HMC150 vs FX1
 

I am currently own the sony FX1 and ready to get my 2nd camera.
At this point i am very confused as what camera to get.
Cameras I considered were the Z5, FX1000 and the HMC150.
I am very impress with the HMC150 very good package all together.
What really makes it hard to decide is that the sony is better in low light and since that all of my work is weddings, camera with low light is a must.
Reading here in this forum I understand that the HMC150 is not that far away from the fx1000.
I just wander how is the HMC150 compare to the FX1 as far as low light and image quality and sharpness.

The low light differences will be pretty minimal and the camera's ergonomics will have much more bearing on your workflow. The 150 uses CCDs so is far nicer under the torrent of electronic flash at weddings - as you know from owing the FX1.

But staying with Sony (Z5, FX1000) means you only take one charger, one set of batteries, one Lanc controller. You also get the reach of the 20x zoom but to go tapeless (as the 150 comes as standard) will mean spending a lot more $$ up front.

tom.

Tom is correct of course. I have the Panasonic and 2 FX1000s. If I had my choice I would choose the Z5. You get tapeless workflow, you use the same batteries, you get pro audio, and better low light. The Z5 would be a perfect companion for the FX1.

Or you could consider picking up a used Z1. If you could get a good enough deal that would be a very good choice.

Your second camera should have the dual audio inputs, IMO. The Z5 and the Z1 both have that.

If your budget allows, I would definitely go with the Z5. It comes with the recording unit and is a very nice camera.

One issue with the 150 is you'd be mixing types of footage and that would not be fun. I got my Panasonic only because I got a real good deal. I'd stick with Sony if at all possible, just as Tom has already said.

Now that's a very good suggestion Jeff's made. If you get a secondhand Z1 Dror you'll be up and running with it in an hour or two, having already got an FX1. You'll just love the focus assist (note Panasonic's 'focus assist' isn't the same thing at all), the fine tune on the white balance, the zoom read-out in the v'finders and the XLRs.

You'll stay with CCDs, have that excellent top screen that's visible in broad daylight and have cameras that will match on the timeline. You'll also have LP, SP, DVCAM and HDV at your disposal.

tom.

Regarding the HMC150, I like it just fine, but I'm stuck with learning a whole new system now.

It didn't seem like that big of a deal in the heat of getting a good deal on the camera, but the reality of dealing with AVCHD and having to learn "alien" camera controls has really sunk in now that I have the camera in my hot little hands.

Another thing that both Tom and I neglected to mention is that the footage from the Z1 will match your FX1 perfectly.

The Z5 wouldn't match as perfectly but would be much easier to match up than the Panasonic.

Hey Jeff, I didn't forget to mention it :)

ooops...missed that Tom!

Having two different camera systems is a total PITA. I didn't think it would be an issue between the HMC-150 and the XH-A1, it was. Those two cameras controls are almost exactly opposite right down to one battery charger being finished with the light on and one finished with the light off.

Im sure the Sony and Panasonic controls are very different too.

Having identical cameras/accessories is such a relief.

well, I think you guys helped me to nerrow it down to ether fx1000 or z5.
I will eventually sell the fx1 and get a 2nd z5/fx100 dipends what I get first.

So, out of curiosity, has anyone here shot with the HMC150 and the FX1/Z5? I imagine the HMC150 is somewhat better in low light than the FX1/Z5. Am I correct?

Dror, there is a Z7 for sale in the classifieds section for $4500 in case you're interested. Great camera from what I hear.

We had multiple FX1s and sold them for multiple 150s. My biggest raves: 150 low light smokes the FX1 like a thug before a firing squad. Dramatically better. Workflow as well. My only 150 complaint is the zoom ring has no resistance like the fx1. I used to be able to do insanely smooth manual zooms. Oh...one other complaint is that the 150 autofocus is not as quick as the FX1. In every other way, the 150 spanks the FX1. You'll find the FX1 to be heavy after trying the 150.

My opinion: Sell the FX1 and buy two 150s. If you're going to learn a new camera, have both of your cams the same, so you don't have to stay up on two cams. I need to be able to unconsciously find things quickly. My cam is an instrument, and the only instrument I want to master right now.

Dana, could you say absolutely that the HMC150 has a better quality\sharper picture then the fx1

Dror:

The FX-1 was introduced in February of 2004. That thing is ancient.

The HMC-150 is far advanced in every way from the FX-1.

Jeff Harper, is the HMC-150 or the FX-1000 better for low light?

Dramatically better than the FX1. We did a lot of research, as we LOVED our FX1s. Yet we had no idea how much better it could be. I feel Sony is a better company, but Sony didn't put the 150 on the market -- and a three year warranty is unbelievable.

Whatever you do, encourage you to go tapeless. It's worth re-learning some things.

The general opinion is that FX1000 is better in low light, but the Panasonic looks relatively good with increased gain.

It is pretty close, from what I can see so far.

With the time you save by going cardless, you can buy a lot of cool stuff. ;o) Keep in mid that cardless is way, way more durable, so your cam will last a lot longer with less liabilty with no moving parts. That's why Panny offers the 3-yr warranty.

Any side by side footage of the fx1000 vs HMC150?

I did a lot of research before purchasing my HMC. I didn't have another prosumer camera to match to in the timeline, so my main reasons were the tapeless workflow, good low light sensitivity, and the wide angle lens. Some people may need a 20x zoom, but for weddings I don't, and that wide angle keeps me from having to spend hundreds on a quality wide angle converter, as well as the extra weight that would be hanging on the front.

These are both excellent camera's, and I think having similar cameras in the workflow would probably be the deciding factor if I were buying now. But I can't say enough about the tapeless workflow and the wide angle lens.

What about archaiving?
istruth that after transfering the file to the computer the file size is double then on the card?

Yes, they are huge...but:

You pop the card in the reader. Copy the compressed files (smaller than HDV). Back up the compressed files. Start your job. Transcode the files - granted, they will be huge. Do the job. Render. Burn. Delete the huge files. Keep the compressed.

In the end, digitally speaking you will take up less space. If you have the compressed files on two drives, it *may* take up more space, but not by much. (Maybe a numbers guy can elaborate.)

Hi Dror,

When choosing between the FX1000 and HMC150, the HMC has XLR inputs, which are a big deal for me. Another advantage of the HMC150 over both the FX1000 and Z5 is CCDs. The FX1000/Z5 use CMOS, and if you shoot with a lot of photography flashes, the rolling shutter look of CMOS is nasty...which is up to personal opinion. You know mine, it's up to you to decide if you like or don't like the look of rolling shutter.

The HMC150 does not have a 20x zoom lens, but the HMC150 lens is wider than the FX1000. When doing a recent workshop, I was suprised how much more I could get in a shot with the HMC150 over the FX1000.

The HMC150 is also lighter than the FX1000, and on the wedding day, I shoot almost everything handheld except the ceremony. If you do Glidecam work, the lighter weight of the HMC150 really makes a big difference.

Being a "Sony" man for many years, I had always heard about the "Panny Mojo", but had never experienced it until I got my hands on the HMC150. I'm now a believer.

I have side by side footage of the Z5 and HMC150. The visuals from the Z5 and FX1000 should be very close, if not identical. This clip includes low light shooting as well as examples of how CCD and CMOS handle flash photography.
Tips & Tricks

Mark, how would you compare the XH-A1 to the HMC150? One of the things that I really like about the XH-A1 is the fact that it is easy to control much of it without going into menus.

One thing I need to throw in that is either being overlooked, ignored, or I'm missing something: When recording with the Panasonic the files are broken into 4gb clips, which I'm finding creates a small break in the video.

Initially I've had errors with Cineform, as the audio length isn't matching the video.

I have read of the tribulations of AVCHD and now I'm experiencing it firsthand.

The XH-A1 is like a childs toy and the HMC-150 is a professional recording tool.


However, the movie Crank 2 is/was being shot primarily with the XH-A1/G1. It will be very interesting to see how that turns out (even if the content is absurd). Im sure the with professional lighting, multiple takes and studio quality editing software, it will look great.

Drori, one thing I need to throw in: When recording with the Panasonic the files are broken into 4gb clips, which creates a small break in the video. From what I'm finding there is no way around this.

Initially I've had errors with Cineform, as the audio length isn't matching the video. While Cineform works well for MANY people, I see many who also have plenty of issues with it.

I have read of the tribulations of AVCHD and now I'm experiencing it firsthand. I'm about to try Upshift, but that still leaves the video gap issue.

While these issues might iron themselves our as I play with these files, I must say that AVCHD is a nasty little format. It is nice to be able to drag and drop from the card, but that is where the advantage of AVCHD seems to end, as best as I can see it.

After an evening of playing with these files, I have cancelled my plans to use the camera this weekend. I'm using my trusty HV30 for the wireless audio.

Unfortuntely I do not have time right now to deal with AVCHD until I find a software solution for converting the files into standard definition .avi widescreen files that are not umpteen times larger than the original files.

It appears that you are having some initial frustrations, but the problems you have been describing have been worked out (although I've never heard of that problem with Cineform before) and you should find less headaches as it starts to come together for you.

I see that Mark posted the .mts clip join tool in the other thread. This was actually dealt with fairly early on by manually copying together the clips seamlessly from the command prompt, so most have never considered this a problem.

1. Press WIN+R
2. Type cmd and press Enter
3. Navigate to the folder where the files are located ....
4. Type copy 00000.mts /b + 00001.mts /b + 00002.mts /b output.mts
5. Press Enter
6. Wait until it is done. (It takes several minutes to complete.)

Anyway, this is not the fault of AVCHD, its the FAT-32 file system on the SDHC cards.
So far, I've never actually had to do it for a video, only to make sure that it worked in case I ever needed to.

AVCHD is a still tad ungainly to work with compared to HDV, but that is changing rapidly as software gets better at handling it natively and computers get more powerful. I can edit natively on my Quad Core desktop, but for my laptop I need to either convert to Cineform (no problems so far) or use proxy files. Either way, I wouldn't trade the tapeless workflow to go back to HDV.

Contact Cineform, they are very responsive.

Actually I downloaded the program Mark linked to and it worked like a champ.

I'm not gonna lie, I am already not happy with the AVCHD thing. I should have know better than to start in on something new in the middle of wedding season. Cineform has never been something I wanted to use, my workflow cannot include triple or even double-sized files. Well it could, but 10TB of drives is enough for me to keep track of.

Transcoding, from what the Panny help file says, produces separate video and audio files. My reaction to that was "give me a break". And for the transcoder to work at all I have to copy the whole file structure from the card...which I find cumbersome.

I feel pretty confident I'm going to let someone else experience the joys of AVCHD while I try out hard disc recorders or something else. This camera will probably be in the classifieds next week.

Part of my problem is my workload. I'm doing two and three weddings a week, most all of them three cams and I'm editing them all myself. On average each wedding takes me about a week to edit. I didn't finish last October's weddings until February of this year, and I really don't need this learning experience right now.

I have liked some of the images I've seen, and have nothing but nice things to say about the camera. But the files are my idea of hell.

I deeply appreciate the support here, great group.

The files you'll have on deck will be massive, but when you're done with the job you can delete them. In the long run it's an easier workflow to me. Either way, if you sell it you will get a good price. My Pastor always said, "If you find yourself in Hell -- don't stay there!"


Can I combine/merge clips on my Mac? I waste a lot of time scrolling to bring in 'the next clip'. I used to deal with just one HDV clip per tape, and miss that feature.

Actually Dana not long after I put up that last post I put the camera up for sale. I'm looking at a Z5 or Z7.

.mts clip join tool - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

There is a Mac version on the page

Hi Ceasar,

I'm sorry I didn't get back with you sooner. We had a corporate shoot in Temecula, and then a wedding yesterday in Laguna Beach. Off to the airport this morning for a wedding back in Tulsa on Sunday.

I owned an XH-A1 for about 6 months, so I am very familiar with it. The only advantages of the XH-A1 is the 20x zoom lens and for those who have to have tape, it does have a tape mechanism.

The HMC150 has a wider lens, so you don't have to add a wide angle attachment. This not only saves weight, but money as well. The HMC150 is lighter than the XH-A1, which makes handheld shooting much easier on long days.

The HMC150 is much better in low light than the XH-A1.

The XH-A1 is very easy to control without going into menus. I never did like the way you had to go into a menu on the XH-A1 to change the XLR input to the on camera mic. If I remember correctly, you also cannot run the on camera mic and an XLR at the same time. With the HMC150 you can run an on camera mic and an XLR at the same time, and it's all done by switches on the camera. No need to go into the menu for such a basic control feature.

I could go on and on, but I have to go to the airport. Let me know if you have any additional questions.

Back in the 1970s I remember buying a wide-angle lens for my Minolts SLR. It was a 28 mm f/2.8 Soligor, and boy, was I impressed by that wide-angle look.

But in a few years the 28 mm was starting to cause yawns, and the 24 and 21 mm lenses were the true wides of the day. As designs improved the 17 mm became the stock super-wide. It had visual Tyson punch and perspective control by the bucket-full.

Along comes Panasonic with their 28 mm equivalent in 2008. I'm not denying that it's a very useful starting point for a 13x zoom, but to say 'you don't have to add a wide-angle attachment' is limiting your picture options hugely. The 17 mm equivalent converter on my Z1 (a single element, so not adding much to the bulk and weight) gives me the clout no 28 mm lens can ever have.

tom.

I have shot with the XH-A1 and HMC-150 side by side in a small/tight room and the HMC-150 lens makes a huge difference even though numerically it is only a little wider. You can get close/wide shot with the HMC-150 that you would have to move the XH-A1 back at least 20 feet if you have the room.

I don't know how the Z1 and HMC-150 compare.

Hi Tom,

I am a firm believer in wide angle and fisheye lenses. When we were shooting with Sony PD150/170s, we shot with a .7 on the camera for a majority of the time because the stock lens was not very wide. Then when we went to the Z1, they were wider, but not a lot.

The problem with adding a wide angle lens to the Z1 was two fold. Cost and weight. We tried one wide angle, but didn't feel it was a good bang for the buck, plus the extra weight didn't justify the extra viewing field.

So coming from those two cameras, the HMC150s 28mm lens is a dream...nice and wide, without adding the cost and weight of a wide angle adapter.

I did a recent online comparision with the stock lens, .6, and .4. You can view it here.
EventDV-TV

Well I liked your comparison footage but I feel you're far too tolerant of the barrel distortion. It's ok to have it with the 0.4x, but the 0.6x as well? Sorry, but it just yells amateur. You cannot use that for serious architectural interiors or cityscapes, and the 28 mm equivalent of the 150's max wide is just too mild for the dramatic pov shot.

tom.

Hi Tom,

I don't shoot "serious" architectural interiors or cityscapes. My brides don't seem to be bothered by the barrel distortion, infact they pay quite well.

Do you have an HMC150 and if so, what wide angle lens are you using? Thanks.

Mark, really enjoyed the video. I like your teaching style. I have one of your videos and have watched it many times...it is without a doubt my favorite instructional video.

Know what you mean Mark, but when I say serious I mean that the couple will have paid for the beautiful cathedral, and it seems wrong for us the filmmakers to go curving the pillars, the candles, the stained glass windows. As you say, brides are only watching themselves, but there will be those that see your film who will note these things.

I'm not adverse to the odd fisheye scene in the same way as I'm not adverse to the donut rings a mirror lens produces - it's all distortion one way or another. But barrel distortion is a no-no because it barrels everything - and that includes the bride's waist.

No, don't have a 151 (the PAL 150), though have had a good play and like it. My 0.52x wide-adapter is made by Bolex in Switzerland, and bayonets onto my Z1. Best bit? Zero barrel distortion, 17 mm equivalent.

tom.

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for your kind words.