Status at DiscoveryHD between HPX300 and EX1

I've used both Sony and Panasonic cams (like many here). The EX1 and EX3 produce great images (better than HPX301). I knew that when I made the correct decision for us to buy the HPX 301!

There is FAR more to it when buying/using/editing than ultimate quality of a camera's freeze frame!

D
 
"There is FAR more to it when buying/using/editing than ultimate quality of a camera's freeze frame!"

I agree... in my original post you'll see that I tried to get them to look at their settings but as I found with several EX3 operators they are wary to stray from the original preset look...

Yes mine is over-saturated ... which will have some issues in the reds... but legal or not it was still broadcasted...

I've got it setup for filming Kangaroos and River stuff which in Australia tends to be very limited colour palate... but if I can get some green grass or colour in there it does pop out at these settings...

I think they are both fine cameras... but I don't know how I'd go operating a EX3 just to un-ergonomic for me...

Cheers
 
Lez said:
I agree... in my original post you'll see that I tried to get them to look at their settings but as I found with several EX3 operators they are wary to stray from the original preset look...
Click to expand...

No Worries, but why would users want to keep the image at default no matter how bad it looks?
 
Bassman2003 said:
No Worries, but why would users want to keep the image at default no matter how bad it looks?
Click to expand...

Because that is the way to do it - gives the editor/colourist/grader far more scope. Once you crush the black IN CAMERA that detail is gone and you limit the post prod 'look' options.

Now that approach is all a bit high end broadcast maybe so I also have 'looks' preset on the HPX for different jobs. I therefore select the best scene file based on edit time/budget available (usually little time to grade on a 'bread and butter' longform conference shoot so I 'grade' it in camera...). However if in doubt, leave it flat/default and tweak in post with client input maybe.

Just one way of many!

D
 
I agree and am well aware of the benefits.

Although I am not a fan of flattening out the image as much as shown in this grab.

This may be good for a colorist, but for "normal" video post, I would not want the image to rely that much on the back end.

But those downstream need to know what and why you are doing it as well!

Then posting screens of a "for post" setup camera and saying how bad the camera looks is a bit wrong isn't it?
 
'Then posting screens of a "for post" setup camera and saying how bad the camera looks is a bit wrong isn't it?'

I think we're all starting to miss the point here a little bit... the screen grabs are 2 quick snaps from my timeline...

I used the guy in red as an example as the difference is easy to see...

There is no colourist... there was no looks set up (although I tried)... there is not even a post production budget...

The gig was to supply news feeds to national and international TV channels to generate interest in the event and give some exposure to the sponsors...

mainly the Australian Navy... http://www.georgebassmarathon.com.au/

The EX3 operator was using the camera on the default settings provided by Sony... 1080i 25fps and was really too unsure about changing the settings...

had nothing to do with providing best options to colourists etc...

I was just glad when the stuff he shot was not too thinly exposed... as most of the stuff happened early in the morning shooting into a sunrise...

Anyhow I reckon this has carried on a bit too much... has nothing to do the the Discovery Channel stuff now....

I believe both camera's are capable of some excellent material...

Cheers
 
Lez said:
I think we're all starting to miss the point here a little bit...

The EX3 operator was using the camera on the default settings provided by Sony... 1080i 25fps and was really too unsure about changing the settings...

Anyhow I reckon this has carried on a bit too much... has nothing to do the the Discovery Channel stuff now....

I believe both camera's are capable of some excellent material...

Cheers
Click to expand...


You posted your screen shots under the guise that the HPX300 provided better quality than the EX3.

Then you noted that you had created custom looks for the HPX.

Then you revealed that the guy on the EX3 was using a default setup and was ignorant of the camera so wouldn't change settings.

What are we to draw from this? We certainly cannot anything helpful in comparing the two cameras... Where were you trying to go with your post?
 
'What are we to draw from this? We certainly cannot anything helpful in comparing the two cameras... Where were you trying to go with your post?'

I reckon we should stop trying to flog a dead horse...

I guess if you want me to be realistic... I'm looking at two lots of footage on the timeline and it's going to take me allot more work getting the EX3 footage looking right than the 300...

I'll post a link when the edit is done...

I'm over all this now...

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top