What used lens to buy for HPX500/555? at DVinfo.net

Kaku Ito · May 29th, 2007, 06:56 PM

I got an offer from the local pro video shop on 555 for 1,150,000 (¥ tax included, body only), so I'm looking for an used lens to go with. What would be feasible for, say less than $3,000?

I'm really surprised with the price, I guess Panny wants to start selling without the specially designed lenses.

Robert Lane · May 30th, 2007, 11:27 AM

I've never seen a used 2/3" lens for less than $3k USD, and if I did I definitely would not trust it to be in good condition.

Although it's going to be more money than you're currently looking to spend you're going to be much better off getting one of the CAC lenses (the Canon with the 2x tele seems to be the best of the crop) than trying to find ultra-inexpensive glass. Just keep in mind, even with the best imagers on the planet you're still going to be limited to the lens performance - and you will definitely get what you pay for when it comes to good glass.

Kaku Ito · June 1st, 2007, 08:21 AM

Thanks Robert, as always.

I guess the prices are not much different here and the U.S., but I'm surprised they give so much discounts from the beginning.

I asked the Canon broadcast lens dealer for help, so I'm hoping I can test full HD lens and compare to the inexpensive ones. I'm hoping to be able to afford the top of the inexpensive line (we have to do better in business but started to kicking, especially after successfully helping a film maker with HD editing system).

Say, Robert, what would you think on transfering to 35mm from HPX500 footage comparing to something like XL H1?
How much difference would the larger CCD would make?
And would you think lower rez. on DVCPRO HD (1280 against 1440) very much noticeble on the film viewing?

I will be talking to someone who just did the feature film project with XL H1 and want to be able to tell the difference between them.

HXP500 would be more flexible with being able to do over/under crank.

Also, what is your opinion on HPX500 comparing to RED pocket cam?

Robert Lane · June 1st, 2007, 09:34 AM

There would be a huge difference in doing a film-transfer from any HDV camera than one shooting either DVCPRO. HDV has less color information, 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 of DVCPRO which will make a huge difference. That along with the fact that HDV has motion smearing and less smooth gradients on rounded edges it would not make as clean a transfer as DVCPRO. Even DV50 (SD) would look better than HDV, less resolution but better color and less artifacting.

I can't comment about any RED camera because none have been released yet. Also, RED is shooting a completely different format and even difference aspect-ratio, Super-35, which has an even wider horizontal aspect than any 16:9 chipset camera. Totally different animal.

Kaku Ito · June 1st, 2007, 09:46 AM

Robert,

Some impressions from the editors are the same as what you mentioned, the color wasn't so impressive on HDV route.

The RED camera I was talking about was the pocket one. Not the large one. I guess that is still revealed yet, but wanted to know how Panasonic and Sony is thinking over the RED hype.

I'm thinking HXP500/555 will be really hot for few years.

Dean Harrington · June 3rd, 2007, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaku Ito

I got an offer from the local pro video shop on 555 for 1,150,000 (¥ tax included, body only), so I'm looking for an used lens to go with. What would be feasible for, say less than $3,000?

I'm really surprised with the price, I guess Panny wants to start selling without the specially designed lenses.

What's the name of the pro-shop?

Jan Crittenden Livingston · June 4th, 2007, 06:59 PM

[QUOTE=Kaku Ito;690277]Robert,
but wanted to know how Panasonic (edit) is thinking over the RED hype.
QUOTE]

When they are delivering cameras then it will be time to talk, till then it is speculation. Thanks,

Jan

Steve Rosen · June 4th, 2007, 08:30 PM

You know, all of this "mine is better than yours" stuff is very tiring and non-productive.. Personally I think HDV is pretty amazing.. given all the compression and the long GOP (I've used Canon) it is capable of an amazing picture.. more than most audiences are capable of discerning...

I'm moving to a 500 for other reasons - the prejudices of other parties... I know that I will be happy with this camera too (I liked my DVX several years ago)... But personally I''d rather hear positives about DVCPRO HD than negatives about HDV... because negatives are too easy...

And the RED? I would want one if I could get it... But I can't, and for 99% of what is being produced it would be over-kill anyway... a good picture isn't measured by a ruler...

Dean Harrington · June 5th, 2007, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Rosen

You know, all of this "mine is better than yours" stuff is very tiring and non-productive.. Personally I think HDV is pretty amazing.. given all the compression and the long GOP (I've used Canon) it is capable of an amazing picture.. more than most audiences are capable of discerning...

I'm moving to a 500 for other reasons - the prejudices of other parties... I know that I will be happy with this camera too (I liked my DVX several years ago)... But personally I''d rather hear positives about DVCPRO HD than negatives about HDV... because negatives are too easy...

And the RED? I would want one if I could get it... But I can't, and for 99% of what is being produced it would be over-kill anyway... a good picture isn't measured by a ruler...

I agree completely Steve ~ Red is a serious camera and I too like many on this board lust after it! We'll get a better take on what it can do when it comes out and people start using it. For the moment, the 500 looks a bit more appealing!

Kaku Ito · June 5th, 2007, 06:08 PM

Thanks all,

I'm committing to HPX so, wanted to hear what everyone think about other choices. I've helped a film company with a feature film shot with XL H1 and they were happy, but we seriously wanted to look into using HPX for the next one. The director has done one with DVX and Cinealta, too, so it would be interesting to hear how he will think.

The film we worked on was good with XL H1, not doubt, but I think this director works just like Peter Gabriel, one new main gadget for each album, that results in various flavors by trying to get the best of it at during the shooting.

By the way, Steve, in which part did you think of me saying "mine is better than yours" stuff? I just agreed to Robert saying about the richer color about 4:2:2 and mentioned a fact from the impressions of the editor.

Steve Rosen · June 5th, 2007, 09:07 PM

Kaku: I didn't mean to single your comments out, and I'm sorry if it seemed that way - maybe I'm overly sensitive - I've just come off of a year and a half of selling HDV footage shot with and XL H1 to people who pay more attention to specs than to the picture on the screen... I personally like HDV. Sorry...

The "richer" color of 4.2.2. may be a technical fact, but any format can be effectively used to tell a story if one is aware of the limitations going in, and uses those "facts" to the advantage of the film.. Look at all the movies that were made using Super-8 reversal film - people liked the grainy contrasty look, and now they emulate it in contemporary commercials..

Comparisons are only valuable if they're used to evaluate a "look" for a specific project.. I like the "funky" look of VHS sometimes, for instance...

I expect the picture from any decent camera that costs over $5000 to be good enough for basic story-telling - The knowledge that I want to gain in forums like this one is not what's wrong with another medium, but what's right with this one.. and, in this case, which lens is best for the bucks..

Kaku Ito · June 6th, 2007, 06:35 AM

Steve, no problem, that is kind of what I guessed and I did mention about utilizing each format and camera according to what they do the best somewhere else, so I'm coming from the same thinking as yours.

What I'm impressed with Canon HDV is not there with HVX200, but I want to see how HPX can change that.

Gary McClurg · June 6th, 2007, 07:39 AM

I have a pdf of the converter... problem is I can't remember where I downloaded it from...

Would like to check it out...

I've posted a link... this company no longer has one in stock... the sales person thought it costs about $15k... plus its a static converter so you would not see the spinning glass on some of the smaller 35mm adapters... when using the frame rate modes... didn't think about light loss until I hung up the phone... duh... plus if I remember right... it keeps the same field of view as the 35mm lens that your using...

http://www.smsprod.com/products/lenses/angenieux4.html

I've heard... but have never used the Pro 35 on a shoot but I believe you can also adjust the ground glass for slomo's etc... but its $27k new...

Was thinking about using the new P & S Zeiss primes...

http://www.pstechnik.de/en/optics-lensset.php

The set is suppose to go for around $8.8k...

May 29th, 2007, 06:56 PM	#1
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	What used lens to buy for HPX500/555? I got an offer from the local pro video shop on 555 for 1,150,000 (¥ tax included, body only), so I'm looking for an used lens to go with. What would be feasible for, say less than $3,000? I'm really surprised with the price, I guess Panny wants to start selling without the specially designed lenses.

June 4th, 2007, 06:59 PM	#7
Jan Crittenden Livingston Panasonic Broadcast Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Secaucus, NJ 07094 Posts: 271	[QUOTE=Kaku Ito;690277]Robert, but wanted to know how Panasonic (edit) is thinking over the RED hype. QUOTE] When they are delivering cameras then it will be time to talk, till then it is speculation. Thanks, Jan __________________ Jan Crittenden Livingston Panasonic Solutions Company, Product Manager for 3D and Handheld Cameras

June 6th, 2007, 07:39 AM	#13
Gary McClurg Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Springfield, MO, USA Posts: 389	Angeniexu HD Converter... I have a pdf of the converter... problem is I can't remember where I downloaded it from... Would like to check it out... I've posted a link... this company no longer has one in stock... the sales person thought it costs about $15k... plus its a static converter so you would not see the spinning glass on some of the smaller 35mm adapters... when using the frame rate modes... didn't think about light loss until I hung up the phone... duh... plus if I remember right... it keeps the same field of view as the 35mm lens that your using... http://www.smsprod.com/products/lenses/angenieux4.html I've heard... but have never used the Pro 35 on a shoot but I believe you can also adjust the ground glass for slomo's etc... but its $27k new... Was thinking about using the new P & S Zeiss primes... http://www.pstechnik.de/en/optics-lensset.php The set is suppose to go for around $8.8k...

May 30th, 2007, 11:27 AM	#2
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,825 Images: 15	I've never seen a used 2/3" lens for less than $3k USD, and if I did I definitely would not trust it to be in good condition. Although it's going to be more money than you're currently looking to spend you're going to be much better off getting one of the CAC lenses (the Canon with the 2x tele seems to be the best of the crop) than trying to find ultra-inexpensive glass. Just keep in mind, even with the best imagers on the planet you're still going to be limited to the lens performance - and you will definitely get what you pay for when it comes to good glass.

June 1st, 2007, 08:21 AM	#3
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Thanks Robert, as always. I guess the prices are not much different here and the U.S., but I'm surprised they give so much discounts from the beginning. I asked the Canon broadcast lens dealer for help, so I'm hoping I can test full HD lens and compare to the inexpensive ones. I'm hoping to be able to afford the top of the inexpensive line (we have to do better in business but started to kicking, especially after successfully helping a film maker with HD editing system). Say, Robert, what would you think on transfering to 35mm from HPX500 footage comparing to something like XL H1? How much difference would the larger CCD would make? And would you think lower rez. on DVCPRO HD (1280 against 1440) very much noticeble on the film viewing? I will be talking to someone who just did the feature film project with XL H1 and want to be able to tell the difference between them. HXP500 would be more flexible with being able to do over/under crank. Also, what is your opinion on HPX500 comparing to RED pocket cam?

June 1st, 2007, 09:34 AM	#4
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,825 Images: 15	There would be a huge difference in doing a film-transfer from any HDV camera than one shooting either DVCPRO. HDV has less color information, 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 of DVCPRO which will make a huge difference. That along with the fact that HDV has motion smearing and less smooth gradients on rounded edges it would not make as clean a transfer as DVCPRO. Even DV50 (SD) would look better than HDV, less resolution but better color and less artifacting. I can't comment about any RED camera because none have been released yet. Also, RED is shooting a completely different format and even difference aspect-ratio, Super-35, which has an even wider horizontal aspect than any 16:9 chipset camera. Totally different animal.

June 1st, 2007, 09:46 AM	#5
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Robert, Some impressions from the editors are the same as what you mentioned, the color wasn't so impressive on HDV route. The RED camera I was talking about was the pocket one. Not the large one. I guess that is still revealed yet, but wanted to know how Panasonic and Sony is thinking over the RED hype. I'm thinking HXP500/555 will be really hot for few years.

June 4th, 2007, 08:30 PM	#8
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	You know, all of this "mine is better than yours" stuff is very tiring and non-productive.. Personally I think HDV is pretty amazing.. given all the compression and the long GOP (I've used Canon) it is capable of an amazing picture.. more than most audiences are capable of discerning... I'm moving to a 500 for other reasons - the prejudices of other parties... I know that I will be happy with this camera too (I liked my DVX several years ago)... But personally I''d rather hear positives about DVCPRO HD than negatives about HDV... because negatives are too easy... And the RED? I would want one if I could get it... But I can't, and for 99% of what is being produced it would be over-kill anyway... a good picture isn't measured by a ruler...

June 5th, 2007, 06:08 PM	#10
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Thanks all, I'm committing to HPX so, wanted to hear what everyone think about other choices. I've helped a film company with a feature film shot with XL H1 and they were happy, but we seriously wanted to look into using HPX for the next one. The director has done one with DVX and Cinealta, too, so it would be interesting to hear how he will think. The film we worked on was good with XL H1, not doubt, but I think this director works just like Peter Gabriel, one new main gadget for each album, that results in various flavors by trying to get the best of it at during the shooting. By the way, Steve, in which part did you think of me saying "mine is better than yours" stuff? I just agreed to Robert saying about the richer color about 4:2:2 and mentioned a fact from the impressions of the editor.

June 5th, 2007, 09:07 PM	#11
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	Kaku: I didn't mean to single your comments out, and I'm sorry if it seemed that way - maybe I'm overly sensitive - I've just come off of a year and a half of selling HDV footage shot with and XL H1 to people who pay more attention to specs than to the picture on the screen... I personally like HDV. Sorry... The "richer" color of 4.2.2. may be a technical fact, but any format can be effectively used to tell a story if one is aware of the limitations going in, and uses those "facts" to the advantage of the film.. Look at all the movies that were made using Super-8 reversal film - people liked the grainy contrasty look, and now they emulate it in contemporary commercials.. Comparisons are only valuable if they're used to evaluate a "look" for a specific project.. I like the "funky" look of VHS sometimes, for instance... I expect the picture from any decent camera that costs over $5000 to be good enough for basic story-telling - The knowledge that I want to gain in forums like this one is not what's wrong with another medium, but what's right with this one.. and, in this case, which lens is best for the bucks..

June 6th, 2007, 06:35 AM	#12
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Steve, no problem, that is kind of what I guessed and I did mention about utilizing each format and camera according to what they do the best somewhere else, so I'm coming from the same thinking as yours. What I'm impressed with Canon HDV is not there with HVX200, but I want to see how HPX can change that.