Panasonic's new version of HPX300

Jan is still around and active on DVXuser.

She has been for years.


If you read back through the archives, you will find that the HVX200 was originally born based on a lot of requests from this very forum.
Then people provided feedback and improvement ideas; and many where implemented in the HVX200A. And many requests that couldn't be done there, where included in the then new HPX170. But people here wanted a larger version that didn't cost quite what the 500 did; and the 300 was born.
Many of the features of the 500 where also desires from this forum.
And the same history dates back to even the DVX100A, responding to this forum's member's comments about the original DVX100. More requests where fulfilled in the 100B.

And early indications are that the 370 is looking to improve some of the things that users (including, again this forum) have talked about.

Not saying that DVXuser designed the cameras, or that we close to deserve all the credit for shaping the cameras (that's what the camera engineers do). Just that every single time we - as a community - have provided feedback; Panasonic has listened. And they continue to.


Forget just online; when's the last time you saw a camera manufacturer rep at a DVXuser party? Other than Jan, who attends regularly.


Some accuse DVXuser of being "in bed" with Panasonic, that we are controlled by them and push their "party line". Nope. Not at all. Panasonic just has very good communication relationship with DVXuser community.

- Mikko
 
spent the last night reading RED forums, to put the things in perspective.
They have at least the same share of strobing etc. problems, but feel even worse, as they have 2-3 times more money spent in the equipment.

At a certain way, 301 and RED are very similar consepts: both have a (relatively speaking) higher quality still photographic image as beginning point, and then these images are put on move using shutter, scanning speeds, processing and post processing.

In both camps, the driving force is to achieve something what was not possible before in their price classes. Both have achieved it to certain extent, and both have taken disadvantages in trade.

The industry as whole, is still very new.

Citing one thread from red people:
“Watching Oceans 11 in hotel last night I noticed lots of strobing on both action moving across frame and panning. I think people become hypersensitive and lose perspective on what are natural limits to shooting 24p. Strobing is actually one of the things that defines the 'film look' and induces the abstraction from reality.” (Adriana)
 
according to the brochure (since the op manual link is currently incorrect) it looks like there are minimal changes over the 300 - outside of the different imager (still 1/3") the 370 has 50hz recording capability right out of the box - similar to (i believe) the 301 that can do both 50 and 60.
 
Last edited:
Stijn said:
http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...d=406090&catGroupId=34401&surfModel=AG-HPX370
Click to expand...

Well spotted! :dankk2:

I'm seeing 3 differences in the brochure.

New sensor with better Dynamic Range. (No mention of noise or rolling shutter improvements, but they are likely there too in some form)
60Hz / 50Hz (Worldwide standards) switch-ability built in. (Yay! This should be standard on all cameras!)
"One-Clip" Rec mode option ... continues the last clip (instead of starting a new one) when you stop/start recording. Multiple shots/takes become just one clip, with Text-Memos inserted automatically at the index points.


FBC is listed as a USER button option, but I believe it already is in the 300 with the FBC update?

Plus the studio (base-station & camera adapter) kit is now listed available. But again, that also works with the 300.



Oh yeah, and MSRP is $1000 more than the 300. :(

- Mikko
 
Nah, they haven't fixed it .. still goes to the 3700

But I tried the same PDF URL, with out the extra 0 and it didn't work.

- Mikko
 
Barry_Green said:
Steve Cooperman is the new product manager for the HPX300/HPX500 series; he has been the manager for the HPX2000/2700/3000/3700 for quite a while.

I don't think he has much (if any) forum presence, but he (and the sales support engineers) are readily contactable for any support issues.
Click to expand...

Thats certainly true in Aus. They are very contactable. Still, Jan was always on it in regards to any 500 issues, which pre empted a lot of direct calls.

Jan also promoted this community, not sure about other cams, but there was a demo reel of my and others footage from the 500 at NAB last year to promote the cam, but they let us put our credits on it.
 
Thanks for the link to the brochure.

Now let's hope somebody can post some footage to see if the camera lives up to the claims of high sensitivity and low noise. A comparison against some 1/2" or 2/3" cameras would be really nice.
 
A HPX300 upgrade to a better sensor less grain/noise and more light sensitive is good news.An upgrade for a HPX500 is more needed.A 2/3 inch sensor thats not full raster HD is stupid.This camera needs to be at least that.10 bit AVC Intra would be icing on the cake.I for one would buy.
The 2700,3700 are just to expensive for the work I'm getting.To me they are over priced anyway.But 4:4:4 would be so sweet.
 
reticulan5 said:
A HPX300 upgrade to a better sensor less grain/noise and more light sensitive is good news.An upgrade for a HPX500 is more needed.A 2/3 inch sensor thats not full raster HD is stupid.This camera needs to be at least that.10 bit AVC Intra would be icing on the cake.I for one would buy.
The 2700,3700 are just to expensive for the work I'm getting.To me they are over priced anyway.But 4:4:4 would be so sweet.
Click to expand...

I totally agree a 600/601 is needed in these economic times, I too would buy one if it was around £15k inc lens
 
Last edited:
reticulan5 said:
A HPX300 upgrade to a better sensor less grain/noise and more light sensitive is good news.An upgrade for a HPX500 is more needed.A 2/3 inch sensor thats not full raster HD is stupid.This camera needs to be at least that.10 bit AVC Intra would be icing on the cake.I for one would buy.
The 2700,3700 are just to expensive for the work I'm getting.To me they are over priced anyway.But 4:4:4 would be so sweet.
Click to expand...

The 2700 and 3700 (dual-link HDSDI 4:4:4) are certainly not overpriced. Their feature-to-cost value is off the charts. I challenge you to find a camera that matches them for a better price. Not the Sony 700. Not the F900R ($69.9k). The SRW9000... certainly, but not in the same price galaxy.

You can, being a bit resourceful, get into the 3700 for less than $40k, less lensing. That's nothing short of amazing to me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top