real deal between HPX500-HPX2700

D

dolph2000

Well-known member
I'm planning on buying an HPX2700. It is 10-bit, full 720p and a lot more.
Only thing is I find the HPX500 sometimes stunning! I want to know if there are users here who have both camera's who can explain why the 2700 is dominant over the 500. I want some reviews. it's a $20.000 difference only for body so i want to know as much as possible about the differences. I can look up the differences and I did but I want the users reviews.
I hope somebody will!

thanks in advance
 
The -2700 is dominant because of it's quality; however, the -500 is better for quantity.

It used to never make sense to me how the -2700 could have less features than the -500 (which for example, can reach higher fps than the -2700) but still costs double.

What I found was that I could tweak my 1080i/60p scene files on the -500 and create a brand new 1080i/24PA scene file which would imitate that of the -2700's "1080p". Now this is not saying much because the -2700 is only an imitation of the -3000. And the body for that is $45,000, but at least you know you are shooting 1080p blue ray on the -3000.

Don't get the -2700 if you think you can get 1080p blue ray quality, it's not true 1080p (it is just like the -500 in this aspect), only the -3000 can pull blue ray off.
 
The HPX2700 is a native 720p camera, the HPX500 uses an SD chip set that is pixel shifted. Wide shots with lots of fine detail should benefit from a native HD camera. I have A-B'd my HDX800 with a 500 and found the 500 looked very good. It was a bit quieter, similar sensitivity, good latitude. However, when I tried to find gammas that matched, the 900 seemed to have a smoother, less contrasty image, even with the 500 in film gamma modes. The 2700 takes that a bit further with FILM REC mode. It also has DRS, like the 900, except with three different levels.

I think the biggest advantage, besides the native HD CCD's, is the amount of image control the 2700 offers via menus and RC10 paint box vs. HPX500. The 500 menu system is more like the HVX200 and just doesn't offer the kind of menu control that high end cameras have.

The image control flexibility pays dividends when matching cameras, and making scene files. A high end DIT expects this kind of camera control on set.

Whether AVC Intra, HD native sensors, extensive menu control of image parameters, frame rate ramping, a much better viewfinder, and 5th P2 slot is worth the large premium is up to each user. Panasonic sells a lot more HPX500's than HPX2000's, 3000's, 2700's and 3700's. I'm sure many will consider the HPX300 to do most of what an HPX3000 does.
 
indeed after seeing the FRAME-BAND compensation update i am in love with HPX300 ... I am any time willing to bet my money on that camera. hopefully i will have the $$$ very soon for the TWO units i have planned for long.
 
MannyHDE said:
Don't get the -2700 if you think you can get 1080p blue ray quality, it's not true 1080p (it is just like the -500 in this aspect), only the -3000 can pull blue ray off.
Click to expand...

Exactly what does that mean though? What is Blue Ray quality? I've seen Planet Earth on Blue Ray and it looked pretty good to me and that was largely shot on the old Varicam which is nowhere near as good as the 2700.
Incidentally, I've just hooked up a 2700 and a Sony 750 to the same monitor, really to see just how much less res was apparent on the 2700, and I had to double check that I'd made the right connections as I was getting a more detailed pic out of the 2700. Both cams had similar settings (ie the BBC ones).
Steve
 
The HPX2700 is a true Varicam. The 3700 is not, as it doesn't overcrank, has no 60p, no 720.
The HPX500 does not have more frame rates than a 2700, the latter does variable frame rates from 1 through 60. It is the most flexible camera Panasonic makes in every way, except it isn't a native full raster camera.

The 3000 and 3700 appeal to the "pixel counters", the 2700 is more appealing to me because it does so much more. The HPX500 just doesn't have the subtle tonality that all of the Panasonic native 720p cameras have. The 500 also looks low-end video-ish when pushed into the hard clip and the detail circuitry is nowhere as sophisticated, ditto matrix.

The 2700 rocks, but it's expensive--although there is a promotion offering a choice of one of four accessory packages worth $8,000 for no charge until September 30.
 
Thanks. I was in London in June shooting with three HPX3000's, but we brought them from the states. Very good British audio, lighting and camera department crews.
 
Dino said:
The HPX2700 is a true Varicam. The 3700 is not, as it doesn't overcrank, has no 60p, no 720.
.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can really say that. It is a Varicam, the name implies variable frame rates, which it does have. What is isn't is an "overcrankycam" but it's nat called that!
Steve
 
Just comparing it to the original Varicam. It has been "un-overcranked", which to me is a big
omission vs. the tape based Varicam 27 series. When it comes to frame rates, perhaps it should be called "Varicam Lite"?
 
Dino speaks the truth about the 2700. I own one and love it. To summarize, its benefits over the 500 are:

1) It has a 720p imager instead of an SD imager (HPX500). This produces beautiful HD shots that don't leave you thinking they're not sharp enough (like the HPX500, IMO). Like the 500, the 2700 also shoots 1080, but its 1080 really does look like 1080 (due to a combination of the imager and the codec, which leads me to...).

2) It can shoot to AVC-Intra, instead of the 500's DVCPRO HD. This means you get a 10 bit codec over the 500's 8 bit, plus you get full-raster pixel resolution (1920x1080 vs the 500's 1280x1080 or 1280x720 vs the 500's 960x720).

3) It has deep paint controls over the image, along with the Varicam's popular FILM REC modes and Dynamic Range Stretch, which helps capture detail in high contrast scenes.

4) It uses sharper viewfinders, and has an optional color one.

5) You can install optional cards, like the ProxyCard, which records low-res proxy videos to an SD card, so you can hand those off to a client as soon as the shoot ends. You can also install a little GPS adapter that records your GPS location into the metadata of your clips (obviously great for travel and nature photographers).

6) You get 5 P2 card slots instead of 4!

7) There are a few other audio benefits...

8) Due to the 500's simpler circuitry, battery life on the 500 is better. Maybe about 50%? On my 2700, I get a little less than 2 hours of shooting time on an Dionic HC battery (similar to a Dionic 90).
 
Dino said:
Just comparing it to the original Varicam. It has been "un-overcranked", which to me is a big
omission vs. the tape based Varicam 27 series. When it comes to frame rates, perhaps it should be called "Varicam Lite"?
Click to expand...

No way it could ever go to 60fps at 2.1 million pixels - just way too much processing going on. Panasonic have done the right thing, giving the user the choice of a super resolution image upto 30 or a slomo-capable camera at 720P for those who need the slomo more than the image quality (although for TV work it'll be more than adequate).
The only baffling thing to me would be why anyone would buy a 3700 and not just a 3000.
Steve
 
steve phillipps said:
The only baffling thing to me would be why anyone would buy a 3700 and not just a 3000.
Steve
Click to expand...

Agreed! Unless one wants the 4:4:4 dual SDI output. With the 3700 at $29,950 w/o viewfinder, with trade-in, the 3000 prices will have to drop. Saw one for $22K at a dealer, used. A 2000 at $15-16K is also worth considering, especially if it has the AVC Intra board.
 
steve phillipps said:
No way it could ever go to 60fps at 2.1 million pixels - just way too much processing going on.
Click to expand...
Just add more processing power, of course it would drag the pricetag up, but with the old varicam was able to do this years ago...1080p should not pose to big challenge with todays development in electronics.

But more realisticly, what the avcUltra outline might bring to this ballgame in the future is also interesting...
 
Power consumption and heat would be issues that Panasonic would have to deal with when using 2/3" CCD's for 1080/60p. RED ONE uses CMOS and has to reduce the sensor size when doing high speed frame rates, reducing resolution.

I am a big fan of 720p and have quit the "pixel counter" club. I do like the fact that AVC Intra 100 records a whole lot more information than DVCPRO HD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top