HPX500 Teaser

[Simon Wyndham]

The 500 sounds like a good camera. Regarding the CCD specs, this is what the trade off is. Panasonic have gone for performance in one area, while Sony have gone for performance in another. At this price point there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Though I am curious as to why there is reference to HVX200 owners wanting this camera. I'm sure they do, but an HVX200 owner is an unlikely 500 owner for the same reason a PD150 owner used to be an unlikely DSR570 owner, and like a DVX100 owner was an unlikely SDX900 owner. They are very different markets.

A person who uses an HVX200 is unlikely to be the sort to be able to afford the 2/3" HD lens, much sturdier tripod and battery sets that a camera like the 500 will require. If they can afford all that then it is likely that they will already be a user of 2/3" cameras in the first place.

[Peter Corbett]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

In all, the 500 was a dream to use and performed better than I expected. In fact, considering the true capabilities of this new camera I'm absolutely amazed that Panny can bring it to market at such an affordable price-point. Based on it's feature-set alone, I'd have expected the 500 to be at least a $25k body and the HPX2000 to be a $40k body, so to think this will land *somewhere* between $12-15k is a steal, from my perspective.

For me, comparing the 500 to the HVX200 is not useful. I know the pictures are going to look better; better CCD block, later-generation electronics, 14-bit AD, better and bigger glass, SDX-proven quality, etc, etc. What I want to see is the camera up against a SDX900 for SD comparison and HDX900/HPX2000 for HD comparison.

At least side-by-siding against those three cameras will give you a benchmark to work to. Whatever happens, at it's price-point and the with the apparent inclusion of 4 x 16gb cards in the deal, it's really going to shake the industry up. For me I'm still leaning towards the tape-based HDX900 or the Grass Valley Infinity (if it ever comes).

Peter

[Jan Crittenden Livingston]

Originally Posted by Peter Corbett

For me I'm still leaning towards the tape-based HDX900 or the Grass Valley Infinity (if it ever comes).
Peter

Hi Peter

These cameras are at the minimum $10,000 more just for the camera head. These should be better than a $14,000 camera. Since Robert only had the camera for a little while and he couldn't waltz into any dealer and just compare it to any camera, although I am sure he would have like to, he could really only compare it to the camera he knew the HVX. The reason he couldn't btw was that he was under orders not to.

So those comparisons will happen but in due time. There are only 3 prototypes in the world right now and one is starting to limp a little.

Thanks for the write-up Robert.

Hope that helps,

Jan

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Peter Corbett

For me, comparing the 500 to the HVX200 is not useful...

While the HPX500 will have a great deal of ENG-type shooters very curious and interested - and it should - comparing the 500 to the 200 is most logical because of the board it's been posted in and, because many 200 users have been pondering what the next logical step-up from the 200 would be. The 500 was in fact designed and priced to attract both current and potential HVX200 users as well as the seasoned ENG shooters, so this camera will have a great deal of cross-over that most ENG cams don't enjoy.

I've shot with the SDX quite a bit and while all my testing was done in 720p I did try SD just for kicks for a while; on my Sony broadcast monitor it looked very near if not exactly like SDX output; it looked so good in fact that I've already decided to shoot a DVD-only project later this year on the HPX500 in 16:9-DV50 mode speficially to match other SDX900 footage already shot. That should be a good benchmark for an SDX comparison.

Keep in mind the detailed comparo you're wanting can't be done until the camera is formally released to the public and someone like myself can actually *own* one and take the time to do the very side-by-side, same-scene tests you're referring to, just as the boys from the "Texas Shootout" did with the handhelds last year. However, unlike the previous two years I personally won't be spending any time doing those tests myself as I'll be busy shooting new projects with the 500.

And ultimately Peter, if the free-flowing information on forums such as this don't fit your needs, then you should do what myself and others have done and use the resources available to you in the form of your local dealers, manufacturer sales reps and rental houses and spend the time doing the research and testing yourself, rather than post a complaint that what's been given as a free resource isn't what you wanted to see.

[Peter Corbett]

Hi Jan and Robert,

Sorry, I wasn't trying to sound too smarty-pants. There's a thread on the Freelancer's Forum which is heavily Panasonic-centric and the talk is about comparing the HDX900 to the Varicam. My argument is that for the majority of uses, 99% of people couldn't tell the difference between those two cameras. In fact, the HDX900 might even be better than the Varicam in regards to it's newer electronics, 14bit head, etc.

My suspicion here with the HPX500 is that is WON'T look appreciably worse than these higher-end cameras and subjectively will compare very favourably with the 2000/900/27; especially when ending up as a DVD on a client's desk.

The HVX200 is further removed from the 500 than those other cameras (price put aside), but I understand and appreciate why many HVX200 owners will want to step up to the new 500. Based on Robert's and other other impressions of the camera I read, it will be a sensational seller at that price-point. With a KATA glove on the camera and a great piece of glass on the front and a Sachtler tripod, it will look the part and will most clients will not even CARE what's under the hood. Not in most of the corporate, indie and non-high end market. Scary stuff but exciting.

Peter

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

Though I am curious as to why there is reference to HVX200 owners wanting this camera. I'm sure they do, but an HVX200 owner is an unlikely 500 owner for the same reason a PD150 owner used to be an unlikely DSR570 owner, and like a DVX100 owner was an unlikely SDX900 owner. They are very different markets.

A person who uses an HVX200 is unlikely to be the sort to be able to afford the 2/3" HD lens, much sturdier tripod and battery sets that a camera like the 500 will require. If they can afford all that then it is likely that they will already be a user of 2/3" cameras in the first place.

I think you are right about that, but I do think that the 500 will seem as the most logical choice for those wanting to make a financial jump to a 2/3" camera. Personally, I'm considering it now that the need for a deck has been eliminated by the use of P2.

But I have to consider how the money will be best spent -
one 500 + lens OR 3 HVX200's

Will the image be worth the trade off of having three HVX200's that you can do multicam shoot's with? And will the 500 be worth giving up the extremely WONDERFUL portability factor of the HVX200. I had an XL2 before the HVX and I can tell you that in my own personal opinion, the HVX is sooooo much easier to handle and carry around, and that makes a big difference in the amount of shooting that can be done. I would also imagine that like the tripod and battery that you mentioned above, other accessories and gear would be more expensive as well. Such as mounting the 500 on a car or using it with a crane or jib.

At the moment, I'm just going to be waiting to see what happens when it's released and see what footage comparisons between the 200 and 500 look like. With all that said, it's great to live in a time with so many good options.

[Simon Wyndham]

but I do think that the 500 will seem as the most logical choice for those wanting to make a financial jump to a 2/3" camera.

Oh, certainly if they have made a decision to move up to a new level of work then yes, it would seem like a logical choice because they can use the same P2 cards, plus have the extra 4 that the 500 comes with.

I had an XL2 before the HVX and I can tell you that in my own personal opinion, the HVX is sooooo much easier to handle and carry around, and that makes a big difference in the amount of shooting that can be done.

Yes, smaller cameras can make shooting easier in some cases. Although in run and gun situations I actually find 2/3" cameras to be better because they cope with the varying conditions better. Quite often although the weight of the big cameras can be a pain, I would only use a smaller camera these days if I absolutely had to or the 2/3" one wouldn't be practical. But it all depends on the type of shooting you do, and your own personal style.

I would also imagine that like the tripod and battery that you mentioned above, other accessories and gear would be more expensive as well. Such as mounting the 500 on a car or using it with a crane or jib.

Absolutely, definitely. The thing that needs to be realised is that unless you already own a 2/3" camera, purchasing a new one of these babies is much more than just purchasing a camera body. To get the best out of them you can't really go with cheap and cheerful equipment as much. Tripods and lenses especially. Insuring it is paramount too. This obviously goes for any equipment, but the insurance hike might be quite steep.

I'm not saying any of this to put people off. Far from it. If your shooting can benefit from a larger camera and you can afford it, then go for it. Just remember that there is more to consider than just the camera body though.

[Jasenn Robertson]

Will the Firestore FS-100 work with the HPX500? I'm excited about the camera and am looking for long record-time solutions until the 32GB cards get here.

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Jasenn Robertson

Will the Firestore FS-100 work with the HPX500? I'm excited about the camera and am looking for long record-time solutions until the 32GB cards get here.

In theory it should since it's shooting the same codec/formats the HVX does however it's possible a firmware upgrade may be required for proper communication. Wait for NAB and more details when the camera is formally released.

[Paul Toth]

Originally Posted by Peter Corbett

... with the apparent inclusion of 4 x 16gb cards in the deal, it's really going to shake the industry up.

So if I am reading this right, the 500 comes with a viewfinder, 4 x 16gb Cards... all for $14k USD? So just add lens and off to the races...

This sounds too good to be true...............!

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Paul Toth

So if I am reading this right, the 500 comes with a viewfinder, 4 x 16gb Cards... all for $14k USD? So just add lens and off to the races...

This sounds too good to be true...............!

No, that's the approximate body-only pricing. Wait 'til NAB and exact pricing for everything will be made public. The word is, Jan might be putting camera body/cards/viewfinder/lens together into a package offering, again exact details and pricing to be announced at NAB.

[Mike Schrengohst]

Here is a link to packages

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp...0&displayTab=O

[Peter Corbett]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

No, that's the approximate body-only pricing. Wait 'til NAB and exact pricing for everything will be made public. The word is, Jan might be putting camera body/cards/viewfinder/lens together into a package offering, again exact details and pricing to be announced at NAB.

Jan told me over on the DVX forum that the base model ships with a 1.5" viewfinder as standard, not just a body-only.

Peter

[Jeremey Shelton]

The package pricing is already available on the Panny website. The $14k is for body and viewfinder. There are different lens configurations as well. But as usual, the prices are MSRP so contact your dealer for "street prices".

[Robert Lane]

So there you go; the information that was originally going to be released at NAB Jan decided to release early! No more guessing.