Not a just simple hpx-300 vs hpx-170 post...

evolvnyc

evolvnyc

Well-known member
I know, these "which camera?" posts are really old but the significant price drops have me thinking about getting the HPX-300. And my question isn't "which is better?" because I have shot both and love them both. I'm primarily a doc filmmaker who does a lot of "behind the scenes" work for corporate stuff. When doing the paid work, I always shoot handheld. When doing my own work, I'm almost always on a tripod and often use an adapter and Zeiss lenses. Here's my question:

Most people who hire me, hire me with my HVX-200. That's the camera they request (whether they know what it is or not.) I'm losing my HVX because my partner is taking it on a doc assignment in Africa for 3 months, so we needed to invest in a 2nd cam anyway. My question is, can I safely assure people (clients) that they are getting the exact same picture/quality they would with the HVX? Like when I had off the footage to their editor, and I have done the settings right, will it be the same codec or compression, the same look (I know it will be sharper, but I mean that same panny mojo and beautiful filmic/color look in 24p) because I want to have the higher resolution for my own personal stuff and want to make sure I'm still also giving my clients what they want and are used to with the HVX-200 footage.

Also is there anything which will be different in terms of higher cost (beside the batteries) when it comes to shooting the HPX-300 with a 35 adapter (like a letus)? Will I need an extra piece to make it work with this Fuji lens? Thanks so much for your input.
 
We thought that identically shot DVCProHD from our 170 did not look as good as the same footage shot from the 300 in AVCIntra100.

But the mojo was definitely there in both.
 
As compared to an original HVX200? or an HVX200A?

The HPX170 workflow will be identical, the footage will be cleaner, more sensitive, way less noisy, but with all the same "mojo".

With the HPX300 you have two choices, AVC-Intra or DVCPRO-HD. If you give them DVCPRO-HD it'll be the same workflow; AVC-Intra may or may not complicate things depending on how they edit. HPX300 footage is going to be substantially sharper and also quite a bit "smoother"; HPX300 footage reveals that the HVX/HPX170 have a grittier texture while the HPX300 is slicker and smoother. Color etc. will match up very nicely.
 
And for my personal stuff the hpx-300 will still have the same dreamy/saturated look in 24p as the DVX and HVX both did? DO I need special items that I wouldn't need on the HVX if I want to put a Letus adapter onto the HPX-300 lens? Thanks again.
 
You wouldn't really want to put a Letus adapter on the front of the HPX300's Fujinon lens. That's asking for a really long, heavy, clunky system. What you'd really, really rather have is a direct-connect relay lens, a purpose-built lens that can be more optically pure and purpose-built for the exact job of relaying the adapter's image to the camera's chips. And you can go with a lighter adapter rig because you don't need flip optics in it, since the HPX300 can employ its "reverse scan" function to overcome the upside-down issues in conventional non-flip adapters.

I don't think any 1/3" relay lenses are on the market yet, but I know Letus says it's coming. I would assume Cinevate is working on one as well?
 
PS Technic has a 1/3" relay for the JVC series ProHD camcorders, I believe. But the HPX300 is definitely gonna be better than the 170 in terms of picture quality. And with recent price drops, its under 8k for the HPX300. However, I don't like the stock lens at all. At full resolution, you can really see the flaws in the optics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top