It will be a horse race. Great codecs, same chip size and resolution. Too bad neither of them offer 8-pin rear zoom control. I just can't have a LANC style remote after using the broadcast style 8-pin controllers. This is a nice feature of the EX-1, the other horse in the race.

the EX-1, the other horse in the race.

It's interesting though... EX1 was the first in this race and has been wining for quite some time now. Surely they must be having a replacement for the EX1 in the works by now? Panasonic came very late to the game - even later than Canon... Sony EX1 was/is a really nice cam. I wonder if this move from Panasonic was maybe a little premature - because if Sony releases something new in the next 1 year it will surely beat the crap out of it's competition...yes?

Yes, it is very interesting. I see the EX-1 just the same as the Canon 5D MKII. Why replace a product that is still working? Like the 5DMKII the EX-1 has plenty of resolution and chip size and the competition has not surpassed it in the marketplace. The only problem is the next logical step for the EX-1 is the 50mbps 4:2:2 codec which would throw Sony's line out of shape. This is the main area where Panasonic and Canon have an edge. But lets face it, going forward skimping on the codec will be very frowned upon as memory gets cheaper and cheaper. Not to mention if Scarlet comes out soon with RAW processing.

I like Panasonic cameras. It is a shame they have abandoned 1/2" chips. If the HPX-250 had 1/2" chips it would be a no brainer to so many.

But lets face it, going forward skimping on the codec will be very frowned upon as memory gets cheaper and cheaper.

The codec/memory question isn't about saving money with memory any more. It's keeping the camera in a certain price range.

Now that memory prices continue to drop camera manufacturers should be able to use larger codes (but probably won't). 50Mb/s 4:2:2 mpeg2 is still highly compressed. It is better than 35 xdcam 4:2:0 but still give me 100 - 200 Mb/s 4:2:2 I-frame and I'll be happy.

I wonder if they will do hybrid camera next such as an HPX600/601 that is an ENG shoulder mount camera based on the AF101 4/3 chip but with the P2 system and AVC Intra 100 as the record end.

Yes, it is very interesting. I see the EX-1 just the same as the Canon 5D MKII. Why replace a product that is still working? Like the 5DMKII the EX-1 has plenty of resolution and chip size and the competition has not surpassed it in the marketplace. The only problem is the next logical step for the EX-1 is the 50mbps 4:2:2 codec which would throw Sony's line out of shape. This is the main area where Panasonic and Canon have an edge. But lets face it, going forward skimping on the codec will be very frowned upon as memory gets cheaper and cheaper. Not to mention if Scarlet comes out soon with RAW processing.

I like Panasonic cameras. It is a shame they have abandoned 1/2" chips. If the HPX-250 had 1/2" chips it would be a no brainer to so many.

Couldn't have said it better myself, the real let down this year for me was from Sony and the F3, 35 4:2:0 is ridiculous. But this means I'm sure that the Ex1 upgrade will still be 35 4:2:0 not to step on the F3 toes. This looks like a great camera just like the Canon XF305 but 1/2 chips would swing so many people. I actually think that it would sway a fair amount of the Scarlet crew too.

"1/2 chips would swing so many people."

And put a large dent in Panasonic's more expensive line at the same time? Sony are faced with a similar problem with their EX upgrade.

Canon and JVC are the ones to watch IMO. They don't have higher end models to protect, though canon make a fortune supplying glass to the others.

It can't be long before Canon come up with a cam to go up against the af100 and F3, but in the meantime this new Panny range looks very nice.

I would have to praise Sony for its line right now and the focus on offering options to all levels of professionals. They have small and large format cameras from 1/3" all the way up to 35mm. I think this is a customer approach and in the end, does not take away sales that would not have been there to begin with.

The approach that says 1/2" chips will hurt a product line imho is out of touch by Panasonic. They have stated the HPX-300 was geared towards news stations. Well isn't that in place of orders that used to be 2/3" cameras? The fact is, people who think paying $20,000 for a body is too expensive for their budget are still going to think that way with or without a 1/2" chip option.

I have been waiting for JVC to step up and fill a void for a long time but they have released basically the same 1/3" camera for the last five years. I am not holding my breath!

Why bother putting in 1/2" chips if you can get the same or better performance and quality from a 1/3" chip?

HVX user since forever, dabbler with DSLR's and 1/2" Sonys. Barring global financial villainy, I will be a 250 buyer this fall.

Kevin, you have a good point. I would say that the performance of the 1/3" chips is very good, but a similar 1/2" chip would be better. This includes less noise reduction due to the chips being so amped up (HPX-370) or better light gathering ability (XF-300). Also the diffraction point allows more of the aperature range to be used succesfully with larger imagers.

Why bother putting in 1/2" chips if you can get the same or better performance and quality from a 1/3" chip?.
Has anybody ever got the same or better performance as 1/2" from a 1/3" chip? (At least when comparing cameras from the same era.)

The laws of physics make it very unlikely, certainly if you compare like with like.

We've been over the ground many times, but (*all else equal*) the 1/2" chip will have a fundamental sensitivity advantage of more than 1 stop, will give DOF halfway between 1/3" and 2/3" chips, and will have a better usable aperture range before you get diffraction softening. (The Canon XF300 range seem to overcome the latter by some optical trickery, but their approach is unlikely to ever work for an interchangeable lens camera.)

Well from my own point of view I can live with a one stop difference, doing work for UK broadcasters inc the BBC my 1/3" chip HPX371 is BBC approved out of it's box (as is the XF305) where all the sony 1/2" camera's I would have to add more hardware (and cost) to make them acceptable.

I can now do 80% of my work with just the HPX371, if I need more DOF or capabilities then I hire the 2/3" HPX3700 or 3100 as they still use the same P2 record format and codecs.

I would say that the performance of the 1/3" chips is very good, but a similar 1/2" chip would be better. This includes less noise reduction due to the chips being so amped up (HPX-370)...

And this got me thinking. The 370 with all it's noise reduction failed. Even so that Panasonic had to release an update which reversed the camera to the previous model (picture wise) the 300. So if the 250 is going to have the same chip set as the 370 or 300 for that matter I wonder what will they do about the noise "problem".

If they do nothing and the picture will be the same as in the 300 then the 250 will be behind the EX series and the canon XF series in picture quality (regarding noise. otherwise I'm not to judge...). The only plus will be the AVCintra codec. And even this great codec is still 10bit and is wasted on such a "noisy" picture...

Noise was never a problem in PAL with the 301 it was mainly the NTSC cameras that had problems, and from what I have seen the 371 is just as good as the EX ser if you use it right!

There are too many pixel spotters who don't know how to use these cameras properly and expect them to do wonders in the dark, it's mainly the DSLR brigade etc and if you use any camera with decent lighting it will perform very well. You need to know the cameras limitations but anyone who dials in +12db and above and think it will be Ok is asking for trouble.

...from what I have seen the 371 is just as good as the EX ser if you use it right!


All that I saw were pictures from other shooters and reviews... So I can't judge from my own experience. But wasn't the 301 judged for bad noise? And because of that they released the 371 that would rival the EX series in noise performance (the 301 didn't). But that failed and had to be reverted to the 301. So as I understand it the 371 with the update is noisier than the EX series. Yes?

I'm not saying it's a useless camera - just objectively thinking about noise performance between this cameras and which one is going to have the lowest noise...

............and if you use any camera with decent lighting it will perform very well. You need to know the cameras limitations but anyone who dials in +12db and above and think it will be Ok is asking for trouble.
Yes, but the HPX301/371 is marketed strongly towards news/documentary/actuality filming, and they are precisely the areas where it may not be possible to use decent lighting. In a whole raft of scenarios, ANY lighting may be impractical or unwise. It's either use gain, or go home early.

The 301 may work OK in good light - but be at a disadvantage as soon as the light levels start to go down. As Sanjin says, nobody is saying the 301 is a "useless" camera - but it is at a disadvantage compared to 1/2" or 2/3" cameras. And if you need to dial in 12dB with it to get exposure, with a comparable 1/2" camera you'd get better results at 6dB! With a 2/3" camera, you'll get better exposure at 0dB, than with the 371 at 12dB. (All else equal.)
And this got me thinking. The 370 with all it's noise reduction failed. Even so that Panasonic had to release an update which reversed the camera to the previous model (picture wise) the 300. So if the 250 is going to have the same chip set as the 370 or 300 for that matter I wonder what will they do about the noise "problem".
Which is a very good point. We'll have to wait and see how the 250 performs in practice, but if I was thinking of getting one, I'd look very hard to see if it exhibits any of the "ghost noise trails" that plagued the 371.

The Canon is 1/3" - but is helped to come close to EX performance by lens design - a fast lens, with optical design that overcomes some of the worst iris diffraction problems. What will the HPX250 lens be like for maximum aperture? None of the so far released information seems to mention this (AFAIK), which may not bode well.

Yes, but the HPX301/371 is marketed strongly towards news/documentary/actuality filming, and they are precisely the areas where it may not be possible to use decent lighting. In a whole raft of scenarios, ANY lighting may be impractical or unwise. It's either use gain, or go home early.

The 301 may work OK in good light - but be at a disadvantage as soon as the light levels start to go down. As Sanjin says, nobody is saying the 301 is a "useless" camera - but it is at a disadvantage compared to 1/2" or 2/3" cameras. And if you need to dial in 12dB with it to get exposure, with a comparable 1/2" camera you'd get better results at 6dB! With a 2/3" camera, you'll get better exposure at 0dB, than with the 371 at 12dB. (All else equal.)
.

My thoughts exactly!

I do agree with Garry to. About the DSLR crowd. But yes - this camera is aimed at news - eng production (and corporate maybe).

Well personally I never use my HPX301/371 above +6db and as it has an f1.6 lens and CAC as opposed to the EX1/3 & 320 f1.9 I doubt if there is any practical difference between the two chip sizes, I certainly havent had to go home early on any job I've done and have shot in all sorts of lighting conditions including dusk and night shoots.

The ENG shoulder mount form factor is for me way better than the EX range and it is far more pro like than the sonys and the audio switches are far better, it also has five year warranty.

It may be marketed as a news camera in the USA but not here in the UK and I have used mine on everything from news thru doco, to live OB's and indie feature films, as said it's fully BBC approved for full HD shooting out of the box so that is good enough for me as it gives the camera real credibility in the UK.

The HPX250/251 should be a good camera too and with the canon will certainly sony will have to consider putting a 50mbs codec on their next generation of mid range cameras to replace the EX1/3 & 320.

.....it has an f1.6 lens and CAC as opposed to the EX1/3 & 320 f1.9 I doubt if there is any practical difference between the two chip sizes
No, there is a significant difference - I've seen one side by side with a 320. It would seem that the intrinsic difference should be a stop because of the chip size difference - in practice it should be more because of the boundaries between photosites not scaling in proportion. Hence for equal resolution, then although a 1/2" chip may have twice the area of 1/3", then each photosite in the 1/2" case will be more than twice the area for 1/3"

The latter factor roughly seems to null out with the f1.6/f1.9 lens difference (which is less than half a stop) - leaving an actual difference between the cameras of roughly a stop. (It's a while ago, but I seem to recall that at 0dB they both seemed to expose at roughly the same f stop, but as gain was added, the 301 showed noise worse than the 320. The conclusion was that at 0dB the 301 had a worse s/n figure than the 320. That's not to say it would be a problem as such - but would mean you could only use a lower gain for the same degradation.)
certainly sony will have to consider putting a 50mbs codec on their next generation of mid range cameras to replace the EX1/3 & 320
Yes, I agree. If they did, there'd be no argument. You'd be having your cake and eating it.

Thanks David and I take your point as you have had the advantage of seeing them side by side.

I had to make the choice for my camera system two years ago and went for the 301(371) mainly as the P2 system was common to the 301/371 2700 and the 3700 that I hire in for the serious work.

I also consulted Alan Roberts and his testing and the 301 was the camera for me as sony didn't have the 320 or 500 out then, they didn't even have the 800 out so my choice was made on the system rather than pure noise and technical considerations but Alan's report said it was acceptable and as it turns out two years later the 371 is now BBC approved out of the box.

I still await the 600/601 from panasonic and if it happens that will give us the large sensor sub £10k camera to compete with the 320/350 and 500 from sony but with the same P2 system that I have bought into.

Has anybody read or seen anywhere what's the filter diameter on the lens?

Hi Sanjin, the filter thread diameter on the Panasonic AG-HPX250 is 72mm. Hope this helps,

Hey, Chris! Are you sure about this, and if so, where did you get the info? Having handled the camera at NAB, it really seemed larger than 72mm, more like the 82mm of the HVX.


Nevermind…just saw it on the Panasonic PDF. Interesting.

I might as well attach that brochure here...

Is it just me or is that PDF SERIOUSLY garbled?

Looks like a 64 hundred dollar question to me. Yikes.....

Is it just me or is that PDF SERIOUSLY garbled?Don't know if it's just you, but it looks okay from here. Anybody else have issues with this PDF?

No problems with downloading and printing the PDF.

PDF OK for me too.

Hi Sanjin, the filter thread diameter on the Panasonic AG-HPX250 is 72mm. Hope this helps,

Thank you!

What about the batteries? Same as the HPX171?

Yes, the same batt. as the AG-HPX170/171, which is the CGA-D54.

Great! Thanks for the info Chris!

New HPX-250 footage on Youtube: AG-HPX250 Sample Footage (http://youtu.be/jHNXmPYD5lA) *warning* some numb-nuts shot the footage interlaced.

Looks pretty much like what I would expect from my 301 and 371.

*warning* some numb-nuts shot the footage interlaced.

You made my morning, spat my coffee everywhere laughing at the comment

Just watched the footage, is it me or the most boring thing ever......

Here is a real project with the 250:

The Challenge on Vimeo

You made my morning, spat my coffee everywhere laughing at the comment

Just watched the footage, is it me or the most boring thing ever......

Um... impressive zoom range? lol

Apparently someone wrote that if you watch in 720p there are no scanlines, though I'm pretty sure i saw them at all resolutions... but yeah, boring.

Now the challenge video is more of what I like to see.

No 1080P 60P? Was hoping since this feature is in Panny's high to mid level consumer cams (TM900, SD90) that this would be creep into the prosumer end.

Somebody explain: how can the XF305 compete with this camera? It can't possibly be worth 2.5k more... Can it? I think Canon should readjust their price...

You have a good point. The XF300 is only a little more but the SDI ports are the difference. Both have strong codecs with the Panasonic costing more to operate. 1 hour of P2 is about $650 I hour of mpeg-2 50mbps is less than half the price. The Panny will be better in sensitivity (especially in 1080p).

The HPX-250 should be quite a camera. The 160 looks to be a good value as well. I am surprised I have not seen a review yet since these cameras are so close to being on the shelf.

I only had the camera for a bit less than 24 hours, so there were plenty of things I didn't get a chance to check out. But…

Hands on Review of the Panasonic AG-HPX250 on Vimeo