I understand what you are saying, but oddly I have found that shooting with the HPX250, requires conditions to be just right to hit the sweet spot of this camera, and get footage that looks good. When using the GH2 or GH3 under the same conditions and or together with the HPX250, my results are that the these cameras have provided superior looking footage as compared to the HPX250.
HPX250: Noise and soft, Camera problem or me, expecting too much?
- Thread starter mmaller
- Start date
I understand what you are saying, but oddly I have found that shooting with the HPX250, requires conditions to be just right to hit the sweet spot of this camera, and get footage that looks good. When using the GH2 or GH3 under the same conditions and or together with the HPX250, my results are that the these cameras have provided superior looking footage as compared to the HPX250.
lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
Well-known member
I didn't bother to shoot in 720/60p mode w/ the HPX250 to compare it w/ the HVX200. The HVX200 is 720p native. So can't compare between the two cams. But I can say the HVX200 is a bit better in overall sharpness than the HPX250. I have about 300 hrs of HVX200 footage to back it up. 1080p requires very high quality lens and certainly the HPX250 is compromising quality for reach and cost. Coming from the recent Sony PMW200 experience and their dismal DVCAM SD recording, I suspect the HPX-250 won't be good if it's down converted. I work regularly w/ the fiber SMPTE 314 cable switched cam (Ikegami 79 & 79D). Their CCU is a whopping 2 RU and weight about 30 lbs. Their SD & HD SDI outputs are incredibly sharp and absolutely no degradation in SD mode. It is that good. On the other hand, these small compact camcorders are no doubt taking a big performance hit for the sake of compact size whenever you're not shooting in its native mode.
The consistence sharpness issue is real and not an isolated incident. You simply have to do numerous of workarounds. And in most cases, simply expose it to 98-100% IRE. This will make it look overall sharper. I hate it but it seems the only way other than controlled lighting. It's crazy & financially foolish where I have to use several 1.2k Arri HMIs to even out the contrast ratio to accommodate the HPX250's limitation. Quality monitoring w/ the 9" BT-LH910 monitor is a highly recommended accessory. This camera handle mountable monitor will reveal the exposure and overall sharpness problems. But with my style of shooting, I rather shoot on their 2/3" AJ series cams and be done with it. There is night and day quality difference between Panasonic's AG & AJ series, but so is the cost.
Last edited:
I shoot in 720 mode often with the hpx250 and find the image to be impressive and sharp. I also have a canon xha1s and the image from the panny is sharper,more colorful and nicer. It seems to me, that your black levels need to be down in the 0-3 ire area to help with the image.
lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
Well-known member
With your real world use of 720p on the HPX250, I can pretty much say that the Archilles' heel on the HPX-250 is its optical varifocal 22x lens. 1080p AVC-I 100 is suffering from considerable optical compromises in the lens. I prefer the full raster 1080p acquisition despite only 30p available. If they stick w/ Leica or Fujinon, I'm willing to bet it won't be as bad. I don't mind paying up to $7K (similar price to the Sony PMW200) w/ a better quality zoom lens. There were many instances where I want to get rid of my HPX-250, but I find it still useful for variety of situations. I haven't try in regular SD - DV50 mode yet. But I hope it will be much better than Sony's PMW200 in DVCAM 4:1:1 mode.
Last edited:
That is too bad. I would rather a reasonable range lens (13-16x) that performs well than the insane range with performance compromises. Wonder why they went that route? Think next gen small sensor cams will see them going back to the "old" ways? I think of the original ex1 and how, while it may not have the most exciting image, it is sharp as hell and seems to pretty much work at any light level (until maybe the low low low).
lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
Well-known member
My speculation is that Panasonic is camcorder corp, not lens mfg. Their speciality is camera' electronics, not optics. They may be thinking that AVC-I 100 will magically boost the quality or at least keep it right at the cusp of 720 & 1080p minimum standards MTF. In reality, it's just not the case. I'm surprised that B&H reviewers gave it very favorable high. Virtually none of the reviewers commented on the lackluster optics. You really have to shoot a lot of footage and be in a wide variety of scenarios to fully test out the camera. Can't be pointing at 3200K indoor test chart and assume that it'll be splendid in all cases. Not sure if they spend enough time in beta testing the camera prior to mass production for outdoor, 5600K mixed lighting situation & make necessary changes. On the other hand, indoor 3200K is pretty good.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
The HPX250 is an amazing camera if you are realistic with your expectations for a prosumer camera. If you are happy with the quality from the lens, the 22x length is fantastic. AVC-I 100 pushing possibilities in post, several focus peaking options and variable framerates are a few more things that make this camera ideal for my run and gun work. If I am on a controlled project, I will be using a slr 10/10 times with very high quality lenses (rented) simply because I can get a sharper image.
Just on a side note, Barry Green recommends keeping your aperture from open to f/5 (give or take) to get the sharpest image with this camera.
Just on a side note, Barry Green recommends keeping your aperture from open to f/5 (give or take) to get the sharpest image with this camera.
lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
Well-known member
On a lighter note, I just captured footage shot on the Panasonic AG-170 VHS camcorder. Their label on the camcorder itself as "Industrial". It's about 26 years old and still working as back in 1987. Holy moly, dramatic quality difference. 240 lines VHS vs. 1080p. Color rendition & overall sharpness is quite dated. But back then it was the norm. Relatively speaking, I can't complain too much on the $5K HPX-250 and its class of camcorder (AG series). In about 25 years (2038), the HPX-250 be like the AG-170 VHS "Industrial" camcorder. I'm hoping some sort of flying drone camcorder with the option for handheld in about 25-30 years from now.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Yeah, I'm reading some of this and I just can't see how you guys are experiencing what you're saying... an HVX200 is sharper than an HPX250? Not possible, unless you're stopping the HPX250 down to like F/11 or something. The HPX250 is hugely sharper than the HVX200. The HVX is famous for some very lovely images, but ultimate razor crispness was never in its toolbox.
Are you guys keeping the iris at f/4 or more open? You cannot cannot cannot let the camera stop down to f/8 or f/11 without destroying the image sharpness, so ... as the doctor says, "don't do that."
This is an oldie, but a goodie, and it still represents some of my favorite HPX250 footage.
http://filmmakingnaturally.com/an-iowa-morning-testing-the-panasonic-ag-hpx250/
Are you guys keeping the iris at f/4 or more open? You cannot cannot cannot let the camera stop down to f/8 or f/11 without destroying the image sharpness, so ... as the doctor says, "don't do that."
This is an oldie, but a goodie, and it still represents some of my favorite HPX250 footage.
http://filmmakingnaturally.com/an-iowa-morning-testing-the-panasonic-ag-hpx250/
lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
Well-known member
What at stake here is the as-is, non-graded raw footage sharpness at certain challenging lighting situation. If you're shooting nature w/ not much fast-paced wild life action, chances are you will have more control and time to change the cam's setting than shooting live events w/ unpredictable human interactions. There are numerous times where the cam op simply can't tell the live action to stop and change the PAP 1 or 2, and gamma modes.
I've read the comments on the site and the B.PRESS gamma along w/ PAP 1 & 2 were used to overcome the limitations. And I strongly believe that additional color gradings were done in post to get the overall consistency of the color. It's pretty much impossible to get it right in the field for every shot. Will have yet to see non-nature and more live and uncontrollable situations.
I've read the comments on the site and the B.PRESS gamma along w/ PAP 1 & 2 were used to overcome the limitations. And I strongly believe that additional color gradings were done in post to get the overall consistency of the color. It's pretty much impossible to get it right in the field for every shot. Will have yet to see non-nature and more live and uncontrollable situations.
Last edited:
Being a still film shooter (35mm to 8X10) back in the days, I ALWAYS tested several lens for my cameras. Not all lens of the same model will be equal in sharpness. I tested a Zeiss 127mm for my Hasselblad and it was very, very soft at all apertures.
This also applies to zoom lenses for video, or anything, for that matter. I have an old Fuji TV lens that is sharper than most from the same model. So, same thing with the HPX250, etc. You might have a lens that is not 100% to spec. Doesn't take much for the elements to be out of spec. We're talking 1,000's of mm's
Try a friends 250, or go to a store to shoot some footage of a 250.
This also applies to zoom lenses for video, or anything, for that matter. I have an old Fuji TV lens that is sharper than most from the same model. So, same thing with the HPX250, etc. You might have a lens that is not 100% to spec. Doesn't take much for the elements to be out of spec. We're talking 1,000's of mm's
Try a friends 250, or go to a store to shoot some footage of a 250.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I shot a lot of convention footage when I lived in Las Vegas, so I'm well aware of the challenges of available light and challenging light. What I'm saying is -- regardless, you absolutely must, under all circumstances and at all times, keep the iris at f/4 or more open. Period. If you let the iris stop down to f/5.6, you WILL be compromising the sharpness of your footage. If you let it stop down to f/11, you will be SUBSTANTIALLY compromising the sharpness of your footage.
This is not a flaw in the camera, or a flaw in lens design, or anything like that. It is simply the laws of physics, and will equally affect any and every 1/3" 1080p camera that has 1920x1080 sensors. If the sensor is smaller, the restriction is even tighter -- on a 1/4" camera, you must keep the iris to f/2.8 or more open, in order to avoid diffraction.
If you're using an HPX250 and you see the iris is at f/8, then you should swap in some ND to get that iris back more open. That operational hassle is the price you pay for having a full-raster 1080p sensor in the 1/3" size. It will equally affect every 1080p 1/3" sensor camera on the market, now or in the future, forever. Diffraction is diffraction and you can't get around it.
If I had my way, they would have put a menu option in there to limit the iris to not be able to go more closed than f/5.6. But that didn't happen. So I have to continually remind (and warn) people that if they see f/6, f/7, f/8, f/9, f/10, or f/11, they're ruining their footage.
Now -- to be clear -- I don't know that iris issues are causing the complaints of softness, but -- I can't imagine what else is. The HPX250 is a razor sharp camera, so my GUESS is that you guys must be letting the iris stop down occasionally. And all I can do is urge you to just not let that happen. Be diligent on the ND wheel. Or use the gain switch if necessary. But don't let the iris stop down past f/5.6, and if you want ultimate optical fidelity, you wouldn't want it to stop down past f/4 if you could avoid it. Keeping the iris from f/1.6 to f/4 is the way to avoid diffraction making all your footage look out of focus.
And yes, I know that it is a historically accepted photographic technique to stop the iris down more to bring more of the field of view into focus (deepening the DOF). But I'm telling you -- you CANNOT do that on a 1/3" 1080p-sensor camera. All you will accomplish by stopping down to f/11 is to make EVERYTHING out of focus.
Hope that helps at least some of you overcome the softness issues you're encountering.
A little off topic but what size monitor do you need to see soft focus caused by diffraction? I ask cause i shoot with an ex1 sometimes and dont follow that rule about staying at or more open that f4 and have never seen anything looking soft. BUT im usually viewing on a 22" acer or my imac or even smaller monitors.
maranfilms
Veteran
An ex1 is 1/2 in. sensor, it's not 1/3rd or 1/4. Not to mention, the ex1 is known for sharpness, and very crisp images. But again, your talking apples to oranges.
Barry_Green
Moderator
True, and that extra size buys you more leeway with the iris. Also, the EX1 only records 4:2:0, so that gives you even a little more room. You can probably go to f/8 on EX1 without incurring noticeable diffraction loss.
Diffraction affects red first, because red is the longest wavelength. In 4:2:0, the system is only recording 960x540 in red, so if the red gets diffracted down to only 1/4 of its total potential resolution, it still wouldn't really show in the footage. It will, a little, but not much.
The HPX250 is recording 4:2:2, so any loss of sharpness in the red channel will be seen in the footage sooner on the HPX250 than it would on a 4:2:0 EX1.
The HPX250 is every bit as sharp as an EX1.
lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
Well-known member
If I'm not mistaken, the Sony EX1, EX3, PMW200 are all 1/2" and not 1/3" sensors. Maybe @f/5.6 over f/4 diffraction advantage.
27" Samsung Series 9 @ 2560x1440 or MBP 15" w/ Retina Display, Sony BVM 22" HD CRT montitor via Deck Link Extreme HD-SDI. Flaws are clearly seen.
Examples: Small specks of dust on the lens when shooting outdoor, it's there. Can't conceal it. Sometimes even if a small insect happen to stay on the upper left, I can see it too.
I will take my HPX-250 to Panasonic service for a lens checkup. It's just not a good quality run on this copy I have.
Last edited:
Barry, I understand what you are saying, But all of the conditions that I was in when encountering this noticeable loss of sharpness, was in low light scenarios.
My iris was wide open and when zoomed in, I wish I had a wider aperture. I had to evoke +6db gain to get a reasonable image. It wasn't that dark as can be seen by the images I posted. There were overhead room lights and some daylight was filtering in. I did have the camera in the pap1 setting as I knew what I was going to encounter, but it didn't really seem to help.
I'm wondering if what JohnnyD mentioned, might be the case with my camera?
My iris was wide open and when zoomed in, I wish I had a wider aperture. I had to evoke +6db gain to get a reasonable image. It wasn't that dark as can be seen by the images I posted. There were overhead room lights and some daylight was filtering in. I did have the camera in the pap1 setting as I knew what I was going to encounter, but it didn't really seem to help.
I'm wondering if what JohnnyD mentioned, might be the case with my camera?