WTF Panasonic!?!?!?!?!?

nfc565

nfc565

Well-known member
Im reading the brochure for the HMC 40 and getting increasingly pissed off i bought the HMC150!!

first off, the HMC 40 has a photo feature which would be AWESOME for some messing around with and whatnot.

second, it has interval record.....this means that its not because of the AVCHD recording format we dont have interval......why doesnt the 150 have this!?!?!?!?!?!

its pretty much a smaller....better......cheaper version of the 150!!!!


WTF PANASONIC!!! this honestly makes me irate!!! why would pana take out the features on a higher end camera and put them on a lower teir camera?!?!?!?!

if they dont come out with some sort of update for the interval recording at least, im selling my 150 and straying away from pana FOR GOOD!!! not cool panasonic.


sorry for my rant....any other input?
 
The HMC 150 is a much better camera, the HMC 40 is not much cheaper, and if the HMC is doing the job for you than keep it. I saw the HMC 40 and I said: ew. Then I saw the price and I said: ew. Then I saw that B&H is to have it listed for $1000 under MSRP and I said, huh?

In any case the HMC-150 is clearly the superior camera. Better optics, better controls, better image quality (from what I can tell just by looking at measurements as there doesn't seem to be much HMC 40 footage if any out there.)

Come on the HMC 40 has one ring on the lens and uses a TOUCH SCREEN for christs sake. It is not nearly as serious a camera as the HMC-150 which is almost identical to the HPX-170 save for codec and a few features. (but has identical hardware basically)

The HMC 40 kind of reminds me of a Panny AVCHD version of the Canon GL2....and that is NOT a good thing.
 
NFC, I'm surprised that you have 267 (current) posts in this forum. This site tends to draw the more professional video types, not whiny amateurs wondering about lame features.

Gee, I wonder if the 40 will let you do sepia or black and white WHILE sooting. That would not only be awesome, but would make it MUCH better than the 150.

Sign me up!!
 
If HMC40 was 1/3" chip and CCD I'll be pissed... The interval recording seems more like something a firmware update would fix. Different cameras for different needs; if you are planning to go incognito, or using this as a B/C cam this is the perfect camcorder. If you were only to own one camera I'd rather keep the HMC150. So, go shoot with a smile in your face :)
 
let's wait and see

let's wait and see

The HMC40 (street price: $1,995.) has no pro audio inputs; you must buy an adapter. The lens in not as wide as the 150's (40mm vs. 28mm); 1/4" CMOS's vs. 1/3" CCD's; probably not as good in low light as the 150, which has the same chips as the DVCPRO HD 170 and 200.

Let's see how image quality compares and contrasts between the two.
 
It is basically an HD version of the old GS400 except its got CMOS sensors, it will have its place but it really is a toy compared to the 150.
 
D.R. Gates said:
NFC, I'm surprised that you have 267 (current) posts in this forum. This site tends to draw the more professional video types, not whiny amateurs wondering about lame features.

Gee, I wonder if the 40 will let you do sepia or black and white WHILE sooting. That would not only be awesome, but would make it MUCH better than the 150.

Sign me up!!
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that you have 237 since we don't tolerate personal shi* here....

Just saying...

let's keep it cool.

--

To the o.p. New cameras come out all the time... They dont' make your camera any less functional. Can't worry about what is always coming out next or you'll never get anything productive done.

later,
Jason
 
I can understand the wee bit of lamenting about the interval recording. It would be nice too have, but brother.. the 150 shoots a really nice image for the price and it's CCD so you won't have a lot of the issues that you would with a CMOS.

Cameras come and go.. think how pissed a person would be who bought an HVX200 and then the 200a comes out a month later. Same for the DVX.. You buy what's best and forget the rest. Personally I've been very happy with the people at Panasonic and they are reallly one of the only manufacturers that listen to its customers and take feedback.... all from this lovely site.

I'm down for the ride...but sure I do also like Canon stuff too... I just am not a fan of the Sony brand but that's MOPO.
 
In general all the camera companies produce cameras that generate good images; it's just that some cameras produce better images than others.

I would never expect a lower cost 1/4" CMOS 40 camera to produce an image as good as the higher cost 1/3" CCD 150 camera. In general the smaller sensors tend to magnify CA more than the larger image sensors. HOWEVER, we are talking about 2 very different lenses here, so until someone can to a side by side test, we'll have to wait for the final word.

The Minimum Luminance: Approx. 1 lx (Gain: +34 dB, Slow Shutter: 1/2 sec.) doesn't sound very good compared to the HMC-150. Increase the shutter speed to 1/30 and we are talking 15 lx at +34 dB of gain.

Given that this is a different image sensor, I can't say how high the gain can be before it's too much noise in the image. Still, it looks like this is not going to be as good in low light as the HMC-150.


Each camera has it's place in the market. When the 170 first came out, I couldn't understand it's position in the market, but after checking it out and comparing it to the 150, it al made sense. My guess is that once the 40 comes out it's position in the market will make sense.

Now, if there's a software upgrade to add time lapse to the 150, that would be cool...


Bob Diaz
 
hahaha....geez D.R. since when did post count correlate to professionalism? im not whining, i'm simply irritated and appalled by the fact that 2 basic functions have been by passed on a WONDERFUL camera like the HMC150. this just shows that it was just by passed rather than not possible. the dvx and hvx have the interval record, now the hmc40 has it.....why not hmc? everyone is right here, it was a bit of an exaggeration when i said i will sell my 150, but cmon, someone has to see where im coming from?!?!?! the 150 is a GREAT camera and obviously the 40 is targeted to comsumers shooting their little kids birthday party or soccer game and what not....i knew this from the get go, and i figured it would be obvious i wasnt going to trade my 150 for the 40, but it p*ssed me off!


and D.R.:

how is interval record a lame feature?
 
Wow - this is the first thread of its kind I have seen here.

Simple fact is that technology gets better over time, and anything you buy, you will have to accept something better will come out imminently.

If you want to feel less aggrieved, look at what you bought and compare to what would have been available at what price a year earlier. You will feel like a winner rather than a loser.

That said, I have been a little concerned at the impact on the HMC150 price (dont want to buy one and see it suddenly drop); but it does seem that Panasonic feel there is still some life in this model.
 
I find this thread quite intriguing. I am a new amateur videographer and I am considering the HMC40 as well as the GH1. Although I would prefer the HMC150 (as a hobbyist) it is out of my price range.

The HMC40 seems to clearly be heavily based on the HDC-TM300 (same sensor and optics). So we should be able to garner some sense of its performance using the TM300 as a reference. Reviews of the TM300/HS300 have been split on its low light performance. And yes, it has the same photo and interval recording that the HMC40 will have. I don't think Panasonic could release the HMC40 without those features when its consumer camera costing half as much does.

Although the sensor is 1/4.1" it is a full 1920x1080 sensor. It is CMOS rather than the CCD of the HMC150, so it will have all of the standard CMOS issues. In some ways this camera seems like a scaled down AVCHD version of the HPX300 rather than a scaled down version of the HMC150. It may have better resolution than the HMC150 (if the optics on it allow). But I would be very surprised if its overall picture is anywhere near as nice.

I am anxiously awaiting its release to see what the TM300 sensor and optics can do when coupled with the better software of the AG series. My concern is that Panasonic lowered the price because its optics and sensor do not hold up. Clearly they have had some aspects of this camera working since NAB (since it was demoed there).

But I am not upset at the model or the price. If you look at the TM300 (street price around $1200), the $2295 MSRP seems fairly priced.

Rich
 
I'll give you that interval recording is an ok feature, but far from being integral to my needs or others.

You're also complaining about the 150's lack of a photo feature. I don't know anybody using the camera professionally who would care for such a thing.
 
D.R. Gates said:
I'll give you that interval recording is an ok feature, but far from being integral to my needs or others.

You're also complaining about the 150's lack of a photo feature. I don't know anybody using the camera professionally who would care for such a thing.
Click to expand...
that's just the thing, you may not need/want these features, or find them useless....but i would rather have these features and not use them, than not have them and want them.....its all relative to what you shoot. you may find no need for a still capture, but what if i want to take a picture of a location? that is just one example of using the photo feature....also, not all of us on here are professionals.....some of us are simple hobbyists looking for a fun camera, im not saying im either of these, im simply stating its stupid to put these features on a lower end camera and not have them on the higher end one.
 
You're also complaining about the 150's lack of a photo feature. I don't know anybody using the camera professionally who would care for such a thing.
Click to expand...

I don't really know it would be very useful, but i know a few companies here in Chicago offering "Hybrid Wedding Packages" where they use mostly 5DMKII's for video, and snap pics here and there to create albums... some are even getting frozen frames from the video and printing pictures, you could get an awesome 4x6 or 5x7 out of it (i've seen 8x10 but thats pushing it)

I don't know that i would do a "Hybrid Wedding Packages" but if i had a good resolution picture, i might use it for DVD case covers or DVD menu creation...

Other than that i completely agree about the 150 being superior on every other function to the 40.
 
Superfresa66 said:
I don't really know it would be very useful, but i know a few companies here in Chicago offering "Hybrid Wedding Packages" where they use mostly 5DMKII's for video, and snap pics here and there to create albums... some are even getting frozen frames from the video and printing pictures, you could get an awesome 4x6 or 5x7 out of it (i've seen 8x10 but thats pushing it)

I don't know that i would do a "Hybrid Wedding Packages" but if i had a good resolution picture, i might use it for DVD case covers or DVD menu creation...

Other than that i completely agree about the 150 being superior on every other function to the 40.
Click to expand...
yea, i agree that the 150 is wayyyyy better...but i was a bit P/O'd when i saw that it had interval record.....
 
I am in the same boat as Rich. Would love the HMC150, but out of my budget. I have always noticed a gap between the top consumer cams, around $1500, to the Pro cams, say $3500. The HMC40 fits in that gap. I for one like the photo function and will use it. Also the smaller form factor is something that works great for what I do, in car video both hand held and mounted. Also will be easy for run and go filming as well as when I need to carry it and a DSLR. Anxiously awaiting it's release and will try to make many different sample videos available.
 
I get it, and I'm not going to attack you for saying it.

And no, it's not a question of technologies coming out over time. But consider how many features exist in the camera world (features being overrated, especially in the consumer market). Clearly no engineering department is given the time and funds to make every one of those work. If they did the costs would have to go up as well as development time, QA, things like that. So they pick their priorities, and work until those are taken care of as well as possible. That's what happened here. Those things didn't happen to be priorities for the market Panny targeted, so they didn't put in the extra expense of making it happen.

Interval recording is questionable, but it's sketchy as to if consumers really ever want it, so it probably is discussed as an extra for higher end cameras.
 
Maybe R&D on the interval recording feature took a few months after the HMC-150 was already finished, and they're planning to hold it off until the HMC-150A (not yet announced).

Am I the only one who doesn't understand the concept of a photo feature in a video camera? What's wrong with pulling a frame grab from the video?

I don't see how the resolution would be any better, because the image is traveling through the same lens and imager either way. My last consumer video camera could record five seconds of a frame grab to the tape, which I never used - it's easy enough to do in post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top