Upgrade from 170 to 370

ksteiger

ksteiger

Well-known member
I started with and HVX200 (original) and am now using an HPX 170. I'm considering an upgrade to the 370. I see that the resolution tests indicate a huge difference between the series. My question is this ... Is there also an appreciable increase in the latitude of this camera as opposed to the HPX170? I can't seem to find out how many more stops are possible with this camera. Or if there is an improvement at all in this area.
Thanks in advance. If I'm going to spend 10 grand I'd like to see a marked difference.
Cheers !
 
I don't think you will see a remarkable difference. Its all relative. Its not going to be like switching from the 170 to the Alexa. Its another 1/3" chip camera. What you will get is full 1080p resolution (with no pixel shifting and such, which is pretty clear in 1080 mode on the HPX) and a better codec: AVC-Intra.
 
I too am curious about the dynamic range on the 370. The 500 has a definite increase in dynamic range over the 200/170, but I haven't noticed as much (dynamic range) difference in the 370.

I have only shot on rented 300s, so I haven't had enough experience to know the answer for sure.


Anyone care to comment on their real world experience?


Jason
 
2/3" chips made a big difference for the HPX500. The HPX370 is still a 1/3" chipset. I didn't do extensive dynamic range testing on the 370, but IIRC the 300 was about 9.5 stops. The improvements in the 370 are in sensitivity and noise performance, but I don't recall if there's any improvement in dynamic range.
 
The 300 has 4x as many pixels on its chips, meaning (effectively) that each pixel is 1/4 the size. Larger pixels = better dynamic range. If they were comparable technology (both 2010-era CMOS chips) then I would expect the bigger-pixel unit to have at least 2 stops more dynamic range. But since they're different technology (CMOS vs. CCD, and 2008 vs. 2010) the difference is narrowed. But I still would expect the 170 to have more dynamic range than the 300, yes.
 
I'm on the other side of this I have both a 170 and a 370 . The 370 is far better in terms of dynamic range. Between the in camera processing that the 370 has but the 170 doesn't have and AVC Intra the 370 handles a wider latitude.

I just demonstrated that to myself last week on a shoot where I was doing a shot with a character running between 2 semi trailers parked parallel and close to each other. The shot was hand held about waist level so there was some sky in the shot. The sky was blown out with the 170 but held cloud detail easily with the 370 with the same exposure on the talent.
 
Not really though. It means that it will have 4x as many shades of gray, but the hard limits of ultimate white and ultimate black aren't extended in a 10-bit system.

In a 10-bit system, absolute white will be 1023, absolute black will be 0, and there will be 1,022 shades of gray between them.

In an 8-bit system, absolute white will be 255, absolute black will be 0, and there will be 254 shades of gray between them.

But the absolute clipping point of white isn't automatically extended two stops because of the 8-bit vs. 10 bit issue.

For example, record something on an HPX300/HPX370 in AVC-Intra mode, and then record the exact same thing in DVCPRO-HD. There you'll have the same chip delivering a 10-bit recording and an 8-bit recording of the same scene. You'll find that the same highlights and the same shadow detail are held, so there is no increase in totaly dynamic range (and certainly not two stops). But there will be more noticeable banding and gradients displayed in the 8-bit recording, and will be a lot smoother in the 10-bit.
 
Thanks Barry, Mark and Michael. Very helpful.

Mark, we still need to pin down a date to grab a coffee. Shoot me an e-mail when you have a chance.


Jason
 
I have both cameras and I use them at the same time quite often. When I have a 1 camera shoot that is not a the crane or the steadicam I use the 300. In general it always provides a better picture for me, not that the 170 is bad, the 300 just shines.

I just did a shoot for Wake Forest where we used both cameras, it was a ENG type shoot so nothing spectacular and in available light but you can take a look if you think it will help.

http://vimeo.com/user4580916
 
Hey Jason,
You used one camera in the gym, and the other in the classrooms? Not using both cameras in the same location, right? Which camera shot what?
Thanks for sharing.
Chuck
 
Hi Chuck,
Sorry about the delay in getting back to you. The gym portions were not shot by me those were done by another firm with an XHA1. The ones I shot were the following:
(the straight on shots were from the 300, cutaways were the 170)

http://vimeo.com/14513026 - Both the 300 and the 170
http://vimeo.com/14451832 - Both
http://vimeo.com/14468137 - Both
http://vimeo.com/14436451 - 300
http://vimeo.com/14532352 - 300

I hope that helps, tell me if you want more info. I am glad to share my 300/170 experiences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top