ATL Media Group
Veteran
I'm getting the HMC40 because it's lightweight. I'm just trying to figure out which stabilizer is light and best for my female assistant to use with the HMC.
What to buy? Panasonic HMC40, Sony FX7, etc.
- Thread starter tylerrad
- Start date
Obviously, whichever one lets her wear the least clothing...
and goes with her shoes
and purse
and doesn't make her face look too round
and doesn't look just like any other stabilizer on the set
a cutesy animal would be a real plus
it must be 100% recyclable and no animal products...
and pink or purple, maybe with some lace
nothing too aggressive looking
definitely NOT black. No Orange either because that doesn't go with pink.
Not too heavy, but not so light as to make her look weak..Can't have anyone thinking she is a wimp.
Heck, this decision pratcially makes itself. I don't know what the trouble is.....
(and I have heard every last one of these, though not all from the same woman, about things like camera gear....most cases they weren't even up for consideration for using it)
(and seriously... no SERIOUSLY how does a tripod make your face look round? 8 years and I still don't know the answer to that one...)
ATL Media Group
Veteran
ROFL... she's not that bad! She just doesn't have the wrist strength for any heavier cameras on stabilizers no matter what color they are.. hehe
ShugPro Digital Studio
Active member
LOL, oh man, I'm glad my wife isn't like that at all. She'd just insist it doesn't cost a fortune.
oh, except for the cutesy animal part, she'd go for that.
i'm also actually very interested in the answer to this question, my wife tried to shoot with my hmc40 and said it hurt her hand.
oh, except for the cutesy animal part, she'd go for that.
i'm also actually very interested in the answer to this question, my wife tried to shoot with my hmc40 and said it hurt her hand.
ATL Media Group
Veteran
I'll let you know how mine reacts when I hand her the HMC and the Merlin... :engel017:
Noise is a function of the sensor and system design, and yeah, it has been dropping over the years. When CMOS technology was new, CMOS chips were a tad noisier than the more mature CCDs. But in recent times, no so much. CMOS typically deliver a raw 14-bit output, versus 12-bit for CCD, and the noise levels have been dropping dramatically. For outside proof, grab any of this year's DSLRs and reel in amazement that, not only can you dial in an ISO6400 setting, but you actually get something pretty much like a photo as a result.
I can't answer for every Sony, but my HVR-A1 (the one replaced by the HMC40) looks like video, period. They have one of those "fake 24fps" modes also found on some Canons, but it's a fairly useless gimmick... I can do real frame rate interpolated conversion in Vegas if I get despatate, and and a few days of rendering time available.
This is genuine 24fps on the HMC40 (well, technically, 23.976fps, the same "NTSC Film" rate supported on DVD and Blu-Ray). So the cadance, yeah, it'll look more "filmy". That's not all you need, though... gamma and depth-of-field are also key indicators you're looking at film. If you need to look very, very much like film, you might look into a DSLR with 1080/24p support, like the Canon EOS T2i or 7D.
Nope. The FX1 has the upper hand in low-light, the FX7 has the upper hand in image detail and quality, I suppose. The FX7 does full HD -- three full 1080p sensors. The FX1, not so much... it's based on three 1Mpixel sensors with offset. That's good for low light performance (the same sized sensor with half the pixels means each pixel covers roughly twice the area), but bad for resolution. But you really want low-light performance, go back to the VX2100.... or get a DSLR with video.
This is the first time I've check this thread in a LONG time, and, very oddly, today is the first time since I've last checked that someone's responded!
Right now, I've more or less turned against all these cameras. I'm looking most seriously at the 7D, which you mentioned hazydave, since I already have some good Nikon glass to go with it.
The thing is, I don't want a film look. I'd like a cinematic cadence, yes, but I like the distinctly digital look of camcorders like the Pansonic 150, 170, and 200 -- the DSLR video is too clear and sterile, also the noise is very ugly. Still, all in all, I think a DSLR, for the money, is probably going to give me the most versatility and image quality. Plus, I've been shooting Nikon DSLRs for the past few years, so I'm familiar with the controls and ergonomics.
Still, I'm not sure what I'll do. We'll see...
Right now, I've more or less turned against all these cameras. I'm looking most seriously at the 7D, which you mentioned hazydave, since I already have some good Nikon glass to go with it.
The thing is, I don't want a film look. I'd like a cinematic cadence, yes, but I like the distinctly digital look of camcorders like the Pansonic 150, 170, and 200 -- the DSLR video is too clear and sterile, also the noise is very ugly. Still, all in all, I think a DSLR, for the money, is probably going to give me the most versatility and image quality. Plus, I've been shooting Nikon DSLRs for the past few years, so I'm familiar with the controls and ergonomics.
Still, I'm not sure what I'll do. We'll see...
Hello everybody,
what will you say about HMC40 + XLR (2290$ at BH) vs JVC GY-HM100U (2795 with XLR) in terms of low light?
It seems both cameras have awkward controls (1 ring for zoom/focus, no ring for iris etc).
I'm in the same shoes as tylerrad (small budget), yet I choose a cam for documentary work with mostly principal lights. So, low light performance is essential for me, as well as manual controls (iris, zoom, focus and focus assist function).
What is really bad is that both are around 40mm at wide end... Adding wide lens adapter and loosing light sucks.
Unfortunately, I can't go and check them myself in nearest shop (just not possible).
Denis.
what will you say about HMC40 + XLR (2290$ at BH) vs JVC GY-HM100U (2795 with XLR) in terms of low light?
It seems both cameras have awkward controls (1 ring for zoom/focus, no ring for iris etc).
I'm in the same shoes as tylerrad (small budget), yet I choose a cam for documentary work with mostly principal lights. So, low light performance is essential for me, as well as manual controls (iris, zoom, focus and focus assist function).
What is really bad is that both are around 40mm at wide end... Adding wide lens adapter and loosing light sucks.
Unfortunately, I can't go and check them myself in nearest shop (just not possible).
Denis.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I've heard that the HM100 has an ISO of about 100, whereas the HMC40 has an ISO of 50. However, the HMC40 is a lot cleaner with less noise than the HM100, so you could probably easily use 6dB of gain to make them equally sensitive, while still having less noise on the HMC40.
And the HMC40's footage will be much sharper.
The bigger question between those two is the CCD vs. CMOS. The HMC40's CMOS, and the HM100 is CCD, so if your shooting scenarios demand CCD, the HM100 might be the better choice. If you're fine with either CMOS or CCD, I'd say the HMC40 is probably the better product, and much less expensive.
And the HMC40's footage will be much sharper.
The bigger question between those two is the CCD vs. CMOS. The HMC40's CMOS, and the HM100 is CCD, so if your shooting scenarios demand CCD, the HM100 might be the better choice. If you're fine with either CMOS or CCD, I'd say the HMC40 is probably the better product, and much less expensive.
For the most part, CMOS issues have been minimal for me with the HMC40. I did encounter an issue the other day, and it was an unusual circumstance. I was standing in a river which was cascading down a boulder strewn waterway with the most beautiful clear water pools you can imagine. My HMC was inside a housing and I was shooting inside the pools. The cascading water created undersurface bubbles which got the better of the CMOS imager. They looked like little undersea fireworks displays. Each bubble looked like a streak of light, and there were millions of bubbles. If someone wants to see it, I'll post it up on Vimeo.
Grant
Grant
BobDiaz
The Professor
I'd like to see it, but from the description, it sounds like too much random movement "overloaded" the CODEC resulting in compression noise showing through. If you could post the source file, that would be best.
Thanks,
Bob Diaz
Thank you, Barry, for good point on iso and noise level of both cameras. From this numbers (ISO 50 and 100) it seems that it's way better to make budget a little bit bigger and go with HMC150 which is 500iso (I read your post elsewhere). I think it is a huge difference. Yet, price difference between HMC40 and HMC150 is about 1000$. Well...
CCD vs CMOS is not a big deal for me as well as sharpness.
Thank you, ggrantly for your input on CMOS issues of HMC40. It's good to hear that you almost don't experience any problems with it.
CCD vs CMOS is not a big deal for me as well as sharpness.
Thank you, ggrantly for your input on CMOS issues of HMC40. It's good to hear that you almost don't experience any problems with it.