Considering changing from P2 to a 750

[David Cleverly]

Hi all,

In an attempt to do some fine-tuning and cost-cutting, I have been thinking of selling my trusty Panasonic P2 camera (500/502) and downsizing to one of the 750's.

I love the P2. Pictures are awesome and for the last three years it has been an incredible camera.

However the 750 has attracted my attention because of the smaller size and the ability to record on cheaper SD cards with files immediately recognisable by Final Cut pro, which I use. Also, I can simply hand over the SD cards to clients if I need to, which I simply can't afford to do with P2. Cheaper cards also = more affordable to do long format shoots such as concerts.

However, I have been reading with some dread (and disappointment) the problems a few of you are experiencing with the 700/750. Viewfinder issues/quality, lost files from SD cards and average low light performance. All of this dampens my enthusiasm somewhat.

My main work with the cam would be ENG, concerts and corporate videos.

Any comments re my concerns?

Cheers,

David

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

Hi David.
I used to own an HM790. It was a fantastic camera. I never had problems with lost files. Just use reliable SDHC cards and you should be fine. Cheap media is one of it`s strenghts.

The camera`s ergonomics was fantastic. Solid and lightweight. And mega sized LCD. Big plus.

What did disappoint me about the camera though, was the low light capability and the Canon 14xlens. It is nice and wide, good zoom range but does suffer from CA. And in low light situations you would either have to use lights or gain. After comparing both the image and low light capability I found the EX1R suited me better.

The JVC is not a bad camera. If I were to use it outside only it would`nt hesitate, but since I work with documentaries in all sorts of situations I opted for the EX1R instead.

But do I miss the JVC? Sometimes I do, yes. Other times no. Different tools for different jobs I guess.

[David Heath]

Have you thought about the Sony 1/2" range? Technically, the recording format and media have the same advantages that you cite as the reason to change, but in other respects the front end of the camera is probably superior to th JVC - largely down to 1/2" v 1/3".

That said, the JVC has superior ergonomics to the EX1 without doubt, which may be what attracted you to it comig from an HPX500? If so, it's worth considering the big brothers to the EX1 - the EX3, and the PMW320. They are more expensive, but better ergonomically, and even the PMW320 is not *that* much more than the EX1 - and it's a true shouldermount camera.

It also gives the option of SDHC cards OR SxS. A feature which I consider important is that it also allows in-camera dubbing of clips from card-card fairly quickly. Hence possible to shoot on SxS, dub to SDHC in camera to give to producer - but still retain a copy for yourself for security.

[David Cleverly]

Thanks guys.

A few years ago I hated the look of the HD tape-based shoulder mount JVC's. I thought they looked like toys. A bit older and wiser now and used to lugging a heavy P2 cam around and the fact that they shoot on affordable SD cards and they are looking MUCH more attractive.

I really like the ergonomics of the JVC. The on-the-shoulder style still turns me on for my news stuff. The SD card format also excites me (especially for news) because it goes straight in the side of my Macbook Pro for editing in FCP. Lovely.

I just don't want to go from a camera that I know with nice pics to one that has crappy pics.

I think I better get my hands on one to give it a try before I commit. I remember the P2 being poo-pooed a bit before I bought it but once I got my hands on it, I loved it, working around its downfalls to my advantage.

I just want a simple, robust camera that is cheap, easy to use and gives pictures with enough quality for news interviews/pickups, low-budget corporates and dance concerts. Higher budget stuff I will be using a DSLR anyway.

Oh...what about the viewfinder? The advertising says it's pretty good but end users are complaining about it but don't really explain why. Is it that bad? I loathe bad viewfinders!!

[Mike Kujbida]

I went from a 1/2" chip camera (JVC DV500) to the 750 and, as much as I love the lighter weight and convenience of SD cards, I do miss the low light capability I had with the old camera.
In good lighting the 750 is great but if you're in less than ideal conditions, the 1/3" chips do show what they can't do :(

p.s. I've never had any problems with either viewfinder. I had been warned about how critical focus was with HD cameras but I haven't had any problems. The Focus Assist feature is great!!

[David Cleverly]

I have been looking at some of the vision examples of the 750mon VImeo and YouTube and I have got to say I am pretty unimpressed.

What's with the yellow casting to the colours especially in daylight? The CA is very noticeable too. Not sure if I have been spoiled by the Panasonic, but I have to say I reckon the pics look pretty darned ordinary.

Can see I am going to have to get my hands on one to give it a test.

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

David.

I am not sure you are gaining much in terms of picture quality. But you are getting a more lightweight camera and cheaper media. And it does sit comfortably on th eshoulder. In terms of image quality I found that it was a completely different camera giving much better images when shooting in 720p50 than 1080.

Right now I believe that the JVC 750 offers the best compromise between cost and quality. It is always possible to change to a different lens, but I found that it was too costly for me.

[Mike Kujbida]

Originally Posted by David Cleverly

Can see I am going to have to get my hands on one to give it a test.

That's probably the best idea so that you can see for yourself.

FYI, St. Clair College - Centre for Applied Health Sciences is a series of videos that were shot with no additional lighting and no color correction of any kind. All I did was do a white balance for each scene. I did have a rented wide angle lens for this shoot.
For examples of videos that were lit, take a look at any of the ones at St. Clair College - Alumni Association - Alumni of Distinction
These were all shot with the stock lens.
In all cases, I shot at 1440x1080i and rendered and uploaded them to YouTube using the 1280x720p preset found in Sony Vegas.

[George Kilroy]

I chose the JVC over the EX1 mainly for the ease of use as it just felt right on my shoulder and the ergonomic layout works well, everything is easy to get to, and the fantastic LCD screen thought the smaller EVF is not a patch on it's big brother but still useful . From that point of view it's been a great success I'm extremely disappointed with the low light performance, without a lot of additional light it's a very gloomy looking image. Up to +9db of gain helps a lot but of course that is with a cost of a grainy image which I can save with NeatVideo, but over +9db in my view the images are useless.

[David Cleverly]

I am not changing cameras to get a better picture. I am simply changing to get a lighter, easier workflow workhorse. As long as the pics aren't CONSIDERABLY worse, I could handle the shortcomings because of the workflow benefits.

The P2 is great although not perfect. I have to say I am pretty unimpressed with it's hd quality at times and its sd dv quality is woeful. But maybe that's just me being used to it after 3 years.

I just want a camera that is easy to use, light and fits into my Mac workflow well.. I love the thought of the cheap cost of the camera and the cheap cost of the media...great for shooting long dance concerts!

This current economic climate has shown that I just cannot justify full sized xdcam which all the networks are using. Sure, I could hand them a disc at the end of a shoot, but with sometimes weeks between jobs, the investment would not be worth it for me and ingesting the media is a pain when you can't afford a player.

The JVC looks perfect...I just need to get my hands on one to try it out and see those raw pictures first hand!!

[Mark Williams]

Why not downsize to the Panasonic HPX250 and keep your P2 workflow. Its about 2 lbs lighter than the JVC. Also, P2 cards have come way down in price. I actually buy mine used for $175 per 16GB. Oops... I just saw that Final Cut will not natively recognize .mxf files. No wonder you want to change. I edit with Edius so no problem with .mxf.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by David Cleverly

The P2 is great although not perfect. I have to say I am pretty unimpressed with it's hd quality at times and its sd dv quality is woeful. But maybe that's just me being used to it after 3 years.

I think it's worth saying that is probably due to the camera front end - not P2, which is just a recording medium. The HPX500 was 2/3" chips, but 960x540 - pixel shifting brought the res up to about 1150x650, which was OK when 720 was the norm, but doesn't stand up so well up against true 1080 cameras (1920x1080).

I wouldn't recommend the HPX250 - there's nothing wrong with it, but unless you have a definite need to have P2 (say for compatability) there's better in that class for the money. In particular, the lens is not a true manual, it's manual modes are via servos so no end stops on focus or iris. Maybe not the end of the world, but nowhere near as good (especially coming from a shouldermount like the HPX500) as the lenses that are found on the Canon XF305 or the EX cameras from that point of view.

Note that cameras like the EX1, EX3, PMW320 are very compatible with the Sony disc cameras you refer to - it's just that they record to solid state rather than optical disc. Use SD cards and you can treat them like a disc and hand over at the end of a shoot (they're probably similar in price now?) Just make sure the guy in the edit suite has something to read your card with........ :-)

[Mark Williams]

David Heath, we have talked before here so I know you are not keen on the tech specs of some Panasonic cameras especially on the low end. I can understand your prior comments on other threads about the HPX170 and HMC150 using pixel shifting to uprez to get to 1920x1080 but the HPX250 is native. Also it has a variety of codecs it can use all the way up to AVC-Intra 100 which is considered to be really good. Since the OP mentioned weight and cost-cutting the HPX250 seems to be a reasonable choice since he is already invested in P2 (although Final Cut does not have a clean workflow with .mxf files and I guess he wants to remedy that).

HPX250 $5,499 and 5.5 lbs.
XF305 $6995 and 5.8 lbs.
EX1-r $5899 and 5.2 lbs.
EX3 $7820 and 7.6 lbs.
JVC HM750 $6395 and 7.5 lbs.

Now I agree that the servos used on the Panasonic lens are not ideal as compared to a true manual lens and this may be a deal breaker for the OP. Also, if he wants a shoulder cam then the HPX250 is probably not the right choice.

[Svein Rune Skilnand]

David.
If you are looking for a solid workhorse with a more efficient workflow I don`t think the JVC will disappoint you at all. Just be aware of the low light performance. It may hane been improved in the 750 vs the 790. I don`t know.

The viewfinder is not bad, but I have used the Sony EX3 and in my opinion that is the best viewfinder I have ever used.

Maybe an Alphatron viewfinder could be an option. I haven`t seen one myself, but if were to change back to a JVC that is the kind of viewfinder I would be looking at if I were to replace it.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Mark Williams

David Heath, ....... I can understand your prior comments on other threads about the HPX170 and HMC150 using pixel shifting to uprez to get to 1920x1080 but the HPX250 is native. ........

Yes, fully agreed, I don't think you may have read my previous post properly. The comments about resolution and pixel shifting SOLELY applied to the HPX500 that David was talking about, and I thought I'd made that clear: "The HPX500 was 2/3" chips, but 960x540 - pixel shifting brought the res up to about 1150x650, ...."

The remark was intended in answer to Davids saying "The P2 is great although not perfect. I have to say I am pretty unimpressed with it's hd quality ....." It was intended to point out that what he didn't like (about his HPX500) was most likely caused by the front end - nothing to do with P2 itself.

Now I agree that the servos used on the Panasonic lens are not ideal as compared to a true manual lens and this may be a deal breaker for the OP. Also, if he wants a shoulder cam then the HPX250 is probably not the right choice.

And that was exactly what I said about the HPX250. I started off by saying "there's nothing wrong with it.... , but went on to refer to what (to me) is it's biggest negative - the non-manual lens - and you yourself seem to agree by saying "the servos used on the Panasonic lens are not ideal as compared ......"

As far as the prices you list, then I don't believe they include any media? As I've said before, you have to consider total cost - camera plus media for the recording time you need. Because of both bitrate and costGB of P2, that will inevitably increase the cost of the HPX250 proportionately more than the others - probably put it between the EX1R and the EX3?

In other ergonomic respects, compared to a shoulder mount, the EX1,XF305,HPX250 are all pretty similar - and poor compared to the JVC or EX3. (And even the EX3 is far from ideal.) The absolute weight is far less important than how it acts on the body - and the first three tend to twist the right wrist.

There is nothing wrong with a servo lens per se, and if I was buying a camera from the NXCAM or AVCCAM ranges it's what I'd expect for the money. But for HPX250/EX/XF305 money I would expect true manual, and the EX cameras and the XF305 give it very well - the HPX250 doesn't.