i own an ex3 and generally prefer the color and picture quality to what i've seen shooting the hpx500. but i'm wondering if some of the post-types around here might weigh in on whether the 4:2:2 of the 500 is inherently better for chroma key than the ex.
i have seen green screen work shot on both cameras that didn't impress me in the least. i've seen an ex outputting 4:2:2 through an aja box that still resulted in a sloppy key. i've also seen dv shot on a pd150 that resulted in a very clean key. and of course i realize that lighting is the most important element, but my concern here is the camera equipment and making sure i'm providing the compositor with the best material the budget will allow. which, by the way, will almost certainly preclude any sort of external recording.
i have been told by an editor friend that achieving a clean key is a matter of some skill on the part of the compositor, that it isn't merely a matter of flipping a switch. so in the end, is the choice of camera or format all much of a muchness?
more details; venue is the web. a lot of head-to-toe and medium close-ups (mcu's may end up being derived from wides in post in some instances) of a "presenter" introducing and explaining certain interactive elements on the webpage.
The HPX has a native 100 Mbps all i-frame 4:2:2 codec and the EX has a a native 35 Mbps Long-GOP compression 4:2:0 codec. I have used both camera for green screen and I believe the HPX is technically better choice if you are recording just the native codec of each camera.
I personally use the EX3 (because I believe the sensor is better) and a Nano Flash using the 220 Mbps (4:2:2) i-frame compression. Or if higher quality is needed you can even record directly to a computer for uncompressed HD. Either camera at this point will do a great job.
Are you in the market for the HPX-500? I have one I'm willing to let go of.
If you have a computer with a proper I/O you could record directly to a hard drive. I can use my Matrox MXO with either of my Mac's, decktop or laptop and FCP for capturing to the codec of my choice, or even uncompressed.
hmm. i only have fce on my laptop, not fcp. and i'm not about to shell out for fcp right now with the new version on the horizon. if the ki pro mini were available now, i'd just buy that and use the ex3. i know i'd get milage out of it if i get the f3 as well.
i much prefer the ex3 over the '500 but it looks like the most economical way to get high bit rate 4:2:2 for this shoot will be the '500.