Would you still buy an HPX170 today?

S

StudioDweller

New member
This my first post and I was hoping to get some feedback on a new camera purchase. I'm finally going to sell my Canon XL-1S that I've had forever and I'm looking to buy an HD camera. So far, I'm pretty much sold on buying the HPX170. My main line of work is audio, but I've done a couple of short films and trailers, I get the occasional video gig as well as having a huge personal interest in filmmaking and visual effects.

My main requirements for the camera is that it be CCD-based. I've never owned a CMOS camera, but I'm concerned about rolling shutter since I do camera tracking/matchmoving and I hear that it can be a nightmare to deal with. There seem to be very few CCD options in the $3-$4K range and the HPX170 just seems like a perfect choice. I did a live band shoot that I subbed out to a two guys with HPX170s last year and I was pleased with the image.

My only apprehension is that the 170 is nearly three years old now and I'm wondering if it's a little late in the game to buy one. If you were in my shoes, would you hesitate in buying one today?

Any input is greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
 
I'd say go for it or the HMC150, since all the recently announced Panasonic's will be using CMOS. These may be some of the last ever CCD cameras in this price range. Canon's gone CMOS, Sony's been there a while, and now Panasonic is following suit.

I should say that the newer CMOS cameras have much less skew than the older ones and that a lot of shooters don't ever see it pop up. If you're willing to go CMOS then you might want to check out the Panasonic AC130 arriving this fall.
It's going to have a 21x zoom lens, the chips from the HPX370 (which perform very well skew wise) much better LCD and VF than the 170, dual card slots, AVCHD media is much more affordable than P2 (if you want the codec of the 170, never mind this whole portion and just get the 170) DV recording, very nice design, etc.
It's a well featured camera for under $4,000.
 
Last edited:
That seems to be the way things are going. I'm sure the CMOS scan rates will get fast enough to where the rolling shutter becomes a non-issue, but I don't expect to get something like that in a $3-$4K camera, at least right now. -Thanks.
 
The HPX 250 is the replacement for the 170. Its shipping in the fall. Its AVC intra but CMOS. There could be a bunch of 170s coming available on the used market in the coming months.

I will say this. The HPX 170 is my favorite camera in the 10 yrs I have been doing this. Features, interface, ergonomics. It was an absolute home run. Coming from an XL1-s you would be thrilled.
 
For what it's worth, I've used an 170 for years and the 200 before that and the dvx100 before that.
The 170 is a great, portable, solid HD camera. With all these new cameras being introduced however
I just sold one of two 170s on Ebay. Only got 2100 bucks for it. My guess is they are only going to get cheaper,
and will be quite the bargain for what they offer. I will hold onto my other one because of the CCD chips
being invaluable in the type of live music settings that I mostly shoot where strobes and flashes persist.
 
i feel the same way you do about the cmos thing. i just dont like the way camera moves show up on a budget cmos camera.
ive owned a 170 for about 3 years and i cant imagine a better camera for the money.

people drunk on specs might argue that xyz camera is "better" but it all comes down to what you want. and it sounds like a 170 will do what you need.
barring a fundamental paradigm change in delivery, id imagine a 170 having easily another 3-5 years of viability.
 
Thanks for the replies. I felt pretty good about what I had concluded about the HPX170, but I've been very much out of the loop for a while so it's nice to get some feedback from folks like yourselves. I appreciate it. I'm going to grab a CCD while I still can! I'm inclined to buy a new camera, but I might reconsider going used when I get closer to buying it if the price is right. $2,100 is a great deal.

Either way, I'm very much looking forward to moving on from the XL-1s. The last involved project I shot with it was a fake movie trailer that blended 50's sci-fi and 70's grindhouse so I could get away with SD and a soft image. However, I still would've loved to have started with HD footage for some of the intensive post work that I had to do.

If you're interested, you can check it out here: THEMS! Trailer

And just last week from the back yard testing out my recent SynthEyes purchase, a camera track/composite that probably wouldn't have had a chance with a CMOS: Honey, Look what I bought!

Again, thanks for the help.
 
The HPX-170 is like the swiss army knife of cams. It isn't the best knife available, but it does many things very well. At the price, especially for used, it is pretty hard to beat. There is one thing I really like about the new cams; that nice long 21x lens. I will have lens envy when that hits the streets. The CCD vs CMOS issue is really just preference. The CCD HPX170 is a bit softer, and more organic and very pleasing, dare I say more filmic. The CMOS cams are sharper, but IMHO a little more clinical. There isn't a right or wrong, just preference. Having said that, I am still a very happy with the 170 and even if I upgraded, would still want to keep it.

Grant
 
Just have to say your trailer is totally awesome! The humor, scripting, camerawork, cheezy effects...looks like a cult classic in the making.
 
For me, the CDD really is more of necessity than a preference. I'd love to stretch the budget and buy an AF100, but Phillip Bloom's test video clearly shows that the rolling shutter skew is there. I probably wouldn't be doing camera tracking on a shot that's panning that quickly, but who knows. I'm also not really looking to spend that much right now anyway.

Danny1280 said:
Just have to say your trailer is totally awesome! The humor, scripting, camerawork, cheezy effects...looks like a cult classic in the making.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Danny! A friend wrote the script which is a spoof on the fifties classic "THEM!". I shot it and did all of the post work and we edited it together. Another friend wrote the score and we went as far as recording some live strings and horns to augment the sampled stuff. It was a fun project. Unfortunately, the gamma got screwed up a little on youtube and it's a bit darker than I'd like it to be, but so it goes.
 
For us there has simply been no finer camera than the HPX170. We have two and I'm sure soon we will have a couple more. I will probably still be using them as front line units for the next five or six seasons, and throwing in an HPX250,etc for when I need stuff a little sharper like wide scenics, etc.

The 170 or the 150 would be a fabulous choice. If you need something for a few of those milky DOF shots, get a base slr. I've got a Nikon D7000 with a 35/1.8 and a 50/1.8 and works fabulous for those kinds of shots.

But the 170s are some of the best cameras I've ever used, especially for the type of shooting environment I'm in.
 
Earlier it was said that the HPX250 would be the "replacement" for the HPX170. I don't know that that's true. The HPX250 is a model above (noted especially by the much bigger number in its name) and costs substantially more ("under $6500" versus the HPX170's street price of $3700). Plus, the HPX170 has a unique position as being Panasonic's last great CCD model, in a world of CMOS. There are applications where that's just more appropriate. And, finally, the HPX170 is a lot smaller and lighter than the new HPX250. All that said, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the HPX170 soldiered on exactly as it is, for several years to come, as a current model.
 
That's high praise and it's not helping ease the wait until I'm able to order it! :) I'm so anxious to get my hands on one. I'm really hoping to be able to buy it next week.

I'm pretty set on the 170 for the 4:2:2 color space and DVCProHD since I intend to do some greenscreen work with it. Would you say the 150 is a no go for those reasons?
 
Of course i would buy another...the 170 is a hell of a camera. Its an hvx 200a that lost some weight and with better battery tabs. Its a dvx100 with no finicky tape. Its a 150 that tapes on more reliable p2. IMO it is the perfect balance of a camera. All the controls are in the right spots. It last forever on a single charge. It has tons of focus assist features. Its respectable in low light. It's workflow is so fast. It well tuned machine that is perfect for many different situations. IMO nothing in it's price range even comes close to offering the same flexibility and high quality.
 
If I do upgrade to another camera, I'm still keeping the HPX170 for rent. You would be surprised how many people use P2 equipment and need a Bcam more often than not.
 
I am in the process of selling mine. That said, I am a bit torn as it was such a great little camera and I kinda want to keep it as I love it for concerts being a CCD camera. While it lacks in sharpness, the CCDs really make it a winner when you have to deal with constant camera flashes and strobe lights... They still are my goto camera for multi-cam events... I just don't do enough to justify keeping it and really need some lighting.

On a side note, after doing a multi-cam shoot for a two night concert, I am over P2 cards... I loved them in their day, but it sucks staying up all night to get all the cards ready for the next day. Compared to other media I have been using recently, it takes so much longer to offload P2 (I know there are really fast multi-card readers, but if I had the money for one of those, I would own a different camera)... Loved P2 in its day, but I am kinda over it now I have to say. Especially with Panasonic's AVCCAM codec performing as it does, and all the new SSD based external recorders now when you that extra quality... P2 has its place, and I am not bashing it. It is bulletproof and uses great codecs... It is just a pain in the ass for the indie guy nowadays...
 
Got my HPX170 on Tuesday and I am loving this thing. Still lots to learn and I've been digging into Barry's excellent book, but I'm really pleased with what I've shot with it so far despite my lack of familiarity with the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top