i am in the market for a new camera that shoots to AVCHD codec and i cant decide what camera to go for, i currently shoot with a sony FX1 and want something that will achieve better low light quality and professional audio options(which they all have) my primary use for this camera is to shoot weddings with. i am really interested in the hmc150 but the only thing holding me back from buying that cam is that it doesn't have auto audio which is a big deal for me considering i don't want to wear headphones every time i shoot loud events. i also like that the hmc150 and the nx5u both can do 720p, which is the only drawback to the ax2000. the nx5u however, has the best of both cameras; auto audio and 720p recording. is it really necessary for me to spend 4grand on the nx5u for just those feature..? is there anything significant with the nx5u over the ax200 or is the only difference that it can do 720p and record to a portable hard drive?

i hope i didnt ramble off too much but i am really in a difficult position on what cam to go with. hope you guys can help with my decision!

Thanks

The following features appear in the professional HXR-NX5 but not in the consumer HDR-AX2000.
1.720p recording
2.Linear uncompressed audio (Dolby AC-3 only)
3.FMU capability
4.Simultaneous recording (due to lack of FMU)
5.GPS, timecode setting, or date recording
6.Upgradability to 60i/50i switchability
7.SDI / HD-SDI
8.TC LINK
9.SDHC card support (Not mentioned on Sony specs page) *
10.B&W EVF mode
11.macro focus
12.high-speed zoom
13.smooth-transitioning gain and white-balance
14.hyper gain
15.viewfinder markers and safety zones
16.numerical zoom display and focus distance display in feet
17.black level
18.black gamma
19.knee and color depth adjustments
20.manual white balance setting
21.colorbars with tone
22.individually switchable front & rear tally lamps
23.shutter angle display
24.hour meter
25.TC reset via remote control.
26.Fewer tweaks for color modes, gammas, and detail settings.

i wonder also, if low light is an issue for you, if it worth hanging on a bit longer and see if Sony develops a "Exmore R" variant of the NX range

Sony Global - Technology - "Exmor R" (http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/technology/theme/exmor_r_01.html)

i did read that the initial EXMORE R chips were restricted to small sensor devices currently, but perhaps they are working on that ...

Mike - are you seriously suggesting the 151 doesn't have a switchable AGC or limiter setting on its audio inputs? If this is true I'd be happy to eat the 151 brochure I have in my hands right now. Now go have a look at the little Auto / Manual switch alongside the audio level pots and tell me what this does.

In most markets the NX5 is priced just a little bit higher than the AX2k so most people plonk for that knowing that when it comes time to sell the buying market will be far bigger. And if you put an NX5 and a 151 alongide one another you'll see immediately why the Sony is the more expensive product. It's not wothout its faults, but it's a mighty fine compromise collection.

Justin, thanks for your list - the AX2k has the super slo-mo as well?

tom.

Had a 150 for over a year and it does have agc for the audio.
At it's current price the 150 is a steal. With the Sony cams, the LCD and dual card slots would be a major factor that would steer me their way though. Also the ability to add the ssd recorder is a major plus.
I really liked the panny but it was the only game in town (spec and price) when I got it. If the nx had been out at the same time, I would have gone for that.

For a comparison of the using the NX5 versus the AX2000 for wedding videography, see this link to a discussion from last year:

Should i buy HDR-AX2000 or HXR-NX5U?

I had a several posts in there which detailed my take on the extra NX5 features that I thought would (and do) make a difference to what and how I shoot weddings. Several of us pointed out that others could very well reach different conclusions about the choices that would be best for them.

I can offer a few additional thoughts to supplement what was said there.

I'm not familiar enough with the HMC150 to comment on how well it does with lower-light level shooting. The NX5 can shoot in some some pretty dimly lit settings, about comparable with my old VX2000 cams. However, grain can be an issue when shooting in auto-modes in those conditions. Also, I've found that the auto focus in dim lighting can be imprecise and somewhat slow. The AX2000 will exhibit the same behaviors. My little CX550v cams do a better job of getting low noise images on auto mode in in dim lighting. (Ron Evans has posted more on these issues.) Basically, I tend to run in manual mode for dimly lit events and resort to using 1/30th shutter speeds to avoid grain. I have not found the slower shutter speed to be a problem for weddings as things tend to move at a pretty sedate pace.

Because most weddings move sedately, I do not see any real benefit to 720/60p. The only advantage that I've ever heard for using 720/60p for weddings is that this format apparently scales down to DVD a bit more readily than, say, 1080/30i (which is what used to be called 1080/60i). My own tests did not show any significant benefit for this, though. Also, I do multi-cam wedding shoots and none of my other cams will shoot 720/60p. I've only found 720/60p useful for single cam shoots of very high contrast. very high motion subjects such as close-to-the-stage shots of dancers and downhill mountain bike racing. Not the kind of thing one expects to encounter for weddings.

The HMC150 telephoto only goes to 13x zoom but the NX/AX cams go to 20x optical zoom. The NX/AX cams go very wide at wide end of the zoom. The wide angle is significantly wider than most other cams I've seen. Very useful for shooting in tight places. The longer reach of the zoom was and is important for me in the venues that I shoot in. Do note that zooming out to 20x with the AX/NX cams will result in some reductions from maximum aperture size.

I believe the HMC150 does have audio AGC. But the NX/AX go one better and have audio limiters. Limiters basically cap how loud things can get, thereby avoiding some audio issues like clipping from sudden increases in sound levels.

Forgot to mention the lens difference. The 150 starts at 28mm (in dslr terms) where the Sonys start at 29.5mm which is not that big of a difference and is extremely wide. I used to shoot full body greenscreen with the 150 about 4 feet from the talent (without having the camera flipped to portrait!)
The big difference is the zoom. The 150 just doesn't have enough throw for a lot of things I shoot. Having the extra throw on the Sony is worth it unless the aperture change is really drastic. Wasn't bad at all on the 150.
Also, I believe the agc on the 150 was in addition to having a limiter but since I dont have it any more, I can't verify.
Just checked BH and the 150 is down to $2795 which is insane knowing what I paid for mine!
This is becoming a tough choice I'm glad I don't have to make!!

thanks a lot everyone for your replies! i greatly appreciate it!

From what i can tell now it seems that the panasonic 150 and the NX5U are a pretty good comparison as far as features and what they offer. (excluding the ssd recorder on the NX5U) they both seem identical. if that is the case then i would have to go away from sony and lean towards the 150 due to the fact that its only going for 2,800 vs the NX5U going for 4,000. i would much prefer to stick with sony considering i already own a FX1 but if i can get the same camera as the NX5U in Panasonic then that would be a no brainer. please correct me if i am wrong.

Thanks a lot for every ones input!

Spec sheets are fine for an initial comparison, but aside from them, here are some of the features I've come to love about my NX5 after using it for a good number of weddings.
____________________

1. Active Steadyshot
This is the most amazing steadyshot feature I have ever seen. It makes it possible to get particular handheld shots that I was never able to get using my Z1, and of course it smooths out all of my standard handheld shooting. Here's an example...at a wedding last night, I spotted a man holding his baby at one of the reception tables. Wanting to catch them in the moment, I backed up against the opposite wall of the room for support, and zoomed in all the way. With the active steadyshot feature turned on, the shot came out great. I used this tactic throughout the night and was able to grab many candid shots. If you do a lot of handheld and/or monopod work, do yourself a favor and do not buy anything else until you've had a chance to try this out in your own hands. (Note, that I prefer the active steadyshot feature be set to "standard" strength. You may like it elsewhere.)

2. Iris Ring
The iris dial of the HMC-150 is not the slickest, but I can't knock it too much either since it can do the job in a similar fashion to most other prosumer cameras. With the iris ring on the NX5 though, you're able to easily adjust the exposure and focus without ever having to remove your left hand from the lens assembly of the camera. This holds true with the camera in a football hold as well where I will often use my right thumb to ride the iris. My handheld and monopod shots are steadier because of this, and I am now able to hold more continuous shots.

3. 20x Zoom Lens
I use this camera at full zoom many times on every shoot. With my previous cameras, I always felt that I was having to "make do" with their inability to zoom in enough for me to frame longer shots the way that I actually wanted to. Also, the 20x zoom allows you to focus all the better as you can actually get in close. You know what I'm talking about if you've ever tried to achieve critical focus on a person standing over 20 meters away. Additionally, my previous cameras produced a soft picture, and so I had more leeway when it came to focusing on distant subjects, but with the superior sharp picture of the NX5, I have to be far more careful about this. The 20x zoom is an absolute necessity toward this goal in my opinion.

4. Expanded Focus
I simply cannot be sure of my focus without this feature. My previous camera did not allow me to access this function while recording, but the NX5 does and I use it all the time.

5. Viewfinder
Although the LCD looks nice, the viewfinder is by far the better tool to use when focusing with this camera. The HMC-150 as I recall had a very tiny picture when looking through the viewfinder, making focus nearly impossible. (Panasonic partially made up for this through the great display of focus distances via a numberline that appears on the screen with a slider showing the distances that are in focus. I think this is still only a partial solution and I will take the larger screen anytime.)

6. 1/30 Shutter Speed
The grain was terrible on my previous cameras (combined with interlacing) when I shot at 1/30 shutter speed, but the NX5 does an excellent job with 1/30 (shooting progressive). The extra stop of exposure this adds is critical to my low light shooting. To put it another way, I do not feel that I am trading detail for exposure when shooting at 1/30 versus 1/60. After evaluating the picture given using both settings, I feel that any blurring effects at 1/30 are small enough to be considered imperceptible by most videographers.

7. Dual Recording
What a relief to be able to record simultaneously to the card and flash unit. Do I need to anything more on this?

8. LCD Placement
I like how Sony sticks the LCD on top of the handle. It makes my handheld work much easier then if it were in the farther back position of the HMC-150.
____________________

Alec Moreno
Wedding Art Films - Southern California - Los Angeles - Orange County - Video (http://www.WeddingArtFilms.com)

Almost everything that Alec mentioned about the NX5 is also true of the AX2000. The one difference he mentions is the add-on flash memory unit (FMU) as well as the SD cards.

But there is a price to be paid for this. Here in the US, an FMU adds $750 to the cost of an NX5. So, in comparing the HMC150 to the NX5 with an FMU, we're really talking a price difference in US$ of $4750 for the NX/FMU combo versus $3500 for an AX2000 versus $2825 for an HMC150. Spending more on the Sony cams gets you more features. Whether that "more" will be worth it to Mike is a different question.

Regarding Robert's comment "Having the extra throw on the Sony is worth it unless the aperture change is really drastic." At full wide on the NX5, you can stop down to f/1.6. At full 20x zoom, the NX5 goes down to f/3.4. I don't remember what the HMC150 does, but I recall it being similar.

Mike: since you are in Chicago, where there are some rental shops, have you checked to see if anybody can rent you an HMC150 for day? Undoubtedly, you could rent an NX5. There is nothing like getting your hands on a camera to find out if it will or will not work for what you want to do.

Personally I'd try to choose between the HMC150 and the NX5. The HMC150 only costs $2,800 while the AX2000 costs $3,500. I view the AX2000 as being way too expensive for not offering any 720p modes or a fully native 24p mode. It does 24p within 60i. The NX5 on the other hand not only has 720p modes and fully native 24p like the HMC150, it also has HD-SDI output and you never know when that can come in handy.

Good detailed post Alec. One point worth mentioning though is that switching to active steadyshot robs you of some wide-angle coverage as well as reducing the image quality. I'm not so concerned for the former (as you gain telephoto reach at the other end for no lens speed loss) but the quality loss disturbs me - doesn't it you?

OK, if you shoot 1080i and downconvert to SD that quality loss may become academic - I haven't tried it, so can you comment? I do love the NX5's slo-mo though, and I can now film table decorations and so on at a hand-held, medium telepho setting while tracking round them. 3 seconds becomes 12 on screen, and snipping 3 or 4 seconds out of that in the edit looks really good. Quick, simple, effective.

Of course there's a quality hit and you need a lot more light as the camera's shutter speed automatically jumps to 1/215 th sec, but it's a price worth paying for 'first time' tracking perfection. I never bother with the longer slo-mo times as the quality drops alarmingly, though it is fun to watch on the camera's tiny LCD. Again, the downconvert to SD almost (but not quite) hides the slo-mo's quality hit.

More points. The twin card slots of the NX5 are way better than the 150's single slot. What were Panasonic thinking at the design stage? But the 150's big 4:3 side screen does clear the image of a lot of its spam - the NX5 (even with the tiny font its saddled with) can have a lot of the image obscured by info.

The Panasonic' lens is f/1.6 to f/3, so overall the Sony G lens is faster and has a much longer zoom range. Side by side though the 28mm coverage on the 150 sees a lot more than the 29.5 mm of the NX5. Thing is in this day and age 28mm is considered very mild, so you still need a decent wideangle converter to add some visual punch to both cameras.

tom.

I believe the slo-mo is another function that the AX2000 shares with the NX5.

A point of clarification: when Tom is talking about resolution loss, I think he is referring to both the slo-mo function and the active steady shot. My perceptions are slightly different than Tom's. I found the slo-mo to have what looks to me like a significant resolution loss but the resolution loss with the active steady shot isn't very significant in most of what I've shot. Where I've noticed it, it seemed to me like a slight softening of the focus. Where I noticed this was a close up shot of a wedding flower arrangement, a shot I made while I had the Active Steadyshot engaged. (I know this is resolution loss rather than a focus issue because p.74 of the manual mentions this.) Basically, I use active steadyshot for things like shooting hand-held while following the wedding couple, making pre-ceremony shots of the members of wedding party in a hallway as they get ready for the ceremony, etc. It's basically a choice between having video that is unwatchably unsteady and watchable video where the shot isn't quite as wide or sharp as it might have been. Otherwise, I vary between the "standard" and "hard" settings for the regular steady shot, and generally have it off altogether when shooting from a tripod. Here's another example, a couple of weeks ago, I used the NX5 Active Steadyshot at near-full telephoto (probably 18x) to hand-hold a shot of a flock of wild turkeys in a herd of whitetail deer as they were feeding in a snow-free patch of a grain field. The video looks like I was hand-holding from about 20 feet away. If I had been only 20 feet away, I probably would have scattered the group while I fiddled with camera settings.

The way I see it, Active Steadyshot is one more tool in the NX5 kit and has its uses. It works well for what it does but I do not leave it on for everything. On the other hand, my tiny CX550 cams are so small and light that I generally leave them on Active Steady shot even when shooting from a tripod. Usually, they are on tripods as locked-down b cams so I don't need to worry about jerky pans.

The 150 has nothing like this tool.

And that brings me back to something else that Mike said: "it seems that the panasonic 150 and the NX5U are a pretty good comparison as far as features and what they offer (excluding the ssd recorder on the NX5U) they both seem identical."

I do not think you can say that the NX and 150 "seem identical" unless you mean they are functionally identical for your needs and shooting style. One can make a rational choice that the additional functions of the NX/AX series are not important to you or, perhaps, not important enough to warrant spending the extra $600 for an AX or $1200 to $1700 for an NX. (And remember that there will be additional expenses for things like tripods, mics, etc.) Maybe one or two weddings would cover the additional costs? Maybe, it is just more money than you want to spend. The choice of camera is rarely a question of which is better/best? The question really is more complicated: best for whom on what budget to shoot what for whom?

I could have been pretty happy with an HMC150. I am happier with the NX. As the discussion above indicates, the NX/AX cams have more features and functions, and the NX has more than the AX. See

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-nxcam-hxr-nx5u/475795-should-i-buy-hdr-ax2000-hxr-nx5u.html

and

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-nxcam-hxr-nx5u/478058-nx5u-ax2000.html

When it comes to choosing between an NX/AX and a 150, things like the AX/NX having a 20x zoom, Active Steadyshot, the high-res viewscreen (with expanded focus function) and multiple SD slots are just five of the things that the NX/AX have that the 150 does not.

The twin SD slots that Tom mentioned are very useful for long form events such as weddings. With the NX/AX cams, the camera will fill one card, automatically switch to the other while allowing you to swap out the full card for a new one, and keep going as long as you have the power and cards to feed it. Of course, you can use one 32g card in the HMC150 to get about three hours of 24Mbps AVCHD and that may be sufficient for what you want to do.

Do note that some videographers like the 150's use of CCDs versus the CMOS sensors in the Sony cams. This is the so-called "rolling shutter" problem. With a CMOS-based camera, a photographer's flash covers only part of the frame or field (say, the bottom or upper half) while, with a CCD camera, the whole frame is covered. Some shooters are passionately offended by this artifact. Some wonder: why all the fuss? My personal opinion is that the flash thing can be annoying if you like slow-motion effects in your wedding videos (I rarely use them) but otherwise, I could hardly care less. Your preferences may be different and, if they are, this may help you in making your choice.

One thing we did not think to ask yet is whether or not you will be keeping your FX1 for multi-camming with whatever new cam you get? If you decide to keep the FX1, you can share batteries, chargers and other accessories with the NX/AX series. The FX and NX/AX footage will visually mesh with less effort than with the Panny. Doubtless you've been through the Panasonic HMC150 threads and so have seen what others have said about this. (I'm guessing you did because I see you made a similar posting in that DVinfo forum.) Another consideration is that the control layouts on the NX/AX are pretty similar to those on the FX1. They are similar enough to make it very easy to transition from one camera to the other. That can be a big deal while under the pressure of shooting weddings. (I speak from experience on this.)

Again, if you can spend a day with a rented HCM150, you could find out pretty quickly if it is enough for what and how you do what you do or if, instead, an AX/NX might be preferable.

Does anyone use a Wide Angle Lens for Sony AX2000/NX5?
How much will it be useful?
Thanks

Good detailed post Alec. One point worth mentioning though is that switching to active steadyshot robs you of some wide-angle coverage as well as reducing the image quality. I'm not so concerned for the former (as you gain telephoto reach at the other end for no lens speed loss) but the quality loss disturbs me - doesn't it you?

Good point Tom. Yes, with Active Steadyshot there is a resolution loss that I didn't think to mention. I'm sure that it didn't cross my mind though because to my eye, the loss is negligible (as in...nonexistent as far as I'm able to discern). I was definitely worried about this before handling the camera, but once I saw the comparison shots side by side at 1080p, I was very happy.

Conversely, I was really looking forward to the slow-motion feature, but was extremely disappointed with its quality in my tests. Although the overcranking does a great job of apparently smoothing out my handling of the camera, the blurring of the image is too much for me to take, along with a flickering effect under certain lighting conditions. I prefer to keep shooting at 30p and to use Twixtor to slow my footage in post if necessary.

Alec Moreno
Wedding Art Films - Southern California - Los Angeles - Orange County - Video (http://www.WeddingArtFilms.com)

thanks for your reply Paula!

the question that it comes down to for me is, is it really worth me spending $1200 more for the NX5 when i am pretty much getting the same features in the HMC150 and same quality and what not. there are some features on my FX1 that i will loose though such as; shot transition, expanded focus ect. but i feel like those extra features are not worth the $1200 more and i wont even see myself using the HXR-FMU128 flash unit that can be attached to the NX5. what more is there that is in the NX5 that makes it so much more the the HMC150? newer?

Thanks,
Mike

Does anyone use a Wide Angle Lens for Sony AX2000/NX5?
How much will it be useful?
Thanks

I owned it (the Sony wide angle) and used it with my former Z5, but not enough to justify keeping it for the NX5. Of course, it depends on the kind of shooting you do. There were a couple of times where I wanted to get a little wider and couldn't do it any other way (e.g., stuffed in a corner at a kid's birthday party trying to get a shot of the whole table and no way to back up), however the Sony wide angle is immensely heavy and, IMO, makes it extremely difficult to hand-hold the camera. This severely limited its usefulness for me. And in general, I find that the stock lens is wide enough for most of what I do.

Best,
Aaron

ignore this post

This severely limited its usefulness for me. And in general, I find that the stock lens is wide enough for most of what I do.


Aaron, could you tell me if it possbile to use easily Sony NX5 walking without using Wide Angle Lens?
Thanks

the question that it comes down to for me is, is it really worth me spending $1200 more for the NX5 when i am pretty much getting the same features in the HMC150 and same quality and what not.
The NX5 may cost more but you are getting extra for the money. The lens has already been mentioned - not just the zoom range, but also the far better manual operation. But a big difference between their specs is that the NX5 uses higher resolution chips than the 150 - 1 megapixel rather than the 0.5 megapixel of the 150.

While I agree with everything David just said, and could add more of my own "for instances," I think we might be slipping towards semantic quagmire here. It's the same kind of semantic bog that appears whenever somebody asks "what is the best camera." It's always a question of best for who to do what for whom on what budget.

I think Mike has used some loose and unintentionally provocative language when he says "i am pretty much getting the same features in the HMC150 and same quality and what not." In context, I think what he means is that the more budget-friendly HMC is good enough for what he wants to do so the higher quality and functions of the NX5 are not a consideration.

On that basis, he can't go wrong with an HMC.

If he really means to put that otherwise provocative comment out for discussion, he really needs to spend some hands-on time with an NX5, as I've suggested above.

I'll point out one point of comparison that maybe illustrates this. The NX5 has (as do the AX, Z5, Z7 and FX1000) a high resolution viewscreen that is larger and much clearer than the one on the HMC (and the FX1, for that matter.) The one on the HMC that I saw reminded me of the one on my beloved old VX2000 with an extra band of data on one side. Not bad but harder to use for manual focus. With the NX5 screen's high resolution and the expanded focus button, I find it far easier to get good manual focus. You can't do that with an HMC. One cannot say that the HMC is equal to the NX5 in this area unless one doesn't particularly care about a manual focus aid. But, if one doesn't care about manual focus aids, then the greater capabilities don't matter.

thanks for the reply's everyone!

it seems that the nx5u is the camera to go with, but that would be pushing my budget. i still really want to stick with sony so i may still consider the ax2000 but if its not true 24p, 30p then i dont know if i wan to go with that. however i feel for what the price of the hmc is going for its almost a no brainer to go with that. although i will need to buy all new battery's and unit charger for it. but i was wondering, does the hmc have over cranking and under cranking? for slow motion shots


Thanks,
Mike

Mike - well said, the HMC is a no-brainer to the finance department of your head. I'd pretty much defy anyone to tell - looking at a wedding film - if the HMC or the NX had been used. I've looked at HMC 720p footage (when the camera's performing at its best, btw) right up close on a 50" plasma, and I've been astounded by the image quality. It may only have a 13x zoom, but boy, what a lens.

OK, you could tell the two cameras apart once the NX's slo-mo appeared in the twirl (no slo-mo on the HMC Mike), but look at the money you're saving - enough for a wonderful tripod + lanc zoom controller, kit bag and extra batteries!

I chose the NX because I could afford it, simple as that - but I still hate what CMOS does to the flash-riddled cake-cutting. But for those who can't justify the extra expense the HMC will give startlingly good results with one or two operational compromises as have been mentioned here.

Remember this good people: films have far more to do with the filmmaker's and editor's skills than ever they are to do with the hardware used. Intelligence, imagination, planning ahead, double checking, being brave - all people skills - and the finest camera out there has not one of these attributes.

tom.

With it now selling for $2795 from legitimate retailers the HMC 150 is an incredible deal. I would guess that pretty soon Panny will come out with a successor addressing some of the HMC150's shortcomings like having two SD card slots and a higher resolution LCD. But then I am sure the price of the new model will reflect those improvements and put it back on par with the Sony competition.

I own two Sony V1U's. I bought them about six months before the HMC150 came out or I would have bought two of those. I love my Sony's but it sure is tempting to borrow $5590 and grab two HMC 150's to take dvantage of the SD format and CCD's vs CMOS.

i have decided that the NX5U is going to be too much for me. i will probably buy a good tripod and nice mic instead of spending the extra cash on that cam. however i still would really like to stick with sony. the question i have at this point is that if i end up going with the ax2000 is that going to be pretty similar to my FX1 as far as the the features are? and if i go with the HMC150 is that going to be a heck of a lot better as far as features and professionalism? i know that that the sony is going to be a little better in low light but i already have a video light so im not too concerned about that now. and i can deal with out having the extra sd card slot. anything else that is going to be a big factor besides all of the small differences such as LCD resolution, expanded focus ect.?

The AX2k is a serious contender as it has proper (at last) XLR balanced inputs for mic and line. It lacks some of the menu tweaks of the NX but it has exactly the same military-grade build spec and will give you the peace of mind of twin cards for those long wedding speeches, a much longer zoom, ace slo-mo and OIS and a really hi-res top screen.

The HMC makes great pictures but the side-screen is creaky/wobbly on its hinge alongside the Sony and as DJA says, it can't be long before the 18x zoom, twin card slot, CMOS chipped HMC 190 will be here.

Coming from an FX1 you'll be right at home with the AX2k in an afternoon. Its default settings will give you beautiful footage but there's no firewire, everything's file based of course. I'm not convinced the HMC is any better regarding 'features and professionalism' as you put it.

Remember that the hardware is never professional, only people are.

tom.

also doesn’t the ax2000 have more resolution image sensors then the HMC does? Although i also heard that the 24p and 30p on the ax2000 is not true progressive, is that true?

I'm not sure what you are asking here, but I'll have a try at answering what I think you might be asking.

If I recall correctly from when I looked at the HMC150, I believe its three sensors had a raw native resolution of something like 960x520. As I recall, there is some offset (the green sensor?) which results in 1440x810. When used to record for AVCHD/H.264, I recall reading that there was some upscaling to yield a 1920x1080 image. This is not without advantages. The pixels are larger which means you may get less noise in lower light images. The AX/NX cams claim to be full raster for 1980x1020 with a 1.2 megapixel sensors. The AX/NX cams will record at up to 24Mbps AVCHD. The HMC150 tops out at 21Mbps AVCCAM.

That said, in terms of image clarity under reasonable lighting with the video converted to DVD, you would often have trouble distinguishing footage from the AX and HMC150. This is illustrated by one of the links in one of the postings above. (Can't find it right now, but the shooter had done a side-by-side comparison of NX and HMC footage of a wedding shot from the back loft of a cathedral. His conclusion was that he liked the HMC150 footage better.) On the other hand, you may notice some differences on larger screen tvs when displaying HD video.

As for progressive formats, my recollection is that the AX2000 records 24p in a 60i wrapper. (Okay, for nitpickers about the newer official nomenclature, I should have said 24p in a 30i wrapper. You know what I mean by "60i.") I believe that the HMC150 will record in native 24p. As best I recall, neither the AX nor the HMC150 will record a native 30p or native 29.97p.