The New Panasonic HPX-300...

[Paulo Teixeira]

It’s obvious that Panasonic wanted to price the HPX-300 close to Sony’s EX3 and I think 1/3” chips were the only way to achieve that goal. If they used bigger chips, they would have gotten some complaints that it cost to much more than the EX3. You cant please everybody and they took a gamble to keep the price low.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira

It’s obvious that Panasonic wanted to price the HPX-300 close to Sony’s EX3 and I think 1/3” chips were the only way to achieve that goal.

There is also a big power difference between the two - the HPX300 consumes nearly 50% more power than the EX3, in spite of the 1/3" v 1/2" chips. Interesting to wonder what the power consumption of a 1/2" HPX300 would have been? There's a great deal to like about the HPX300, but I keep on finding myself thinking "if only it had 1/2" chips and cheaper than P2 memory......."

[Christian Magnussen]

Originally Posted by David Heath

There is also a big power difference between the two - the HPX300 consumes nearly 50% more power than the EX3, in spite of the 1/3" v 1/2" chips. Interesting to wonder what the power consumption of a 1/2" HPX300 would have been? There's a great deal to like about the HPX300, but I keep on finding myself thinking "if only it had 1/2" chips and cheaper than P2 memory......."

The power consumption might be the more processor intensive avc intra codec? One advantage of using the larger batteries is light, you'll be able to run better onboard lightning without bulky battery packs as are the case with Ex1/3, but batteries will be a investment that cost some $$ to...

And the memory prices some places between p2 and sxs are so low that they wont interfere with what cam to choose.

[Brian Luce]

Originally Posted by Christian Magnussen

One advantage of using the larger batteries is light, you'll be able to run better onboard lightning without bulky battery packs as are the case with Ex1/3, but batteries will be a investment that cost some $$ to....

I don't follow. If the EX3 uses less juice, it will have more available to power lights. It seems like the reverse of what you're saying.

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Elijah Lynn

Wow! Faster than advertised!!

Well I was just about to post back that the 15 MBps on the Ultra II 16 GB does not claim write speed, which I overlooked, and that it probably means read speed and that it really only has to comply with the class 4 rating of 4 MBps write speed which would equal 32 Mbps write speed but your screenshot tells a very different story!

Your screenshot proves that the Sandisk Ultra II is capable of handling full 100 Mbit AVC Intra. Very interesting. I will have to head over to the EX1 forum.

Edit - Although I just noticed it was only a 100 MB block, correct?

The Sandisk Ultra series cards are consistently coming in above their spec. Which is why THEY work and most other brands of SDHC cards don't in the EX1/EX3. And why the Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card for $35 that we've been getting is SUCH a steal. I am writing on $35 media what Sony charges me $799 for on SxS. That kind of math is why we're adopting this workflow so happily. Tapeless for $35/hr. LOVE it.

Yes, the test I did was a 100MB block. I don't have my card with me tonight, or I'd test it for you with a larger block size. Do you know what block size you're interested in? The EX1 writes 16GB per hour (or 4MB/s by my math) and it writes out every 5 seconds, so it should be writing an ~20MB file to the card each time.

-P

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira

It’s obvious that Panasonic wanted to price the HPX-300 close to Sony’s EX3 and I think 1/3” chips were the only way to achieve that goal. If they used bigger chips, they would have gotten some complaints that it cost to much more than the EX3. You cant please everybody and they took a gamble to keep the price low.

I think much mo9re likely they thought it would eat too much into Varicam territory. Me, cynical? Never!
Steve

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

I don't follow. If the EX3 uses less juice, it will have more available to power lights. It seems like the reverse of what you're saying.

I think what Christian is leaving unsaid is that the HPX300 MUST use expensive pro batteries (unlike the EX3), and as well as supplying the 18watts for the camera these have a lot in hand for accessories like lights.

The normal EX3 battery is much smaller and cheaper, ample for the 13.5watts of the camera, but not a lot more. The option does exist of using an adaptor on the EX3, and pro style batteries, when yes, even more power will be available for such as lights than the HPX300 would allow. At least the EX3 gives the choice.

[Christian Magnussen]

Should have explained what I meant in more detail, but David is right. And us who do some work in cold weather the larger batteries should give us more time when the temp. drops well beyond zero. Pro battery system is an investment, the school where i study still use almost 10 year old Anton bauer packs without any problems. Still HPX300 at around 11000 USD with batteries and P2 cards ain't to bad...

I know EX1/3 can be used with pro batteries but EX1/3 with more weight isn't actually what I would like to use for long shoots handheld...the ergonomics is already a small disaster.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Christian Magnussen

EX1/3 with more weight isn't actually what I would like to use for long shoots handheld...the ergonomics is already a small disaster.

I'll be the last to defend the ergonomics of the EX3 for hand-held work, but pro batteries can actually help. Although they increase the weight, they can be used to improve the balance with good mounting - shift the C of G backwards.

[Simon Wyndham]

the school where i study still use almost 10 year old Anton bauer packs without any problems.

Not modern li-ion batteries though!

but pro batteries can actually help. Although they increase the weight, they can be used to improve the balance with good mounting

Totally agreed (from this rig right here). Not perfect by any stretch, but vastly improved. Actually I always find the modern shoulder mount cameras from Sony too front heavy. There isn't enough adjustment in the shoulder pad, sorry, shoulder carving board, for thinner people like myself.

What happened to gel shoulder pads anyway?

[Heath McKnight]

I'm actually very excited about this camera! South Florida has a lot of Panny users, so I'm hoping someone gets it so I can try it out.

Heath

[Brian Rhodes]

ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasoni...P_brochure.pdf

[Alister Chapman]

I just got back from a shoot in Norway. It was always below -20c and on several days it was -30c. My EX BPU-60 batteries still gave me 2 hours of operation, which is around 50% of normal.

[Brian Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Brian Rhodes

ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasoni...P_brochure.pdf

Learn about Panasonic's AG-HPX300

[Steve Phillipps]

One downside I see from looking at the brochure is that the viewfinder is 0.45 inch!!! That's small! Viewfinders are a real sticking point with a lot of HD cameras (in fact they're all pretty crap, just some verge on the unuseable). This was the worst feature I found on the HPX500 I tried, and not too hot on the Sony F355.
Just trying to remember what the EX3 VF is, as that's reasonably OK.
Steve