Hpx 600

[Sam Lee]

Absolutely no regrets whatsoever in investing high quality 2/3" HD lenses and zoom controller. Good luck shooting type of events in which servo tracking of a subject is needed. I shot a week long fashion show. No CMOS rolling shutter or any other shortcomings. I couldn't pull it off w/ dSLR. the 16-bit see saw servo zoom with variable speed is indispensable for fashion runways, parade, sports, etc.. where one needs to track the subject and remain almost near perfect framing and focus.

I also have dSLRs only for certain type of production. They're great for dramatic works, but not for heavy live event tracking type of shot. The big problem here is the focal range. With dSLR, you can get 24-70, then 70-200 mm lens only. There's a 24-300, but it's just not good. It's a must to have at least 2 bodies, 2 lens, 2 ops to cover the same as a single 2/3" cam w/ a 22x or 25x lens. dSLR needs multi cam ops to get the job done. 25x is more suitable for wildlife. W/ 2/3" HD and a 22x HD lens, I can get roughly 24mm-620 mm (35mm equivalent) f/1.8 w/ minimal breathing and incredible sharpness and clarity throughout the zoom range.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Agreed, Sam. There are still many uses for the 2/3" camera. I just did a 3-day shoot with 2/3" cams and it looked great. Big sensor cams would have been a pain to use. The F800 is still one of the top rental cams.

There are many times when I wish I had a smaller sensor, servo zoom camera to go along with my FS100. There are needs for both.

[Glen Vandermolen]

A bit dated, but Panasonic scored a good sales day with the HPX600:

News: Denali Media Holdings Makes Alaska-Sized Purchase Of Panasonic AG-HPX600 P2 HD Shoulder-Mounts And AK-HC1500G HD Cameras For Anchorage CBS Affiliate : Panasonic HVX - HPX (P2)

Seventeen is a lot of cameras.

Otherwise, there's frustratingly little info and reviews on this camera. It was announced at Nab 2012, and I've only seen 2 video samples, plus the little I was able to shoot at a demo.

[Gary Nattrass]

Hmmm maybe the sony 400 has killed it dead in the water before it even got to be used.

I certainly would be looking at a 400 rather than a 600 now even though I already have P2.

[Glen Vandermolen]

I also have leftover P2 cards, B4 lens and batteries from my old HPX500. I wouldn't mind putting them to use again, hence my interest in the 600.

But the PMW400 sure looks nice. I wonder what the price will be, with an EVF. I'm betting the 600 is cheaper, price wise. But with one chip, it ought to be.

Both cameras can upgrade to future higher HD formats - AVC/Ultra for the 600, XAVC for the 400.

The question is, which HD format is most requested by clients, P2 or XDCAM? I think XDCAM wins. And if Sony replaces the EX3 and/or PMW320 with a true shoulder-mount "PMW300," in the $8-10,000 range? I can live with 1/2" chips.

Or how about go with a Canon C300? Decisions.....

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

A bit dated, but Panasonic scored a good sales day with the HPX600:

News: Denali Media Holdings Makes Alaska-Sized Purchase Of Panasonic AG-HPX600 P2 HD Shoulder-Mounts And AK-HC1500G HD Cameras For Anchorage CBS Affiliate : Panasonic HVX - HPX (P2)

Seventeen is a lot of cameras.

Whether or not it was really a good sales day depends on what price got agreed. ;-) It's no secret that manufacturers will do deals at knock down prices if the market demands it - better some money and return than nothing, and it can be good PR to show an actual sale.......

What happened here I have no idea, but I second Glens comment about "there's frustratingly little info and reviews on this camera". I read into that that it's simply not selling, people just aren't interested. In which case, if you're buying 17 units, and you pay anything remotely near list price, you need to sack whoever did your negotiations.......... :-)

Reading back over this thread, the HPX600 is most compared with the PMW350 for very good reasons, not least that they're of similar price. {EDIT - Just checked prices and the HPX600 now seems to be about £2,000 MORE than a PMW350 for a like for like package! Don't be misled by the HPX600 base price - it doesn't include a viewfinder.} There's little doubt that 3 chips give the PMW350 a big advantage in the front end, but undeniably the HPX600 had a fully acceptable codec - the 350 is only fully approved for "journalism". As Glen earlier put it:

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

The last shoot I was on specifically mentioned a requirement for a minimum 50mbps, 4:2:2 codec camera. I suspect that's why the PMW 100/150/200s have such a codec, to appeal to a broader market.
I know it seems I am obsessed with a "broadcast" codec, but I believe this will future proof any new camera. Should I purchase a camera soon, I want at least a 50mbps codec

And as Gary points out, the PMW400 means you can now have your cake and eat it. Broadcast codec and superior front end to the HPX600. It's just what everybody writing in this thread last year was hoping for. And XAVC as well.

From what has been said, it's expected the PMW400 will go on sale for not much more than the PMW350, maybe even still undercutting the HPX600. In that case, then either Panasonic are going to have to substantially drop the price of the HPX600, or the only reason left to buy it will be if a user has to fit in with a P2 workflow, end of story.

As for which format is most requested, then in the UK I'd say it's currently XDCAM by a mile - and with cameras from Canon and JVC being codec compatible, that trend is only likely to increase. Think it's similar in Europe, don't know about elsewhere.

[Glen Vandermolen]

I already did a price check on the HPX600 and the PMW350 in the US, comparing similar packages. They were about the same price. In that case, I would have gone for the 600 for the better codec.

But IF the 400 is going to sell at near the same price as the 350, then it will be a really good package. Unless, of course, you're already heavily invested in P2.

As far as Panasonic giving a good price on the seventeen cameras sold, that's possible. I'm sure the BBC got a really good package deal from Sony when they sold them 200 PMW350s, or when JVC sold them over 500 HM650s. That doesn't mean the cameras suck, or the manufacturer is desperate to dump their stock, it's just good business.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

I already did a price check on the HPX600 and the PMW350 in the US, comparing similar packages. They were about the same price. In that case, I would have gone for the 600 for the better codec.

It varies depending what package you're comparing, but using B&H prices for a package of camera, v/f and lens then the HPX600 is $19,500 ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/906083-REG/panasonic_ag_hpx600pjf_ag_hpx600_camcorder_with_ag_cvf15.html )and a PMW350K is $18,400 ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/657503-REG/Sony_PMW_350K_PMW_350K_XDCAM_EX_HD.html ) - the gap is much greater with the UK pricing I've seen. If you have to buy memory for either, then remember it's also a lot cheaper per hour with XDCAM, which swings the relative pricing even further in favour of the PMW350.

I suspect that allowing for exchange rates we're seeing the PMW350 price dropping in anticipation of the PMW400, which adds weight to the expectation that the HPX400 is likely to be very comparable in price with the HPX600.

But IF the 400 is going to sell at near the same price as the 350, then it will be a really good package. Unless, of course, you're already heavily invested in P2.

Maybe - but all solid state memory only has a certain guaranteed life span. If your P2 cards are already 4-5 years old, then a new camera may outlive them, which could be an unwelcome expense a few years further on.

The only real reason why I'd buy a HPX600 would be if a major client insisted on 2/3" and shooting P2, and I couldn't afford a higher end camera.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by David Heath

If you have to buy memory for either, then remember it's also a lot cheaper per hour with XDCAM, which swings the relative pricing even further in favour of the PMW350.
If your P2 cards are already 4-5 years old, then a new camera may outlive them, which could be an unwelcome expense a few years further on.

The only real reason why I'd buy a HPX600 would be if a major client insisted on 2/3" and shooting P2, and I couldn't afford a higher end camera.

The new micro P2 cards are cheaper than SxS cards. You'd need an adapter for the 600, but you'd only need 2. Then, you can buy as many micro P2 cards as you wish. And they are good for the new AVC/Ultra codec. But they do have a 5-yr life span, which I believe is similar to the SxS-1 cards.

P2 cards have a very long lifespan. The originals are good for 100,00 uses or so. I think the cheaper E models are good for 10,000 uses. I cannot imagine ever using one until it stops working.

But there's the final issue: will clients be asking for P2? Panny has their whole professional line geared toward P2. Perhaps the cheaper micro P2 cards will make P2 more popular, who knows?

And I know you like to compare the PMW350 to the HPX600, but in my opinion, they're not in the same league. Simply put, the 600 has a broadcast codec, the 350 does not. News organisations may not care, but other clients do.
Some clients will insist upon a broadcast codec. I've lost a client because my camera wouldn't do AVC/Intra 100. If I'm going to spend upwards of $20,000 on a new camera, I want that higher end codec, without a damn external recorder. I'm sorry, but the 350 won't do it for me, even if it has better imaging sensors. The 400, however, appears to be the game changer.
(Of course, the 600 may also fail broadcast standards because of its single sensor, but I haven't heard anything yet. In that case, neither the 600 or the 350 is an option to me.)

Also, as far as price, the 600 has digital zoom as a standard feature. To get that, the 350 costs $19,740: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/761588-REG/Sony_PMW350KCE_PMW_350K_XDCAM_EX_Camcorder.html
And the 600, with a $200 dongle, can connect through Wifi. The 350 is not Wifi capable. But the 400 will also have this feature.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

And I know you like to compare the PMW350 to the HPX600, but in my opinion, they're not in the same league. Simply put, the 600 has a broadcast codec, the 350 does not. News organisations may not care, but other clients do.

If I'm going to spend upwards of $20,000 on a new camera, I want that higher end codec, without a damn external recorder. I'm sorry, but the 350 won't do it for me, even if it has better imaging sensors. The 400, however, appears to be the game changer.

The PMW350 was the obvious comparison last year, but I'm not really advocating it now - not with the PMW400 round the corner. Yes, as you say, it's a game changer.

At the moment, there's no definitive pricing on the PMW400 - just strong rumours that it will be roughly what the 350 was. Hence my references to the 350 in the last couple of posts were more to get some sort of pricing idea, I think the PMW400 is a far better bet than either the PMW350 or the HPX600, and I'm happy to make that very clear.

Also, as far as price, the 600 has digital zoom as a standard feature. To get that, the 350 costs $19,740: Sony PMW-350K XDCAM EX Camcorder w/16x Zoom & PMW-350KCE B&H

Not sure I understand when you say "digital zoom"? What makes the above link different to what I quoted is that it comes as standard with a CBK CE01 - but that's a digital extender as in "can be used via a cable" - it enables the camera to be used via a 50 pin plug as a studio camera. Nothing to do with the zoom. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/761584-REG/Sony_CBK_CE01_50_Pin_Camera_Interface_and.html

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by David Heath

Not sure I understand when you say "digital zoom"? What makes the above link different to what I quoted is that it comes as standard with a CBK CE01 - but that's a digital extender as in "can be used via a cable" - it enables the camera to be used via a 50 pin plug as a studio camera. Nothing to do with the zoom. Sony CBK-CE01 50-Pin Camera Interface and Digital CBK-CE01 B&H

From B&H:
With the inclusion of the CBK-CE01 50-pin Interface, the PMW-350K gains further functionality. Its Digital Extender function allows a 2x doubling of image size with virtually no loss in image quality.

The XF305 I had also has digital zoom, but honestly, the same thing can be done in post. I don't think it's much of a benefit, but I suppose it has its uses. I never used it.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

From B&H:
With the inclusion of the CBK-CE01 50-pin Interface, the PMW-350K gains further functionality. Its Digital Extender function allows a 2x doubling of image size with virtually no loss in image quality.

The XF305 I had also has digital zoom, but honestly, the same thing can be done in post. I don't think it's much of a benefit, but I suppose it has its uses. I never used it.

Hmmm, point taken!! I have to say I'd never have thought that buying an interface kit to give a 50pin interface capability for studio use would give a digital zoom facility by the way! Especially since a studio is likely to be the last place where you're going to need a digital zoom anyway!

I'm also very sceptical of the " virtually no loss in image quality" claim as well, and that applies to the facility on any camera. Normal advice (even in the consumer world) is "turn any digital zoom off" - as you say, it is something that if it has to be done, is better done in post.

[Sanjin Svajger]

HPX600+VF+AF lens = 16,5k€
PMW350+VF+Lens = 12,3k€
I'm getting my prices from CVP. And the 350 is 4k€ cheaper! No way would I buy an HPX600 with that kind of an price difference.

The PMW350 has 3 chips and it has hyper-gammas, honestly in this day and age I would never ever buy a new camera that hasn't got nice and smooth highlights roll-off. It just bafels me that Pana is still advertising the normal rec709 cine-gammas. IMHO Pana is to protective of theirs higher end models and that's what's killing them.

So the PMW350K is cheaper, it has a nice, proven lens (I have little faith in Panas "AF lens"), it has 3 chips, it has hyper-gammas. I don't care if the HPX600 has internally a better codec because "everything" else is sub par. You can always attach an external recorder to the 350 (AJA ki pro mini really attaches it self nicely to the back of the camera) and get much better results no matter what codec Panasonic brings to the 600 in the future.

HPX600 really surprised me: it's price and it's capabilities.

[Glen Vandermolen]

So go buy the PMW350.
Sheesh, this is a thread about the HPX600. The 350 has its own thread.
And I still prefer the internal codec of the 600.

[Sanjin Svajger]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

So go buy the PMW350.
Sheesh, this is a thread about the HPX600. The 350 has its own thread.
And I still prefer the internal codec of the 600.

Glen I was just contributing to the discussion about HPX600 place in the market, nothing else. Same stuff that I wrote has been written just a few posts above mine, so what did I do wrong?:)
I personally don't really care about one or the other. I'm trying to prove that the HPX600 price point is in my opinion misplaced.