FORUMS: list search recent posts

HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper

COW Forums : Panasonic Cameras

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
John Stephens
HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 22, 2009 at 1:32:15 am

I am looking for a detailed review of the HVX300 and HVX500 to help with our choice between the two. We are ready to retire our D600.


Return to posts index

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 22, 2009 at 11:54:30 am

Hi John,

Don't think that there is such a paper anywhere. They are very different cameras with a huge difference in price. If you are looking for a camera that will give you the same or better lowlight performance as your D600 then I would say you should go with the HPX500.

Any other concerns or needs?

Best,

Jan


Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, HPX500, HPX300, HPX170, HVX200A
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems



Return to posts index

John Stephens
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 22, 2009 at 2:45:32 pm

Our local dealer stocks the 300 but not the 500, so we can’t see side by side.

Our challenge is how our business has evolved in the past 15 years. We compete in two markets. For a long time the D600 was the ticket for entry in a Beta SP town. Top of the line glass and a Macie setup and we were golden. Today we compete against 100B and 200A on lower-end SD projects, so we bought a 100B. Love it. Use it on SD projects all the time where we mix 100B on b-roll and D600 on stand-ups. For higher-end projects we rent a 3000.

Time to lay down on the couch.

We have decided to go all P2, but still see two-level (3 really) camera offering. 100B for single-man lower-end work, Beta SP for those few clients who still demand a tape right out of the camera and a rented 2000 or 3000 for high-end projects. What is missing for us is the workhorse in the middle that the D600 used to fill. (Once the D600 requires over $2K of service it is toast). The tough question …… is that work-horse a 300 or 500 ?

When using 2000 or 3000 we shoot -3. Both are much better better at 0 than D600 at low-light. 100B is +3 in same situation. But there is an obvious better look with 2000. Part of the challenge is that light sensitivity is more important on lower-end work. Usually use Arri 200 Pocket par HMI on high-end projects.

Do you have any information of users who have bought HPX500 and used top quality (ten year old) broadcast glass for SD work ? Is that a valid compromise in a cost driven situation ?


Return to posts index


David Jones
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 22, 2009 at 4:19:04 pm

Hi John-

The BBC has white papers on the hpx500 (not sure if they do on the 300 yet). http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp034.shtml

It's a tough call: the 500 is 2/3" CCD w/four card slots. The 300 is 1/3" CMOS w/two card slots but does AVC-intra 100, is 10-bit full-raster 1920 X 1080, and also has a wireless slot. I think a side-by-side look, is in order :-)

Regards,
Dave J


Return to posts index

John Cummings
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 1:10:43 am

Hey John-

Coming from a fine 2/3" SD camera like the 600, I would definately lean toward the 500 with it's 2/3" imagers. That little extra available control over your depth of field really means alot for professional work, especially if you're working with ENG-style lenses.

As for SD glass, I used a high-end SD wide zoom with my HDCam (full 2.2m 1080 imager) for a couple of years and all I ever got was repeat calls for more. The picture looked fantastic on the air (HGTV and Food Network shows) and everyone was quite happy. However, that SD lens I used was only two years old at the time...not ten.

In the case of the 500, with it's pixel-shifted SD chips, I would bet that your SD lenses would get you by until you can afford to make the jump to proper HD glass. Be sure to get a good HD monitor and test the lenses carefully. Some will do better than others. I know...that's heresy for some here, but the real world sometimes gets messy. Personally, I'd use a dirty coke bottle for a shot if it got me the look I wanted...it's all about the result.

Funny, a lot of "indy filmmakers" seem to gravitate toward the HPX500...not just for the price, but because they think the picture has a slightly softer, more "filmic" look than many other 2/3" HD cams out there. You might really want to rent one and do some tests before you run that credit card....good luck!

J Cummings
Cameralogic/Chicago
cameralogic.tv
HDX-900/HDW-730S/DXC-D50


Return to posts index

John Stephens
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 7:48:15 pm

As I research the HPX500 and HPX300, I notice that the 500 does not offer AVC-Intra or Proxy, even with the add in cards. But the 300 supports AVC Intra natively and Proxy with the add in card. Is this up to date information ?

Since AVC Intra does have some real advantages as does the Proxy, the lack of these features does seem to make the HPX 500 a bit behind the times.


Return to posts index


John Stephens
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 25, 2009 at 1:59:41 am

I have one final question in my quest to compare HPX300 vs. HPX500 for future purchase.

I noticed that the 500 does not offer AVC-Intra or Proxy, even with the add in card the HPX300 takes. But the 300 supports AVC Intra natively and Proxy with the add in card. Is this up to date information ? Would the Proxy feature on a 500 SD card work if you used the added the process card in on of the 500's 4 slots ?

Since AVC Intra does have some real advantages as does the Proxy, the lack of these features does seem to make the HPX 500 a bit behind the times. Future upgrade ?


Return to posts index

john brookes
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Dec 19, 2009 at 4:24:31 am

Jan
So hw is the 500 selling?
JB


Return to posts index

Michael Shugrue
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 22, 2009 at 6:40:20 pm


We have done a side by side by side. 300, 500, and a 3000.

The 300 is a great 2nd camera for the 500. However we were using the 18x4.2 lens not the 17x that comes with it. We also have the ACM-17 to switch between lens if we ever need to. Can you tell the difference yes. Can you tell after the upconversion to 1080i ?
The 300 is a great 2nd or insert camera, We have done a few music events where the 300 is the on stage camera with the 18x and the 500 has the 22x lens. The work flow,timecode,etc work fine. Both have the Vari frame rates.
We tested all three cameras on a 24 Panasonic LCD. We rent the cameras. The 300s go out alot more then the 3000.

300 blacks v 500 blacks = 300 not quiet as strong in the black department. But for 10k, it looks great.


Return to posts index


Steve Eisen
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 1:58:37 am

As an owner of the HPX-500, It will get you very far.

Steve Eisen
Eisen Video Productions
Board of Directors
Chicago Final Cut Pro Users Group


Return to posts index

John Stephens
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 2:06:35 am

I saw your Panasonic trade in post. Do they offer a like deal on any other models ? 2000 ?


Return to posts index

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 2:27:53 am

Hiade in offer is only on the 3700.

Best,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, HPX500, HPX300, HPX170, HVX200A
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems



Return to posts index


John Cummings
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 12:23:12 pm

This is a funny thread. Think about how far we've come in just a few years...

He's considering upgrading from a $50K SD cam to a lower-end $11K HD camera...and either one will pretty much kick the stuffing out of that "old" Betacam.

I mean...how cool is that?

J Cummings
Cameralogic/Chicago
cameralogic.tv
HDX-900/HDW-730S/DXC-D50


Return to posts index

Steve Eisen
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 23, 2009 at 11:29:31 pm

How cool would it be to get a HPX-3700 for $29,950.00!

Steve Eisen
Eisen Video Productions
Board of Directors
Chicago Final Cut Pro Users Group


Return to posts index

Adam Smith
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 24, 2009 at 6:57:29 pm

That would be very cool indeed... I just cant seem to talk the wife into it tho.

- - -
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor


Return to posts index


John Stephens
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Jun 24, 2009 at 7:05:29 pm

I have one final question in my quest to compare HPX300 vs. HPX500.

I noticed that the 500 does not offer AVC-Intra or Proxy, even with the add in card the HPX300 takes. But the 300 supports AVC Intra natively and Proxy with the add in card. Is this up to date information ? Would the Proxy feature on a 500 SD card work if you used the added the process card in on of the 500's 4 slots ?

Since AVC Intra does have some real advantages as does the Proxy, the lack of these features does seem to make the HPX 500 a bit behind the times. Future upgrade ?


Return to posts index

Ned Miller
Re: HVX300 vs. HVX500 white paper
on Aug 27, 2009 at 10:13:28 pm

Hi John,

I'm in the same boat, a former D600 owner. Which model did you decide to buy?

Thanks,

Ned



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]