I think it was last March that Mark Von Lanken did a real nice comparo between the HMC150 and Sony Z5U. Covered low light and rolling shutter effects. In that comparison, the HMC150 came out looking quite good. Cannot find a link for it here, but it is easly found on Marks web site. That review suggests that if the NX5U has the same chips as the Z5U, you may want to stick with your HMC150. Sorry I cannot find the link now.
Worth selling my HMC for the new NXCAM?
- Thread starter FUBARFilms
- Start date
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
I posted a link to Mark's comparison video earlier in this thread. Here it is again:
http://www.trainingvideographers.com/tipsandtricks.html
Downscaled (bigtime), there isn't exactly a huge world of difference between the 150 and Z5 - and I don't consider a 50% slo-mo playback of a warp speed whip pan of a fence (obviously shot at an abnormally high shutter speed to boot) as being evidence of serious CMOS jello issues. You could probably shoot something just as incredibly far removed from typical footage bringing out CCD smear from the 150 too. So what?
Now, to get a bit more realistic... Take that imaging block from the Z5U (which resolves more than 800 lines cleanly) and put it in a cam that records AVCHD (considerably better compression, image quality wise). You've pretty much got the NX5U. Now shoot some 1080p footage with the NX5U and the 150 (something a bit more typical than whip pans of fences - you know, maybe kids playing in the yard or something). Play it back on a 1080p display (without downscaling it to 360 lines and crushing the living crap out of it with compression for streaming on the web!). You'll see a difference in image detail, and it won't be the footage from the 150 that's looking real sharp.
http://www.trainingvideographers.com/tipsandtricks.html
Downscaled (bigtime), there isn't exactly a huge world of difference between the 150 and Z5 - and I don't consider a 50% slo-mo playback of a warp speed whip pan of a fence (obviously shot at an abnormally high shutter speed to boot) as being evidence of serious CMOS jello issues. You could probably shoot something just as incredibly far removed from typical footage bringing out CCD smear from the 150 too. So what?
Now, to get a bit more realistic... Take that imaging block from the Z5U (which resolves more than 800 lines cleanly) and put it in a cam that records AVCHD (considerably better compression, image quality wise). You've pretty much got the NX5U. Now shoot some 1080p footage with the NX5U and the 150 (something a bit more typical than whip pans of fences - you know, maybe kids playing in the yard or something). Play it back on a 1080p display (without downscaling it to 360 lines and crushing the living crap out of it with compression for streaming on the web!). You'll see a difference in image detail, and it won't be the footage from the 150 that's looking real sharp.
John_in_NY
Active member
A year ago, when I was considering the HMC150, I was trying to learn more about its resolution performance, but I was very frustrated that those early reviews didn't really address that aspect. Also, the posted downsized samples of its footage were too small to adequately judge for myself. It wasn't until Barry Green reviewed the HMC40 several months ago and he compared resolution chart samples of both the HMC40 and the HMC150 that I finally found a meaningful assessment of resolution for both cameras.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1739788&postcount=2
I know resolution is just one aspect of image quality, but, for me, it is the most important.
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
I kind of get a bit of a laugh when folks post something like a YouTube video as if it could be a serious example of what a camcorders is capable of. I mean, come on, that's absurd in most respects. It's almost like saying let's judge a camera by looking at footage from it after smearing Crisco on the monitor or TV screen.
John_in_NY
Active member
The earliest online video of samples I saw of the HMC150 was practically thumbnail-sized, which makes a youtube video look like IMAX in comparison.
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
A few days back, somebody here posted a YouTube video, comparing an HV40 with an HMC40, citing it as a reason to get the HV40 rather than the HMC40, since you couldn't see any difference in quality between the images from either cam in the video. It was hilarious. It wasn't even good quality for YouTube. Whoever put that video on YouTube must have really crushed it with compression even prior to uploading it for YouTube to crush it yet again. Honest to goodness, footage from an old SVHS cam probably would have looked just as good in that comparison.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Or after shooting a scene through a cheese grater? Heh.
| IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. |
| I AGREE |
John_in_NY
Active member
I have the Canon HV20, which is virtually the same as the HV40, except for the latter's native progressive recording, as far as I know. When Canon released it almost three years ago (2007 still seems like yesterday for me), the HV20 took the indie filmmaker by storm. At the time, it was revolutionary to get an HD camera for about $1,000 and it is still an impressive camera for its performance and price. In 2007, AVCHD was new and the current AVCHD cameras at the time fell short of HDV. Current AVCHD camcorders now surpass HDV in performance, at least when it comes to complex scenes or when there is a lot of motion. The HMC40 is revolutionary in ushering in affordable professional HD camcorders for about $2,000. It is still the only one at that price level.
Last edited:
Whatever you say, footage from HD cameras look better on YT than footage from SD cameras or VHS cameras. Despite low bitrate and small frame size differences are still visible. Big networks are no fools shooting webisodes on HD cams instead of [re-]using older SD cameras for web videos.
I doubt one would spot difference between the HV40 and the HMC40 though. The HMC40 is not THAT much better.
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
If I see that "comparison" again, I'll post a link. I'm sure I could get a better YouTube video out of an SD cam (fairly easily). They really trashed that video pretty badly.
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
Here we go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyylDDvifak
It was an HV20. My memory ain't what it used to be.
It was an HV20. My memory ain't what it used to be.
ATL Media Group
Veteran
It's more than just a bit more resolution.
PCM audio
Dual memory cards
128GB Memory unit with the ability to record to both SDHC and memory card unit at the same time.
GPS
Possibly better glass (subjective)
Hopefully we'll see the next HMC have all of the above (dunno 'bout the GPS) with higher rez CMOS sensors. This way they all compete and we win.
=)
PCM audio
Dual memory cards
128GB Memory unit with the ability to record to both SDHC and memory card unit at the same time.
GPS
Possibly better glass (subjective)
Hopefully we'll see the next HMC have all of the above (dunno 'bout the GPS) with higher rez CMOS sensors. This way they all compete and we win.
=)
Galleddrim
Active member
Here we go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyylDDvifak
It was an HV20. My memory ain't what it used to be.
Um . . . I don't know what I'm supposed to take away from that. Resized to half the YT resolution, it all looks the same to me.
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
well imo, if the difference between the nx5 and 150 is just a bit more of resolution.. id think about the cost first. if youd pay the extra 1000 then go for it.
Hope panny announces a cmos cam on april! ill be buying that
I'm not sure I'd call a couple hundred more lines of detail "just a bit more" and higher resolution certainly isn't the only plus for the NX5U - and it's closer to a $750 difference currently (mitigated close to another $100 if you want a couple extra batteries, and you can actually get generics if you want to save more).
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
If Canon put out a single imaging chip camcorder, built around the same chip as the HF-S camcorders, it might generally outperform an HMC40 (especially shooting progressive footage).
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
...and somebody actually purchased an HV40 just because that video showed that the HMC40 doesn't offer a better image!
Color, exposure, latitude. To me, they look very similar. The HV seems greener, but it is also darker overall, so without bringing both images into editing suite it is hard to tell whether the Canon indeed has more green.
Does it? 800 lines vs what? 750? Not a big difference. The HV still holds its own, and aside of consumer-grade controls, its image is very good. Not mentioning Canon's HDV codec.
Robert M Wright
Well-known member
I've got an HV20 and an HMC40. The HV20 is a certainly a nice little camcorder, but the HMC40 records a noticeably better image (and the AVCHD compression is clearly part of that).