Can someone post some comments on this camera?
http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...d=112115&catGroupId=14616&surfModel=AG-HPX500
http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...d=112115&catGroupId=14616&surfModel=AG-HPX500
Yaaay! new section!
- Thread starter USLatin
- Start date
it looks GREAT.
Flintstone
Well-known member
Because it's the HVX200's big brother?
Think of it, if you need a shouldermount main cam, and also need a cost effective B-cam, the HPX-HVX combo is a great match!
Think of it, if you need a shouldermount main cam, and also need a cost effective B-cam, the HPX-HVX combo is a great match!
Yeah, I've got shows shooting now and for real. USLatin, when are you getting your RED?
Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by.
It isn't a comparison until there is a commercially available product. Let's stop talking about it please.
e
Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by. Please stand by.
It isn't a comparison until there is a commercially available product. Let's stop talking about it please.
e
lol... sore subject?
didn't mean to hut anyone's feelings just making a quick comment
It looks great honestly... though the only real upside besides the nicer lens would be the 2/3 chip... humongous up-side, yes... but is it worth the investment when compared to all other cameras with 2/3 chips? Is 14k too much or are there other things about this camera I haven't considered?
again, I am asking, not pointing fingers
didn't mean to hut anyone's feelings just making a quick comment
It looks great honestly... though the only real upside besides the nicer lens would be the 2/3 chip... humongous up-side, yes... but is it worth the investment when compared to all other cameras with 2/3 chips? Is 14k too much or are there other things about this camera I haven't considered?
again, I am asking, not pointing fingers
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
What other 2/3" camera are you considering? Even Sony's 1/2" F350 is twice as expensive as the HPX500...
that's part of the answer to my question exactly... I haven't been looking at 2/3 cameras so I have no clue how the HPX compares and stands in the market place...
so what's the next 2/3 camera's cost? do they include other things beyond the HPX's line of gadgetry? Is this camera a complete 110% winner then? Is it the only in it's class?
so what's the next 2/3 camera's cost? do they include other things beyond the HPX's line of gadgetry? Is this camera a complete 110% winner then? Is it the only in it's class?
I just don't understand these threads. I really, really don't. To me it's comparable to asking if you should wait for the Millenium to come out when the Platinum was the a-cam at Panavision.
There's always something new coming. If the HPX is just hitting the street now, how can we possibly be talking about next-gen in an HPX500 thread?
I'm really excited about this one. I've been shooting the closest thing to it from Sony for the past year in the CineAlta XDCam F350. You needn't look further than the base format of XDCamHD versus DVCProHD100 for an answer to the "best-in-class" questions.
Forget any of the other features in the HPX - like 2/3" imagers versus 1/2" in the Sony and on and on and on. This is a slam-dunk as far as value for dollar goes.
e
There's always something new coming. If the HPX is just hitting the street now, how can we possibly be talking about next-gen in an HPX500 thread?
I'm really excited about this one. I've been shooting the closest thing to it from Sony for the past year in the CineAlta XDCam F350. You needn't look further than the base format of XDCamHD versus DVCProHD100 for an answer to the "best-in-class" questions.
Forget any of the other features in the HPX - like 2/3" imagers versus 1/2" in the Sony and on and on and on. This is a slam-dunk as far as value for dollar goes.
e
what do you mean "next-gen"?
I am asking out of pure curiosity and the smaller need to know what's out there beyond my reach, since I will not be buying a better camera for a long time (though you never know).
Ok, so it seems this is a revolutionary development which cuts the cost of a 2/3 camera by more than half what it used to take... great news... is there a link to some footage?
I am asking out of pure curiosity and the smaller need to know what's out there beyond my reach, since I will not be buying a better camera for a long time (though you never know).
Ok, so it seems this is a revolutionary development which cuts the cost of a 2/3 camera by more than half what it used to take... great news... is there a link to some footage?
Barry_Green
Moderator
Put it this way: last year's darling SD camera was the 2/3" SDX900. Massively popular, widely regarded as one of the best SD cameras ever made. 24P/30P/60i, DV or DVCPRO50, 2/3" chips etc.
It cost $27,000 for just the body, maybe 2 years ago. Last year it dropped to about $17,000 for the body.
The HPX500 body is retailing at half the price the SDX900 was, and (once you factor in the value of the included cards, if you were to sell them on ebay) is still barely over half the cost of what the SDX900 dropped to!
And that's for a high-def, 1080 & 720, variable-frame-rate 2/3" camera.
Look at the only competition: the JVC HD250? That's a 1/3" HDV camera, not 2/3" DVCPRO-HD, and if you sold your 16GB cards on ebay you could get the HPX500 for about the same price as an HD250 body-only.
Sony's F350? That's the closest thing you'll find on the market, in that it's interchangeable-lens and sort-of variable frame rate, but the HPX is full 2/3" chips, it's DVCPRO-HD instead of XDCAM, and it's half the price of the F350. Half the price, for twice the imager.
The HPX500 is a screaming deal for a 2/3" camera. If you want to compare at the same price point you could get a Sony DSR450WS, which is a 2/3" camera that does 24p, but it's SD ONLY! No high-def, no variable frame rates, it's just a 2/3" standard-def DVCAM product. Yet the HPX500 is a thousand dollars less than the DSR450.
Digital Betacam? Sure, you could get a 2/3" Digital Betacam camcorder; it's a better recording format than DVCAM but it's still standard-def. Would you rather shell out $49.700 for a 2/3" standard-def DigiBeta camera, or $14,000 for a high-def variable-frame-rate HPX500? (especially since the HPX500 does DVCPRO50 too, which is a directly comparable format to DigiBeta)?
That's why I asked what you were comparing it to. If you don't know what the competition is, you don't realize what a bargain the HPX500 is compared to the other products on the market.
It cost $27,000 for just the body, maybe 2 years ago. Last year it dropped to about $17,000 for the body.
The HPX500 body is retailing at half the price the SDX900 was, and (once you factor in the value of the included cards, if you were to sell them on ebay) is still barely over half the cost of what the SDX900 dropped to!
And that's for a high-def, 1080 & 720, variable-frame-rate 2/3" camera.
Look at the only competition: the JVC HD250? That's a 1/3" HDV camera, not 2/3" DVCPRO-HD, and if you sold your 16GB cards on ebay you could get the HPX500 for about the same price as an HD250 body-only.
Sony's F350? That's the closest thing you'll find on the market, in that it's interchangeable-lens and sort-of variable frame rate, but the HPX is full 2/3" chips, it's DVCPRO-HD instead of XDCAM, and it's half the price of the F350. Half the price, for twice the imager.
The HPX500 is a screaming deal for a 2/3" camera. If you want to compare at the same price point you could get a Sony DSR450WS, which is a 2/3" camera that does 24p, but it's SD ONLY! No high-def, no variable frame rates, it's just a 2/3" standard-def DVCAM product. Yet the HPX500 is a thousand dollars less than the DSR450.
Digital Betacam? Sure, you could get a 2/3" Digital Betacam camcorder; it's a better recording format than DVCAM but it's still standard-def. Would you rather shell out $49.700 for a 2/3" standard-def DigiBeta camera, or $14,000 for a high-def variable-frame-rate HPX500? (especially since the HPX500 does DVCPRO50 too, which is a directly comparable format to DigiBeta)?
That's why I asked what you were comparing it to. If you don't know what the competition is, you don't realize what a bargain the HPX500 is compared to the other products on the market.
Now youre making me want an HPX500 even more.......
Kenn Christenson
Well-known member
I don't know why Sony insists on staying behind the curve - like Avid, I think they're going to pay the price.
Now THAT'S what I was hoping for! Thanks a million Barry! (again)
Now I feel like I know what's up in the entry 2/3 world...
Holy smokes! $12.5k at Abel!
The 2/3 is for sure worth the price jump alone! Now does it do more fps or the same as the HVX or do you get the full gamut like in the Vari? the lent in interchangeable, is it a PL? what mount?
Also, Barry, did you mean that you get a free 16GB card for the 14k or what other deals are you talking about?
I will look up all of these answers myself but I would love to hear them from one of you guys who've been looking at this puppy for a while (probably more like a trained German Shepperd)
EDIT: So the 12.5k is without a lens right?
Now I feel like I know what's up in the entry 2/3 world...
Holy smokes! $12.5k at Abel!
The 2/3 is for sure worth the price jump alone! Now does it do more fps or the same as the HVX or do you get the full gamut like in the Vari? the lent in interchangeable, is it a PL? what mount?
Also, Barry, did you mean that you get a free 16GB card for the 14k or what other deals are you talking about?
I will look up all of these answers myself but I would love to hear them from one of you guys who've been looking at this puppy for a while (probably more like a trained German Shepperd)
EDIT: So the 12.5k is without a lens right?
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Same as the HVX.USLatinContent said:
Same as all other 2/3" cameras, B4 mount. Not PL.
Not "a" 16GB card, I'm talking about four 16GB cards. Abel and Spec-Comm are both listing a package at $13,500 that includes the body, tripod plate, and four 16GB cards.
Correct. Cheapest with-lens package I've seen listed is about $20,000.
Barry_Green said:
FOUR 16GB cards?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! HOLY MOTHER OF PANA!!!!!
That means you get it for just a few grand more than an HVX?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is certainly something to be happy about, but I hate to see that my HVX is already not the way I would go if I had the cash in my hands again!
Well... let me calm my arse down... so the lens is not factored in and the HVX comes ready to go... that plays a big factor... but... let me ask you please if you are still around tonight (or whenever possible):
I see the other threads about lenses and the HPX, but being a noob to the lens world, what are the cheap options and more importantly, what are the better options on terms of glass you would want to use with this camera for drama use?
Barry_Green
Moderator
Cheap lenses will be the bane of us all, but it's going to be something we have to deal with.
HD cameras used to cost $80,000, so it wasn't much of a big deal to stick a $30,000 to $60,000 lens on there. But now that we have a 2/3" HD camera for $12,000, I think it's going to be the rare HPX500 owner who realizes the value of the glass and springs for the $30,000 lens. instead, they're likely to go with the "package" lenses, which are valued at somewhere around $6,000 to $8,000 (street price).
And while they're fine for the price, they're not premium. They're inexpensive, and corners will get cut when you do that. That's why the Chromatic Aberration Correction function was added -- to try to overcome the limitations of an inexpensive lens.
With a fantastic lens on there, you'll get great results. With a cheap lens on there, your results will be limited by the lens. It's all up to you as to what you want to spend, because you get what you pay for.
The cheaper lenses are offered because hey, they recognize the realities of the market, and in context with the price tag it does make for a great combination. You're talking about a 2/3" HD body, lens, four 16GB cards, tripod plate and VF all for a street price of under $20,000. Just don't expect an optical doubler, the CAC function, or a lens that's immune to "breathing" etc. It's a killer deal, but it's not a $60,000 lens.
Of course, you could always buy that $60,000 lens and have the best lens going, and it'll work with the HPX500 and probably deliver the best results the HPX500 is capable of. But if you're going to spend that much, you're probably not going to get a $14,000 (MSRP) body to mount that lens to, so... we're back to square 1.
The point is, there are lots of options. Lots of cheap options, if you want to use SD glass. Lots of very modestly-priced options (like the package lenses) if you want genuine high-def glass, just low-budget glass. And lots of fantastic options, if you can pay for it (or rent it).
HD cameras used to cost $80,000, so it wasn't much of a big deal to stick a $30,000 to $60,000 lens on there. But now that we have a 2/3" HD camera for $12,000, I think it's going to be the rare HPX500 owner who realizes the value of the glass and springs for the $30,000 lens. instead, they're likely to go with the "package" lenses, which are valued at somewhere around $6,000 to $8,000 (street price).
And while they're fine for the price, they're not premium. They're inexpensive, and corners will get cut when you do that. That's why the Chromatic Aberration Correction function was added -- to try to overcome the limitations of an inexpensive lens.
With a fantastic lens on there, you'll get great results. With a cheap lens on there, your results will be limited by the lens. It's all up to you as to what you want to spend, because you get what you pay for.
The cheaper lenses are offered because hey, they recognize the realities of the market, and in context with the price tag it does make for a great combination. You're talking about a 2/3" HD body, lens, four 16GB cards, tripod plate and VF all for a street price of under $20,000. Just don't expect an optical doubler, the CAC function, or a lens that's immune to "breathing" etc. It's a killer deal, but it's not a $60,000 lens.
Of course, you could always buy that $60,000 lens and have the best lens going, and it'll work with the HPX500 and probably deliver the best results the HPX500 is capable of. But if you're going to spend that much, you're probably not going to get a $14,000 (MSRP) body to mount that lens to, so... we're back to square 1.
The point is, there are lots of options. Lots of cheap options, if you want to use SD glass. Lots of very modestly-priced options (like the package lenses) if you want genuine high-def glass, just low-budget glass. And lots of fantastic options, if you can pay for it (or rent it).