Jump to content


Photo

Moving From the HVX200 to the HPX170?


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 dan brockett

dan brockett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Producer

Posted 26 October 2008 - 04:46 PM

For those of you who are interested, I wrote a little article for my friend, Ken Stone, about my experience and observations in moving from the HVX200 to the HPX170.

Check it out http://www.kenstone....n_brockett.html

All my best,

Dan

Edited by dan brockett, 26 October 2008 - 04:47 PM.

  • 0

#2 Adam Paul

Adam Paul
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 300 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Here and now

Posted 26 October 2008 - 05:13 PM

Does this one still have the low resolution CCDs that the HVX200 has or did they finally put real HD imagers in their lower cost cameras?
  • 0

#3 dan brockett

dan brockett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Producer

Posted 26 October 2008 - 05:49 PM

Does this one still have the low resolution CCDs that the HVX200 has or did they finally put real HD imagers in their lower cost cameras?


From what I have read, Panasonic feels that there would be heat issues in putting 1/2" CCDs into a body the size of the HPX and they do not want to go the CMOS/Rolling shutter route that Sony has chosen...yet. I think that CMOS imagers run cooler, it is inherent in the technology. I have a feeling that as soon as the technology evolves to where CMOS imagers can be implemented without rolling shutter artifacting at a reasonable cost, I think that everything will go with CMOS.

170 features same size CCD imagers 960x540 pixel shifted, but they did improve noise, detail, upped the speed by half a stop and have new DSP processing. If you are going for purely the highest resolution, you would want the EX1, nothing touches it in it's price range and even quite a bit higher for pure resolution. But to me, resolution isn't everything ;-) I shoot weekly with the EX1 (one of my clients has one that I use) as well and have a a decent amount of experience with both of them. Overall, I prefer the image of the HVX200A/HPX170 over the Sony. Definitely not as high resolution but more pleasing in every other way to me.

The HPX170 and the HVX200A share the same identical new CCD imagers.

Dan
  • 0

#4 DS Williams

DS Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 22 January 2009 - 02:08 AM

Thank you dan for that article! I am decided on the HPX
  • 0

#5 DS Williams

DS Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 22 January 2009 - 02:09 AM

It is terrible though that most on this board are so uninformed as to what the 540x960 imagers actually look like. Pixel shifting works people.
  • 0


Glidecam

Abel Cine

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Willys Widgets