I own an original HVX200 (not the A model) and was thinking about selling it to upgrade to the HPX170.
The 200 captured great images but because of the lcd and noisy low light processing, I found it difficult to use in run n gun situations in which my Sony Z1 performed better in. However I do like the file based P2 system better.
So though I have read some good published reviews, I'm curious of any real world opinions of the difference between the HVX200 and HPX170, especially in the LCD and the low light handling.
I'm not expecting the LCD to be color perfect but brighter, sharper and better viewing angle.
Most definitely worth the upgrade. It's still not the greatest camera ever in low light, but it is much improved over the 200. Plus the form factor of the 170 without the tape mechaism is a bit more pleasing than the 200.
Google hvx200 vs hpx170 and you will find plenty to read and some images.
Yes, Steve. The 370 is a great camera. I rented it and was impressed with it.
I just was thinking that selling my 200 would probably pay for half of what the 170 is going for so it wouldn't be a big expense.
Has the 170's LCD improved since the original 200? Is it similar to the 370?
Hi Chris, I've had both and can tell you I personally like the 170 much more. I had the original DVX100, and have sort of followed the lineup as it's evolved, always as one of our 2nd cameras. We bought the 170 last year, and then had to buy the 200a this year because a client wanted mini-DV for an 8 day shoot and our DVX100 had finally died. So the shoot paid for the camera. When the shoot was over, I thought long and hard about which one I would keep, and decided on the 170. We sold the 200a. Here's why for me - I LOVE the SDI out on the 170. We can plug it into any of our HD monitors. I like weight, and the form factor much more. I found the 200a to be a little clunky. I like the menu access of the 170 better. Also, I feel I can now convert most clients who may ask for miniDV to P2, so I am abandoning mini DV. Now, the 170 is not as stout as the 200. The 200 seems to be a bit more rugged. But again, this is a smaller camera for us as an alternative or 2nd camera to one of our broadcast units like the HDX900, Varicam, or the F900. So our goals may be a bit different than yours. Funny, I had a shoot with it last night and started out on a tripod, but quickly went handheld. For me it's such a great handheld camera since it's so light. You can flow up and down and through things really easily. It's fun to work with.
I usually rent when I need a better camera. But I found myself using my 200 and Sony Z1 more frequently the past few years. Especially for travel. Did you notice an improvement with the LCD? What I liked best about my Sony Z1 was the LCD was pretty good for run & gun work.
Because of this, I usually only use the 200 for tripod interviews and green screen. But it was difficult without really using a monitor.
Glad you found the article helpful. I have been shooting with my HPX170 since that article was written two years ago and I have been continually impressed with it. FWIW, I also shoot the RED One on occasion, the HPX300 and the HPX2700 and I own a 5D MKII as well. One of my clients owns three of the EX1s, so when I shoot for them, I shoot the Sony. After all of this experience with various types and levels of HD cameras, I still feel that the HPX170 is an outstanding camera, I truly love mine.
FWIW, in the past two years, I have billed out $28,560.00 in rentals in my production fees with the 170 so it has paid for itself handsomely and made me a lot of profit. I shot a spot at Staples Center yesterday with it with the LA Clippers, which looks beautiful. I can't post grabs from that until it airs but I also shot two PBS Specials with it, (The Legendary Bing Crosby and an upcoming Andy Williams Special), a film last year that premiered at the IMAX Theater in Copenhagen during the COP 15 Climate Summit and lots of docs and corporate pieces as well. P2 is rock solid and DVCPRO HD, while not the most modern codec on the market, still looks superb.
Thanks everyone for your feedback.
Purchased the camera last week and just finished my first project in the field and it performed great. It was much more user friendly in the field. It handled better in lower light then the HVX200. The LCD seemed better and the waveform was great to use. The controls I think are in better positions as well.
I still wish it had better audio control like the Sony. For example, choosing auto levels for each channel and db pad adjustments. But you can't have it all for that price.
I was thinking about selling my HVX200 but I might just keep them both.