C200b on eBay? If I consider buying one at some point I would honestly go for the C200 kit and not the B. The kit parts would be very important for me specially the touch screen for easy menu and focus access and the EFV is handy in case I need it for anything outdoors. The grip and handle are nice too. I think the B version is best for gimbals.
 
I haven't, but I'd rather sell it on DVXuser, or I'll just keep it.

~$2K isn't a lot of money (in the grand scheme of cameras) and it's an incredibly loaded system to have even if it's just on the shelf for now. If I could use it in the future for a job instead of renting $500-$1000 worth of stuff, that's great.

And if I only keep it for the ND filters for the 5x a year I go out and randomly shoot surfing, I can live with that.

___

As far as the accessories, I never liked the crane-style build for the Canon cinema cameras, so I personally went for the B for a few reasons:

(1) I didn't like the monitor's mounting and overall experience (nothing like with the stills cameras).
(2) Rarely use an EVF and the one on the back of that kind of camera just doesn't work for me personally.
(3) Handle is way too bulky, IMO.
(4) The grip is SUPER nice, it's awesome, and I actually bought it for the B (it's also sold separately, as is the monitor and handle) but returned it because I wanted to continue keeping the camera compact.

I also convinced myself it will be smaller and easier to fly on a gimbal for all of those times I'll be flying it on a gimbal, but that hasn't happened yet. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top