Sony nx5u Vs Panasonic HPX170

F

Focusnow

New member
Looking for an HD camera that would be good for my dream to shoot for film therefore I intend to transfer to film and my wife's dream to do documentaries which means ability to shoot for hours without interrution.
For budget reasons, I've settled on the Sony NX5U or the Panasonic HPX170.
I would appreciate if you would share your thoughts on these 2 cameras for my needs. Does the AVCHD codec of the Sony makes it so hard to transfer to film that the Sony is a bad choice for future transfer to film?
Appreciate your thoughts.
 
I have not used the Sony on a gig but I did kick the tires on the cam at NAB. I actually liked it, but I bought an HPX.

Does the AVCHD codec of the Sony makes it so hard to transfer to film that the Sony is a bad choice for future transfer to film?
Click to expand...
HVXs and HPXs have seen many film blow ups and the reports are always great. I have to say this is an odd goal. a feature length film will cost you about 50,000 for a film transfer. Its expensive and largely unnecessary.

ability to shoot for hours without interrution.
Click to expand...
The sony can record longer for less money due to the recording media, but P2 is hands down the most incredible acquisition media I have ever used. I only have 2 16G cards and I use laptop on set to keep shooting non stop. So you can record all day long if you off load. We shot plenty of projects with 2 4G cards back in the day.

HPX has variable frame rates

HPX has gorgeous 4:2:2 Intra frame codec.

The sony will be sharper. Almost anything is. But there is a real film like mojo that panny has in these cams.

If this is your first cam. I would pick up a used HVX200 it is the previous generation to the HPX and they are going for around 2000 bucks now and are widely available.

Hope that helps a bit. I will say the HPX is my favorite camera I have ever owned. The ergonomics, the features, its a masterpiece. I own more than one camera and I always enjoy when a gig calls for the HPX.
 
I agree with the above... I have screened many films in festivals, and haven't done a film out in over ten years (it's generally DVD, DigiBETA or HDCAM for projection)... the ultimate goal should probably be Blu Ray these days, and the Panasonics really do deliver a film-like image when seen on a big screen in Blu Ray. Contrary to some opinions posted in these forums, film-look is not generally appreciated because of it's resolution... there is a tactile feel to the image, and the Panasonic cameras have had the edge in that regard since the DVX.

I also agree that getting a used 200 or 200a is a good choice. I have a 200 as a backup camera to my HPX500 and I use it regularly. It's not as good in low light, but realistically that only matters when you are trying to match footage shot in very low light with another camera with better low light capabilities.. The 200 is noisier, no question, but it's not that objectionable - to me at least - looks kind of like grain when shooting 16mm.
 
Thank you so much for your thoughts. My assumption has been that if my video is successful (allow me to dream), at some point it will have to be transferred to film?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top