The HPX-500 SD vs. HD Lens game :-)

[SPZ]

Kit, first of all, thank you for posting these grabs and for your time and effort to give us fellow dvxusers real examples of what sd glass vs hd glass looks like on an HPX 500 .

Like many others, i believe, I'm on the fence of jumping to the HPX500, mainly because the body price is incredibly attractive, but lens price is out of my affordable price range.

Please do continue with the comparisons. Can I suggest some scenarios?

I would really like to see how a wide scenery shot looks, for example- a Urban, skyscrapper wide shot? Also would like to see close up of people, and a forced lens flare?

If you could post just 4 seconds of each shot in full resolution for download, that would be EXCELENT (1080P preferable, since its the mode that resolves more)- would really like to see that on my HDTV. Can someone with the Bandwith help Kit here? This would be an amazing ressource for every HPX owner! You can export a short clip directly from P2cms- but I'm sure you already know that

Lots of requests, I know, but this is litteraly clearing my doubts on going HPX170 vs HPX500.

Thank you again Kit! Good job!

 

[dolph2000]

I have a canon HD lens on my 500 and a SD Nikon wide angle. I don't see differences as well. I mix them but you abolutely can't see. I do a lot of post productions so I watch them closely but I realy can't tell, besides the wide angle and offcourse sometimes some CA. I always shoot 720/24n.

 

[Kit Hannah]

Kit, first of all, thank you for posting these grabs and for your time and effort to give us fellow dvxusers real examples of what sd glass vs hd glass looks like on an HPX 500 .

Thanks for the words of encouragement and praises, but that's really not what I am looking for. Just looking to show some real world evidence and share my experiences with this topic. Anybody is more than welcome to take what I say with a grain of salt.

I think that the newer HD lenses are fantasic, but they are far out of my camera budget, so that's why we went with SD. Price. That's it. If I had a choice, I would have gone with HD lenses. But I just feel that they don't "look bad" and 99.9999% of clients are not going to ook at the HPX-500 footage and say "Geez, was that shot with a SD lens?"

What I find funny is that some of these people posting act like the "SD lens" is the limiting factor of these cameras. People come on and try to technically break down an argument for the lens, but the fact is that on this particular camera, many SD lenses work great.

I'm doing my best to post some more footage, but unfortunately, I am running shrt on time these days. With a new television show starting next week, a new live outside broadcast truck on the way, my other company acquiring a professional sports team, and a high maintenance girlfriend, it's hard to get around to doing these tests. Maybe I will try and get my buddy Adam to post some more stuff since he has the HD lens.....

Thanks
Kit

 

[film842]

For what it's worth, I just ordered the $8000 Fujinon lens from B&H even though I had just purchased a $3000 Fujinon SD lens of off Ebay. The lens worked just fine and I did this after researching the SD versus HD threads thoroughly.

So why did I order the HD lens? Primary reason is that I'm producing for HD broadcast and I don't want to take any chances. The second reason is that most folks who say that the the SD lens works fine are motivated more by lower cost than by quality of image (my opinion) And that's a perfectly valid reason.

So now I'll have to put the SD lens up for sale. Could have saved myself some trouble if I had though harder initially about what was really required. Oh well.

 

[Noel Evans]

besides the wide angle and offcourse sometimes some CA. I always shoot 720/24n.

Dolph this is my point of posting in this thread. I dont want to doubt the SD can produce good results or undermine what Kit is trying to do and say here.

What would be good, if people with SD glass could post stills from shots, because I would be wrapped if there was a great wide angle out there that produced almost zero or zero CA.

Also, I do want to make it clear to people considering what to buy that the CA is very real.

I get it on my A1 but can avoid the shots where it occurs. Plus it takes a very nice wide shot that I can cut with HPX footage very easily. So I can live with it because I can usually avoid CA altogether or get very little.

I conclude with, if you can deal with some CA then SD glass is fine. I wouldnt shoot for broadcast on SD glass because of this. If your shooting something like corporate events or weddings then it is much less of a concern based on the knowledge of the clients. And, finally like I said - I would love to find a CA free wide angle in SD.