Panasonic AG-UX180 or Sony PXW-Z150?

T

thercman

Member
Hey Guys!

I am looking to purchase my first camcorder. The plan is to use this as my main camera for well, everything. I am going to be shooting a lot of interviews and documentary footage. My b-cam will be the GH3 for interviews. I have considered purchasing the GH5 or a couple GH4's to allow me multi camera shoots but the versatility of a camcorder is priority at this point.

So each of these of cameras have their pluses and minuses. Ultimately though my goal is image and audio quality. This brings me to the sensors, the bit rate, color depth, and the codecs. The UX180's sensor uses 8.79 megapixel: UHD/FHD 59.94p/29.97p/23.98p and 9.46 megapixel: 4K 24p. Whereas the Z150 uses 14.2 of it's 20 megapixel sensor. The UX180 has a much higher bit rate than the Z150. 200 Mb/s on the UX180 vs 50Mb/s on the Z150. The UX180 only records in 4:2:0 8-bit whereas the Z150 records at 4:2:2 10-bit in full HD. The UX180 uses MOV or MP4 codecs whereas the Z150 uses XAVC Long. Lastly, the Z150 records audio in 24bit and the UX180 only 16bit.

This is how I am trying decipher this info. The UX180's lower megapixels should give me a little better low light performance than the Z150 but have less detail and a wider depth of field than the Z150?

The UX180's 200Mb/s should provide a better image overall due to the large amount of data being gathered as compared to the Z150? (making up for the lower megapixel count?) However, doesn't the type of codec used effect this outcome? So even though the UX180's gathers more data isn't that a mute point if the codec isn't as good?

What about the color depth? 4:2:0 8-bit in the UX180 seems outdated in a $3500 camcorder. Won't that give me much less room for post processing than the 4:2:2 10-bit of the Z150? OR will the 200Mb/s on the UX180 make up for that? Lastly, green screen. It seems the 10-bit is the clear winner here?

Audio: While I have a Zoom F8 in a field bag with a boom pole etc, the 24bit audio just makes sense on camera for carrying less gear in the field. As an audio engineer I don't record clients in anything less than 24bit since it is the new standard. Although I guess I could up sample 16bit in Cubase or Pro Tools which is not my preference.

There is a lot here. I am just trying to make sense of all the data. I know that using each of them will be the best option but I would like to have a better understanding of what the technical info is telling me... Once I have that figured out deciding between the two becomes easier. :-)

Cheers,
Greg
 
Last edited:
I own a PXW -Z150, I think it is a great camera for the needs of my clients and business. I strongly suggest you rent both cameras you are considering, buy the on-line video course from Vortex by Doug Jensen a member here for the Z150 and I am sure you can find some online material on the Panasonic. You can spend lots of time reading and re-reading opinions and pixel peeping but the bottom line is really will the camera you buy work for you needs and clients. Will it pay for itself? And will that happen sooner than later.
I don't care what anyone says, you can do your best to match any two or three cameras, you will always end up doing correction in post.... be it camera or lighting or whatver.. you will need to tweak.
IMHO: The PXW -Z150 is a great broadcast quality camera, it is a world camera, has tons of flexibility and like any camera has some drawbacks. In my country it is an under $5K camera and when you consider what it offers for that amount of money it is great value. It is a camcorder and offers all the benefits that come with that type of camera. A DSLR or Mirrorless camera is a different device and offers different looks and as a result serves different needs, though both can be combined for a great look in a finished piece the latter will require work. I use both.
Though this is not a popular with many in this group with strong Panasonic roots, I prefer the Sony option since they have continued to serve the needs of operators needing 4.2.2 and a camera that can service clients worldwide.
Just my two cents...
Brian
 
Hi Brian,

Thanks for the reply! Yesterday I was watching Doug Jensen's test footage of the Z150 and it looks amazing. Very inspiring indeed!

I completely understand that the YouTube compression effects the videos quality etc. With that said the Z150 just seems to produce a nicer image than the UX180 (based on internet videos, for what it's worth). At least to my eye anyway. Of coarse there hasn't been much footage released yet either.

At this point I like the UX180's zoom range, spot on auto focus, potential color matching to my GH3, and the high bit rate. Although I am not sure if the larger bit rate is providing that much more when all is said and done. The features that stand out to me on the Z150 are the parafocal lens, 4:2:2 10-bit, and 24bit audio.

At this point I have glanced through the manuals for both but haven't read through them... I would love to hear what others have to say. :-)
 
I'd say you are WAY overthinking it. Either camera will give very nice and fairly simular results in the hands of a trained pro. Main thing to really throw it to Sony would be if you do a LOT of green screen for the 4:2:2 (but you can put a fine key from 4:2:0). A big bonus to the Panny is how wide and long the lens is - at least for m as I am often in tight spaces (ie cars) and the extra wide is VERY nice. Doug's footage is (always) very nice, but the Panny has not been out long enough for enough people to test it... this is the best I've seen so far

re: 24 vs 16 bit audio - your choice of mic and its placement will make a MUCH bigger impact on your interviews. no human could tell the difference... especially if they are watching your final product on an iphone or even a tricked out sound system.

really depends on the type of shoots you go on... but either is crazy good. also the Panny HC-x1 is basically the same as UX180.
 
Harry you are absolutely correct! I am WAY over thinking it.

The lens on the Panny is a big plus allowing for more flexibility and while I have a green screen sitting here it is up in the air how much it will actually get used. I am looking to forward to seeing more footage from the UX180. Especially from people that can wield it. :-)

Audio: having a bit depth of 24 vs 16 essentially allows the audio to have more dynamic range and it provides more head room. Couple that with a good mic and good preamps you'll have "cleaner" audio. Which is audible. However, (now that I'm thinking about it) the preamps on the these cameras probably are not that great. This will diminish what a good quality mic and the 24 bit depth provide. That's not to say they won't be an improvement but good preamps are key. Okay with all that ridiculousness aside, played back on the normal persons audio equipment nobody will notice the difference. So your right, its probably good enough... Of coarse I'll probably bring my external recorder, just because. :-)

Thanks for changing my one track mind a bit.

Greg
 
Also in favour of the Panasonic is 50/60P UHD with no cropping of the sensor so you have the choice of smooth UHD to crop into . Z150 is only UHD30P. Also I think the UX180/HC-X1 have more colour controls too. Touch focus is also on the Panasonic for fine focus control essential in UHD.
 
A good practice when buying any camera is to first list down top features you are looking for in that new camera and sort in order of importance. There is no perfect camera in this world and only the most suitable for your budget and scope of work. As long as the cam can fulfill these top 3 features, the rest are bonuses. I'm looking to buy ux180 due to the following features:
1) Long range zoom. 180 win over 150 in this area with its 20x zoom and much wider at 24mm. This is important when doing live event and camera is placed at the end of the room.
2) 4K. 180 can do 50/60 on UHD mode and this is awesome!
3) SD cards instead of QXD, SXS, CFAST or P2 cards. SD is so much cheaper.
4) Fast focus. For live event on stage, having fast and accurate focus is important.
5) SDI output
6) <USD4000

Other important factors are touch screen, menu buttons on side of body and NOT ON HANDLE like Sony. No way to see the menu button when putting the cam on a tripod and raise it higher than my height. The other features such as 10bits, 422 etc is of no use to me. I don't do green screen or intend to do heavy color grading with this cam so having 10 bits will only waste unnecessary space. 24 vs 16 bit audio? Frankly speaking, 99% of the audience can't tell the difference at all since most of the viewers are using PC speakers or handphone to watch. The only post I will do is to adjust the level and clean up a bit of noise so having 24bits is again a waste of space.
 
there is a thread on "the other" forum (dv**fo) that talks about some reliability issues with the z150.

not flaming, nor preaching, nor trolling, simply sharing.

my concerns with both the sony and panasonic offering is whether a 1" chip can offer clients the images they need.

chip size and ultimately light gathering, is one of the reasons i keep looking at the jvc ls300 footage that folks post.

the jvc ls300 has a bigger chip (s35) and with the m4/3 mount, there are plenty of lenses that would be available.

how fortunate we are that we have so many quality choices!

be well.

rob
smalltalk.productions
 
One of the big considerations for me is that when any Sony cam is recording 4K to cards, they're not able to send video out via HDMI or SDI while keeping the LCD on-board monitor active. Doing live event work with the Sonys and recording 4K for later processing requires an additional external monitor. Not the most convinient and ANOTHER additional cost (for the SDI loop through Monitor). The Panasonics do not have this particular issue.
 
BrianMurphy said:
... IMHO: The PXW -Z150 is a great broadcast quality camera, it is a world camera, has tons of flexibility and like any camera has some drawbacks. In my country it is an under $5K camera and when you consider what it offers for that amount of money it is great value. It is a camcorder and offers all the benefits that come with that type of camera. A DSLR or Mirrorless camera is a different device and offers different looks and as a result serves different needs, though both can be combined for a great look in a finished piece the latter will require work. I use both.
Though this is not a popular with many in this group with strong Panasonic roots, I prefer the Sony option since they have continued to serve the needs of operators needing 4.2.2 and a camera that can service clients worldwide.
Just my two cents...
Brian
Click to expand...

This is exactly where I get stuck on which of the UX-180 vs the Z-150 I should buy. Purely in terms of my present needs, I believe the Panasonic fits the bill but PERHAPS not because of the lack of the 422/10bit.
No, I have not yet had a broadcast project but there is one in the works that I do hope for. I attempt to rationalize not needing that broadcast spec by telling myself that regardless of how good of a job I may do, its not broadcast material anyway, except perhaps for a smaller non-major network which, from what I gather, seem be more flexible in their required specs. From time to time, I come across anecdotal material that suggests if they like your project, they’ll overlook the 422/10 bit specification, regardless of what their stated material says. True or false? I have no direct experience with this and would appreciate any input from those that do.

So where does my reluctance to go with the Sony come from? As we all know, the Panasonic offers a few things the Sony doesn’t: a wider and longer lens, better ergonomics, UHD 60P. But beyond all of that it comes down to already having Panasonic mirrorless cameras. GH3, G7 with a number of lumix lenses, 12-35 and 35-100 amongst them. So a certain investment which I would be loath to start over with again and go Sony all in the name of having something that would be easier to match in post. Assuming I stick with Panasonic, I do also see a GH5 or at least a G85 in my future.

But am I better off to bite the bullet, sell the pansonic gear and suck up the additional costs, take the learning curve time and ensure I’m “future proofed” re broadcast possibilities.

And then there are those reports about downscaling UHD 4:2:0 8 bit and getting an HD 4:4:4 10 bit. Seems to be a little controversy about the vaildity of this. Seems like whatever validity there may be, I’d have to wonder what the response of a major network would be.

Input much appreciated. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the great incite everyone!

Based on what's important to me I believe the UX180 to be the better choice of these two.

With that said, is anyone able to explain the relationship between the megapixels used on the sensor relative to Mb/s of data used and the codecs as outlined in the op? I would like to have a better understanding of how this works in a practical sense. Maybe use these two cameras as a reference? I'm NOT using this information to decide which camera to get, I just want the knowledge...

Happy Holidays!
 
Barry_Green said:
Megapixels on the sensor bear no relationship whatsoever to the megabits per second of the codec...
Click to expand...

Yeah Barry I know. Here is what I was referring to:

"So each of these of cameras have their pluses and minuses. Ultimately though my goal is image and audio quality. This brings me to the sensors, the bit rate, color depth, and the codecs. The UX180's sensor uses 8.79 megapixel: UHD/FHD 59.94p/29.97p/23.98p and 9.46 megapixel: 4K 24p. Whereas the Z150 uses 14.2 of it's 20 megapixel sensor. The UX180 has a much higher bit rate than the Z150. 200 Mb/s on the UX180 vs 50Mb/s on the Z150. The UX180 only records in 4:2:0 8-bit whereas the Z150 records at 4:2:2 10-bit in full HD. The UX180 uses MOV or MP4 codecs whereas the Z150 uses XAVC Long. Lastly, the Z150 records audio in 24bit and the UX180 only 16bit.

This is how I am trying decipher this info. The UX180's lower megapixels should give me a little better low light performance than the Z150 but have less detail and a wider depth of field than the Z150?

The UX180's 200Mb/s should provide a better image overall due to the large amount of data being gathered as compared to the Z150? (making up for the lower megapixel count?) However, doesn't the type of codec used effect this outcome? So even though the UX180's gathers more data isn't that a mute point if the codec isn't as good?

What about the color depth? 4:2:0 8-bit in the UX180 seems outdated in a $3500 camcorder. Won't that give me much less room for post processing than the 4:2:2 10-bit of the Z150? OR will the 200Mb/s on the UX180 make up for that? Lastly, green screen. It seems the 10-bit is the clear winner here?"
 
I mentioned this previously and as an owner of a Sony PXW Z150, I have followed the thread. Rent both cameras and try them. I often find it amazing that so many folks are prepared to offer opinions on a camera based on what they have read as opposed to what they know or have experienced with the camera. I find this "trend" in so many threads not just this one... opinions based on other peoples opinions. Seems kinda silly to me... But all the best with your search.
 
BrianMurphy said:
I mentioned this previously and as an owner of a Sony PXW Z150, I have followed the thread. Rent both cameras and try them. I often find it amazing that so many folks are prepared to offer opinions on a camera based on what they have read as opposed to what they know or have experienced with the camera. I find this "trend" in so many threads not just this one... opinions based on other peoples opinions. Seems kinda silly to me... But all the best with your search.
Click to expand...

I do agree on renting if you can before buying. However for these two cameras there are features the other does not have and if those features are important it will exclude the other one. If UHD 60P is important that will exclude the Z150. If 4:2:2 10bit is important that will exclude the UX180. If you want touch features on the LCD that will exclude the Z150. If you want streaming from the camera that will exclude the UX180. No need to try the cameras before deciding what is important. If you only need a HD camera there are lots of others that then join the selection.
 
thercman said:
This is how I am trying decipher this info. The UX180's lower megapixels should give me a little better low light performance than the Z150 but have less detail and a wider depth of field than the Z150?
Click to expand...
The UX180's pixel count means that it is using the largest pixels possible for a 1" sensor. That gives it a rated ISO of about 500. From what I've read, the Z150 has a rated ISO of about 320, so yes, the UX180 should be slightly more sensitive.
Regarding detail - that all depends. It's possible the Z150 would have more detail, but the UX180 is going to create as much detail as a native 4K sensor can do. It's going to be every bit as sharp and detailed as a Red One or other 4K sensor camera. I haven't tested the Z150 and don't know what kind of resolution it delivers. The DVX200 is sharper than the UX180 because it uses a 5K sensor and scales down. It's possible the Z150 does that, I don't know.

As for wider depth of field, no. That's set by the iris and the focal length of the lens. Since they have the same iris (f2.8-f4.5), the DOF should be basically identical between them, except for when you're using areas of the zoom on the UX180 that the Z150 can't match of course.

The UX180's 200Mb/s should provide a better image overall due to the large amount of data being gathered as compared to the Z150? (making up for the lower megapixel count?) However, doesn't the type of codec used effect this outcome? So even though the UX180's gathers more data isn't that a mute point if the codec isn't as good?
Click to expand...
Is any of this going to affect your work? Will it put one more dime in your pocket? If not, why even worry about it? There are other factors that are far more relevant, such as the 20x zoom or the FHD 4:2:2 issue, that may actually affect your ability to do the job. I really like how Ron Evans put it; I mean, if you need UHD/60p, then there's only one choice. If you need a 20x zoom, there's only one choice. If you need a 24mm wide angle, there's only one choice. If you need 10-bit 4:2:2 at 1080p, there's only one choice. The only reason the codec issue would even enter into it is if none of those other factors have been a deciding factor.

Now, that said, they both use h.264. They both use 100 megabits for UHD up to 30p. The UX180 has much wider bandwidth for 1080p, it has 50 megabits, 100 megabits, and 200 megabits. The Sony only goes up to 50 megabits for HD. Furthermore, it has to cram more data into those 50 megabits -- it's trying to fit 10 bits of data, and 4:2:2 color, into 50 megabits. The UX180's only having to put 8 bits and 4:2:0 into those 50 megabits. So that raises a question - will the Sony's codec be as robust as the Panasonic's, seeing as it's having to encode something like 33% more data into the same space? (Or into half the space, in the case of 1080/60p)? Who knows? And frankly, who cares? Will this make the difference between you landing a job or not? If not, why stress it? And if so, then your decision's already made, so why stress it?

What about the color depth? 4:2:0 8-bit in the UX180 seems outdated in a $3500 camcorder.
Click to expand...
It is. That's the single biggest disappointment in the UX180, as far as I'm concerned.
But... one could argue 1080 is outdated in a 2017-era camcorder too. So how big of a deal is 4:2:2 10-bit, if it's only in HD, if what you're shooting is UHD? And in UHD, both cameras are 8-bit 4:2:0. Pretty much all UHD cameras out right now are 8-bit 4:2:0. So in that way, it's not outdated at all...

As Ron said, if HD is your sole concern, there are many other cameras to consider. If UHD is your concern, then surely the gap between UHD/60p and UHD/30p-only is a bigger consideration than whether the 1080p is 4:2:0 or 4:2:2, right? So, again, you have to determine your usage. If you're never going to use UHD, why are you looking at UHD cameras? If you are going to use UHD, wouldn't the ability to go to 60p be important? To me it's a dealbreaker for several uses - live news coverage, live event coverage, sports, all that kind of stuff where you need the "live" look, 30p doesn't cut it. If that's the type of work you do, one camera would get you hired, the other wouldn't, so the decision is already made.

On the other hand, if your employment comes from being a stringer for the BBC, and they're only hiring you for 1080p jobs, and their delivery requirements demand that you deliver 50-megabit 10-bit 4:2:2 HD, then -- there's no question, right? One camera would get you hired, the other wouldn't.

Won't that give me much less room for post processing than the 4:2:2 10-bit of the Z150? OR will the 200Mb/s on the UX180 make up for that?
Click to expand...
Yes, those are questions. Only way to know would be to actually shoot the same scene on both, and run them through the same post process.

Lastly, green screen. It seems the 10-bit is the clear winner here?"
Click to expand...
Not really, 10-bit isn't that big of a deal for greenscreen, but 4:2:2 would be. But then again, if you're post-processing (and in green screen, you're absolutely going to be post-processing) then you should shoot it in UHD on the UX180; that way when you downconvert to 1080p you'll be getting a full legitimate 4:4:4. Which would negate the 4:2:2 advantage for most scenarios. (One where the native 4:2:2 would still be a better choice would be if you were shooting for a client and then handing the raw unprocessed footage over; in that case, you may make life easier for both of you by shooting 4:2:2 in the first place.)

Finally, if the UX180 is ticking your boxes but the 4:2:0 is holding you back and you really think 4:2:2 HD is that big of a deal, you can always get it with a $300 Atomos Ninja Star. That would give you 4:2:2 HD for those times that you need it. Unfortunately it won't be 10-bit, as the UX180 can't output 10-bit, but it would be a true 4:2:2.
 
Last edited:
Barry,

Thank you very much for covering all of that! I really appreciate it! It absolutely helped...

I understand some of the info, especially the Mb/s question doesn't really matter from a monetary perspective. It's more about satisfying my inner tech nerd. :-)

Cheers,
Greg
 
I've seen a few mentions of "you should rent both" which is very sound advice. The problem is that I don't see where I can rent a ux180! Borrow Lenses already declared to me via Twitter that they will not be stocking any, and I did find a rental house in Texas with one, but they won't do out of area rentals. If you find a place to rent one, please share!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top