What to buy? Panasonic HMC40, Sony FX7, etc.

On the HMC40, gain cannot be increased until the aperture is wide open. However ... the aperture has very little range to avoid diffraction effects, so most of what appears to be aperture change is in fact ND filters switching in and out. That latter point is true for the FX7 also.
 
There's a $2300 used A1 in marketplace. only 60hrs. on the heads. Pretty decent.

I find even the small level of skew to be nauseating. Even in the lil doggy footy...

We had an EX3 in engineering at my news station, horrible skew all the time. And I was looking at the 16" monitor from 15ft. and I was flabbergasted. The tech's specifically called it an "HD" camera, with extra emphasis on the air quotes....
 
Be aware that an A1 doesn't have a meter that counts hours of usage. Most folks are basically honest, but this is the internet, and if you are buying from someone you know nothing about, potentially you could be hearing a "little old lady only drove it to church on Sundays" like story - so do be careful out there. That said, the classifieds here can be a good place to find gear. There are a lot of good cams available, that have been well cared for.
 
In adequate light, the FX7 is BETTER than the FX1 from what I could tell. I originally looked at both of them when getting my FX7. The sensors on the FX7 are angled (they have some trademarked term for this I forget), so instead of a bunch of rectangles, it is a bunch of diamonds. This really clamps down on the verticle flares, and somehow helps render fine details better than the FX1 (or XHA1). Again, this is with good lighting.
Click to expand...
This is maybe a peculiar/difficult to answer question, but at what point (with respect to light) will the FX1's larger sensors actually begin to outdo in terms of detail, noise, etc. the HMC40 and the FX1 -- for instance, at what time of night will the FX1's better low light performance begin to take precedence over the detail of the FX7/HMC40? Sunset? Dusk? Or is it only better when it's dead of night, with almost no light. Very specific, I know, but maybe someone has an idea. Perhaps it's more extreme that I image; maybe the FX1 takes the cake even on indoor shots or anything that isn't directly sunlit.

An assessment of my thoughts, so far -- for those who have been following this thread (and helping me out deciding):
I like the FX1's sensors and its body/controls (I prefer its body to all the cameras I'm looking at), but it's lower resolution (not "full" HD) and old, old age worry me. Colors aren't as vibrant as the FX7 -- seemingly.
The HMC40 seems great in well-lit situations and takes the cake for detail. Low light isn't great thought. I like the many shooting options: 1080 24p, 720 60p, etc. I don't like its body really; it's very squat and ugly (forgive me, but that's just how I feel). Though I do like that it's small. Colors don't seem to be as vibrant as the FX7. Gain can't be set when aperture isn't wide open, which is a small problem, but still a problem. (I know it seems odd, but I like to engage gain in daylight occasionally, to keep the image from looking too sterile and clean. I could always add a little noise in post, yeah, but I'd prefer to do it in camera if possible.)
The FX7 was the first camera I was seriously considering. It's a full HD version of the FX1... but without the CCDs or the sensor size. It seems to have the best color of the bunch, as well as decent low light performance (on par with the HMC40, perhaps better). I like its body and controls. Not as nice looking as the FX1 (kind of greyish, which is goofy), but not as ugly as the HMC40, though it doesn't have the benefit of its smaller size.
The XH A1 is pretty much out. Can't be had for less that $2000 (except every once in a blue moon) and doesn't seem to have the upper hand over these other cameras in any significant way -- or any way that would be worth an extra $500. Also, the noise is terrible at upper gain levels, and I'm fond of upper gain levels.

Should I begin looking at the GH1? Are there any other cameras in my price range that I'm omitting?
 
Perhaps you should read up a little more on these cameras, by visiting the manufacturer's sites and reading their product brochures, reading 3rd party reviews, and such. This could turn into one heck of a long thread if we are going to literally re-present, essentially by spoon-feeding, the fundamental information on these cams (like what sort of imaging chips they employ, recording formats they use, etc.) that is contained in the product brochures already neatly prepared by Panasonic, Sony and Canon.
 
The point is, this is an AG-HMC40 forum, not a high definition video camcorders 101 forum, and this thread is well into it's 3rd page of largely just the latter subject.
 
literally re-present, essentially by spoon-feeding, the fundamental information on these cams
Click to expand...
Come on, that's not really fair. I think if you've read my posts you'll recognize that I know something about these cameras and HD video in general; obviously I'm not any kind of expert, but I'm not totally new to the field -- I'd like to think I'm already knowledgeable about the issues that would be brought up in an HD 101 thread (yes, I thought the FX7 had 1920 horizontal resolution, but that's literally the direct result of misinformation from a 3rd party review/comparison of the FX1 and FX7).

I am aware this is a board that's devoted to the HMC40, not HD camcorders in general -- and that's a valid point. But, the fact is, this board happens to be one of the more active ones on the net for this type of discussion. I started this post to get direct feedback from people who've used the HMC40 as well as other comparable HD cameras and have questions about specific issues/interests addressed. That's invaluable when making a $1000+ investment (when you're anyone, but especially if you're a student) and you can't get that from an manual or a review.

Irrespective of all that, though, I take your point. If people are still willing to give feedback, I'd love it, but I won't ask any more questions.
 
Tylerrad, I've used all three camera you are talking about. The HMC40, FX7 and the A1. The HMC feels like a toy compared to the others. The A1 would have the best low-light and as more of the pro-camera controls such as gain switch, iris ring and such. The Fx7 is a nice camera but no 24p if you're looking for that and less manual controls than the A1. The HMC feels and is the cheapest camera. If you have any other question feel free to ask. This is a FORUM so it's an OPEN place so you can ask any questions you want. If people don't like it they don't have to read your post or add their comments.
 
Ask questions, for sure, but do read the basic product info (in addition to reviews as well). For example, if you read the product info on Canon's site and a decent review of the A1, you'll realize that it shoots more than just 1080i. It also shoots 1080p, and actually does it pretty well.

I'd also suggest that you tell us what it is that you want to do, specifically, with an HD cam. What kind of video do you shoot/want to shoot? Personal stuff, like capture memories while on camping trips or something, for example, or perhaps shoot a documentary film about classic cars, etc.?
 
Robert M Wright said:
For example, if you read the product info on Canon's site and a decent review of the A1, you'll realize that it shoots more than just 1080i. It also shoots 1080p, and actually does it pretty well.
Click to expand...


This I didn't know... It shoots 1920X1080 Progressive? Or are you talking about the HDV variant 1440X1080 24F?

Usually when you say "1080P" that means 1920X1080 Progressive.

"1080p also known as 1920X1080. Defines specific computer resolution."
http://www.atlona.com/Explanation-for-some-common-terms-sp-10.html
 
It records 1440x1080 24F or 30F (and indeed a variant of HDV technically). Those "frame modes" (24F and 30F) do record genuine progressive image frames (looks, tastes, smells like progressive images - so that's what it is, for any practical purpose), even though a lot of folks make a big deal out of it coming from an imaging block employing native interlaced scan CCDs.
 
Robert M Wright said:
It records 1440x1080 24F or 30F (and indeed a variant of HDV technically). Those "frame modes" (24F and 30F) do record genuine progressive image frames (looks, tastes, smells like progressive images - so that's what it is, for any practical purpose), even though a lot of folks make a big deal out of it coming from an imaging block employing native interlaced scan CCDs.
Click to expand...


Ahh Okay... I just saw 1080P and thought... "The A1 records 1920X1080?"...

Ya.. the 24F is canon's own 24P added to the HDV spec.
 
HDV cameras, ALL of them... are restricted to 1440*1080, not 1920*1080.

That is a specification of HDV, which uses a DV tape transport system and is limited by a variety of things tp this.

HDV spec allows for HD1 (720*1280) and HD2 (1080*1440) with 384kb of audio and 17.8Mbps for video using 35:1 compression (MPEG2). This has to do with limits in place by the FCC and it gets a bit complicated.

HDV pixels are not square like ATSC pixels, but rectangular at 1.33:1, which is how it works. The short version is that with 35:1 compression and a 17.8Mbps cap on the data rate, HDV can't supply 2,073,600 (1920*1080) pixels with data...so the cut it down to 1,555,200 (1440*1080) to save bandwidth. Does that make sense? Then they made the pixels recatangular so that it would fit the 16:9 screen of an HDTV.

AVCHD Compresses more (having trouble nailing down the rate, but sources say things like 'more than twice as much' ) which is why they can get the full 2.07 million pixels into the same datastream. However, it is more taxing on the computer to decompress and read that file since it is packed tighter, which is why you need a HAL9000 to edit AVCHD, and only an abacus for HDV.
 
oops, sorry..yeah

23.4Mbps of video, .348Mbps of audio, and 1.2Mbps of supporting data.

spent too much time looking for the AVCHD stuff, and not enough writing the HDV part.
 
which is why you need a HAL9000 to edit AVCHD, and only an abacus for HDV
Click to expand...
I love that hahaha

I've used all three camera you are talking about. The HMC40, FX7 and the A1. The HMC feels like a toy compared to the others.
Click to expand...
I imagine it would, more or less, based on images/price, but when it comes to image, how have you found it to perform compared with the FX7 in terms of low light and color? It seems to produce, out of the box, more muted colors than the FX7, but that's not based on experience, just having seen many videos

The A1, like I said, generally sells, used, right at the limit of what I'm willing to pay. It does seem to combine the best of all these other cameras (the CCDs and good low light of the FX1, the 24 frame shooting of the HMC40), but unless I come across it for under $2000, I'm not sure I'll be able to manage it. How good is the low light? Does it blow the others out of the water, in your experience?

One major factor in deciding which I want is how willing I am to compromise on progressive/24 frame recording ability. I'm not sure how important it is to me yet. If I find that I must have it, the HMC40 will be the way to go

Robert, et al., I'll be shooting a short film. Whatever camera I buy now will be an intermediary cam for me, probably used only for this short film (maybe one other), not to be kept longer than a year or two, so I don't want to break the bank. I'll probably want to resell
 
Last edited:
The FX1 and XH-A1 are really quite close, for low light performance. I haven't handled an FX7, but other folks have said it's a little better in low light than the HMC40. I'd be surprised though if it isn't pretty darn close to a wash between those two cams also though. Low light performance is about a whale of a lot more than simply which camera shoots the brightest picture straight out of the box using no gain.

What kind of short film do you want to shoot? Will it be shot mostly with controlled lighting, with practical lighting, or both? Is it something you want to show at film festivals, distribute on DVD or maybe over the net, perhaps on Blu-Ray, or some other way? These are the kinds of things to tell us, if you want some genuinely useful, practical advice.
 
HMC40 feels like a toy because it lacks a metal frame and a tape transport mechanism. It weighs less.

On the other hand, it isn't nearly as heavy to carry around.

If its a camera you aim to resell, the A1 and the FX7 both lack a tattletale. I don't know about the FX1. So, when you go to sell that 4-6 year old camera, how do you prove the hours on it? How do you verify the hours to buy it?

I always thought the Sony colors were a little oversaturated out of the box. You can crank the Panasonic up if you prefer that look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top