hmc150 vs hpx170; which camera is better in lowlight?
 

I understand the hmc150 and the hpx170 share the same chips and imager. I also have read that the 150 does great images in lowlight, but the 170 is not as good in lowlight. That makes no sense to me, so can somebody please clear this up? BTW, I'm looking at the 150, 170, jvc hm700, hpx300 or ex1 to do event work in club settings.

The EX1 is going to be best of this group in low light. The HPX300 is going to be HUGE to move around in a dark club. The HPX170 would be pretty nice too if you want to buy into P2. The HMC is going to be very cost effective. I don't know anything about the JVC.

Thanks Perronne, but how is the hpx170 in lowlight as comapred to the hmc150?

No idea. I'm sure someone here will know. You might want to define what you mean by "better" and low light. Those are some seriously broad terms.

"Better" as far as producing the cleanest possible image, without too much grain/noise and the associated artifacts.

I think it's all to easy to get hung up about what's 'best' in low light. If you were filming test charts then of course the EX1 would produce the cleanest image, as it has far bigger chips that the 1"/3 of the other cameras. Perrone is right - 'best' covers a lot of ground.

If you were filming at a rave where the DJ constantly flooded the dance floor with electronic strobe lighting then the HMC150 with its CCDs would give far nicer images than the CMOS chips of any new Sony. Technically it's inferior, but aesthetically it's better.

tom.

Thanks Tom. Can anybody show footage of the hmc150 and the hpx170 in identical low light conditions?

HPX170 and HMC150 are going to perform identically in low light situations.

Thank you Barry; that is what I was looking for.

I suspect it's as simple as the HMC150 is used more by people more used to cheaper consumer cameras (so the lowlight performance is a step up), whereas the 170 more by people used to pro 2/3" cameras (when the lowlight performance is a step down).

As Barry says, they're identical, so it's a case of 150 owners seeing a half full glass, 170 owners a glass half empty!

David; That is a very interesting and probably accurate way of looking at it. I know I find myself not noticing some of the artifacts/softness that you pros notice. Especially since I currently use a 1/5th chipped camera( jvc hd7)

I've used both cameras, and besides the end codec being higher quality in the 170 everything is the same. You'll have more latitude in post with the HPX-170.

I think this is probably exactly right. Excellent observation.