DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Panasonic P2HD / DVCPRO HD Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasonic-p2hd-dvcpro-hd-camcorders/)
-   -   New Panasonic coming out (replace HPX-170) (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasonic-p2hd-dvcpro-hd-camcorders/282005-new-panasonic-coming-out-replace-hpx-170-a.html)

John Sconiers August 15th, 2009 12:18 PM

New Panasonic coming out (replace HPX-170)
 
I'm finally in a position to purchase an HPX-170. I went to go look at one at a camera store and the salesman mentioned there may be a new replacement for the 170 coming out within the next two months. Has anyone heard of a new camera being released?

Christopher Drews August 15th, 2009 12:25 PM

Not sure how this guy could have a window into the soul of Panasonic. Probably wants you to buy a more expensive camera (like the 300). I can't believe the 170 is only going for 4k w/ rebate.
-C

Barry Green August 15th, 2009 12:27 PM

A replacement for the 170? Haven't heard anything even remotely like that. The 170's only been on the market for less than a year; I think the first ones arrived in September or October 2008.

In comparison, the HVX200 was on the market for about three years before the HPX170 showed up (and, the HVX200A is still available).

So it seems quite unlikely that the HPX170 would be replaced any time soon.

Kevin Railsback August 15th, 2009 02:11 PM

New models will always come out. Don't let that deter you.

I know a guy that wanted to buy a computer back when they pretty much only had IBM AT and XT's. He heard that the OS called "Windows" would be replacing DOS. So he waited. Then they came out with Windows and faster computers. So he waited cause faster ones would come out and they would improve windows. When they came out with faster models there were always going to be faster ones coming so he waited.

This went on for like ten years. He finally bought a Mac a couple years ago but missed out on a decade of computer use and knowledge.

Buy what is here today, you can alway buy newer models down the road.

A 170 in the hand is worth two in the bush.

David Heath August 15th, 2009 02:40 PM

Unless you're desperate for a new camera now, it may be worth waiting until IBC, which is only a few weeks away now. I take the points about never buying anything due to always waiting for something better, but it's not good either to buy something just before it becomes yesterdays news.

Is a replacement likely? I wouldn't rule it out, though I wonder if the salesman may have been thinking about the 300. Fact is, the 300 has redefined Panasonics market - full res 1920x1080 chips, and full raster recording with AVC-Intra 100 - against that 960x540 chips and DVCProHD look very second best. Equally, Panasonics HMC150 offers most of what the 170 does much cheaper - you have to think not just of the basic camera cost, but the full package cost with memory, and a 170 with a decent recording time will cost a lot more than 4k!

By the time you take the cost of P2 cards into account, the 170 costs getting on for what an EX or a JVC HM700 costs, and for that money I'd take either of them any day.

Christian Magnussen August 15th, 2009 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Heath (Post 1226718)
Fact is, the 300 has redefined Panasonics market - full res 1920x1080 chips, and full raster recording with AVC-Intra 100 - against that 960x540 chips and DVCProHD look very second best. Equally, Panasonics HMC150 offers most of what the 170 does much cheaper - you have to think not just of the basic camera cost, but the full package cost with memory, and a 170 with a decent recording time will cost a lot more than 4k!

By the time you take the cost of P2 cards into account, the 170 costs getting on for what an EX or a JVC HM700 costs, and for that money I'd take either of them any day.

Redefined the lower end of the market, yes. But as always it comes with compromises, CMOS and 1/3" sensor.

To a certain extent that hmc150 offer the same as the 170. But the 170 has less compression and are 4:2:2 oppsed to the nightmare of avchd which is 4:2:0. While P2 are way more expensive than SD cards they are more durable, faster and if the 170 se the role of b-roll it's practical for a production to have one type of media for all cameras. The cost of P2 with the new cards shouldn't be an issue for pro use either with the lower card prices.

If there where an upgrade to the Hpx170 i would think of better LCD screen, and overall improvement, it's still one of the best hd cameras in it's size/class.

David Heath August 15th, 2009 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christian Magnussen (Post 1227038)
But as always it comes with compromises, CMOS and 1/3" sensor.

Well - the 171 is 1/3" sensor as well, and my own opinion is that the CMOS is far less of a compromise than 960x540 chips. It allows the camera to have full resolution and better sensitivity, and I also regard the AVC-Intra codec as much less of a compromise than DVCProHD.

If a "181" did get announced at IBC, with CMOS 1920x1080 chips and AVC-Intra, which do you think would sell best - that or the 171?
Quote:

...... it's still one of the best hd cameras in it's size/class.
I really cannot agree. Panasonics 151 or 300, Sonys EX, and JVCs HM700 all offer much better value for money IMO. The 151 may not be quite as good, but is vastly cheaper when you take memory costs into consideration, and the 171 is simply outperformed all round by the EX and HM700 which cost a similar amount. (Again, taking memory costs into consideration.)

I don't deny there may be a niche for the 171, but with most new pro 2/3" Panasonic cameras going quickly down the AVC-Intra and full 1920x1080 route, that b-camera role is going to be increasingly more easily filled by something like the "181" I proposed. (With DVCProHD backwards compatability.) Whether such will be announced at IBC is anyones guess, but if you can wait another couple of weeks, something like that makes a lot of sense.

Barry Green August 17th, 2009 12:20 PM

David, we get it -- you hate the P2 cost, and you hate the chips. You think the HMC150 offers a better value -- and for some, that's true, but you're discounting the reliability of P2, the established workflow, the ability to edit 12 streams of HD directly off the card, the 170's variable frame rates, the standard-def DV and DVCPRO50 recording, the HD-SDI port, the time lapse recording, loop recording, extremely long shutter speeds for light streaks, the five year warranty, the upgradeability to PAL/NTSC switchability... the 170 offers a lot over the 150 and there are lots of reasons that NBC and ABC and Fox chose it over alternatives from Sony and JVC.

Moving on.

Perhaps what the salesman was thinking of was the HMC40? That's due within about a month, it's 1/4" CMOS 1920x1080 chips, it's AVCHD.

Mark Williams August 17th, 2009 03:29 PM

Moving from tape to the HPX170 with P2 card has been the best decision I have made in a while and I am a penny pincher. Love the workflow and speed with Edius 5. Would using the HMC150 with SD card have been cheaper...sure it would....but it is not as versatile. When I fill up the card in the field I offload to a hard drive. I am sure something better will come along but for now it is just fine by me.

Barry Green August 17th, 2009 10:04 PM

For hard drive offloading, it seems like a decent time to point out that Nexto has come out with a sort of mega-P2-store device. The Nexto NVS2500 is a multi-format hard disk offloading device, with a 250gb or 500gb hard disk, or the option of a 128gb solid-state SSD drive. It has ports on it for compactflash, SD/SDHC, and SxS/Expresscard, and it includes an adapter for P2->ExpressCard, so you can directly offload SxS or P2 cards to it. It even has an LCD screen and can play back your footage.

Not inexpensive, I think the 250GB drive version goes for around $1850, the 500GB drive version is around $2k, and the SSD version is around $2500. But it's another option for those wanting a P2-store type of device, especially because it supports multiple card formats.

Jan Crittenden Livingston August 18th, 2009 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Sconiers (Post 1226271)
I'm finally in a position to purchase an HPX-170. I went to go look at one at a camera store and the salesman mentioned there may be a new replacement for the 170 coming out within the next two months. Has anyone heard of a new camera being released?

Hi, I am the product manager for the HPX170 and there is no new 170 on the horizon for a long time to come.

Best,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston August 18th, 2009 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Heath (Post 1226718)
Equally, Panasonics HMC150 offers most of what the 170 does much cheaper - you have to think not just of the basic camera cost, but the full package cost with memory, and a 170 with a decent recording time will cost a lot more than 4k!

The HMC150 is a very nice camera and in the AVCHD class is the best camera out there and its compression engine is up to comparson with the HDV and XDCAM EX algorithm. If however you are aiming a little higher the HPX170 can take you there with a 4:2:2, professional I frame only codec. The cost of memory is a one time shot and if you were to try and archive those it would be expensive, but that isn't how the workflow works. You can actually lease the cards as they do have serial numbers and so if you have leased your camera as well, it could change they way you do business.

Best,

Jan

David Heath August 18th, 2009 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green (Post 1234660)
David, we get it -- you hate the P2 cost, and you hate the chips.

Well, "hate" is an emotive word, and I wouldn't say I could ever feel such a strong emotion towards bits of electronic circuitry!

What I was trying to get over is that camera costs (and value for money) should be calculated thinking of the total system cost (camera plus memory), not just the straightforward camera body cost. That's all. Hence, two/three hours of P2 recording only adds a small fraction to the cost of a high end P2 camera like a 3000, but virtually doubles the basic cost of the 171.

I accept that extra cards may be leased as desired, but I'd expect most owners would like to have a basic amount of their own?

Similarly for the chips. No, I don't "hate" or feel any other deep emotion to them, they are what they are, and give the result they do. But as 1920x1080 display screens become more common, if not commonplace, and as more and more cameras in this price category get 1920x1080 chips, I just feel 960x540 look more and more like yesterdays technology. That even seems underlined when you say:
Quote:

Perhaps what the salesman was thinking of was the HMC40? That's due within about a month, it's 1/4" CMOS 1920x1080 chips, it's AVCHD.
Panasonics HPX301 has 1920x1080 chips, so does the Sony EX, now it's being extended into Panasonics AVC-HD range.

But Jans answer effectively seals the speculation - no new 170 on the horizon. I suspect many will be disappointed by the news, I doubt I'm the only one who would have seen a new product in this price category with full raster chips and AVC-Intra recording as a very good thing. A much better B camera to the higher end P2 cameras.

Daniel Epstein August 18th, 2009 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan Crittenden Livingston (Post 1238045)
Hi, I am the product manager for the HPX170 and there is no new 170 on the horizon for a long time to come.

Best,

Jan

Hey Jan,
I like this response.

Zach Love August 21st, 2009 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Heath (Post 1226718)
Fact is, the 300 has redefined Panasonics market ... you have to think not just of the basic camera cost, but the full package cost with memory

I think the 300 is in a price point galaxy far far away from a 150, 170, 200a, or EX1.

The 300 is at a great price point for less than $8k w/ rebates. But how many people have priced out the entire camera package?

P2 cards, tripod, tripod head, batteries & charger will cost more than a 150, 170, 200a or EX1.

Depending on how many P2 cards (even the E series) & batteries you purchase for a 300, you could easily spend enough money to purchase 2 smaller cameras.

Now if you already have a Betacam & HVX, then you might be able to skip the accessories & then the HPX300 is super cheap for what you get when you don't have to purchase the add-ons.

Zach Love August 21st, 2009 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan Crittenden Livingston (Post 1238045)
Hi, I am the product manager for the HPX170 and there is no new 170 on the horizon for a long time to come.

Best,

Jan

I'm not too sure I can trust this. I'm going to go w/ the baseless claims by some anonymous salesman. Who's with me?

Kevin Railsback August 21st, 2009 04:44 PM

I think I'll go with Jan.

I already have P2 cards, tripod and head that will be more than enough for a 300.

Noah Kadner August 22nd, 2009 01:29 AM

Yeah in general Panasonic is always upfront and candid about new models- they typically show them off at NAB and then deliver when they're ready. So I would never go off the recommendations of some random salesguy when it's contrary to the norm like this.

Noah

Zach Love August 23rd, 2009 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zach Love (Post 1249638)
I'm not too sure I can trust this. I'm going to go w/ the baseless claims by some anonymous salesman. Who's with me?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Railsback (Post 1252278)
I think I'll go with Jan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah Kadner (Post 1253823)
So I would never go off the recommendations of some random salesguy when it's contrary to the norm like this.

Goodness, I didn't realize my internet sarcasm failed so greatly. I guess it is finally time to sign up for that community college course on how to use ASCII emoticons to convey tone.

Robert Lane September 6th, 2009 06:57 PM

The debate about the viability of P2 has been raging since it's inception, as does comparisons between HDV, DVCPRO and now AVCHD.

To wit, the greatest benefit of any P2 camera regardless which model is the 4:2:2 color space compared to 4:2:0 in both HDV and AVCHD. That may not seem like much - until you've hit your head against the proverbial wall of the limiting color gamut/dynamic range of 4:2:0 with easier blown-out highlights and less shadow detail.

If counting pixels on a chip or the cost of the memory cards are your biggest selling points for purchasing an HD cam then you just don't understand what you're missing out on with the 170.

Then, add all the not-so-obvious but superbly beneficial features the 170 has (see Barry's post) not to mention that DVCPRO is both an editing AND delivery codec which takes far less resources in any NLE than even AVCHD... there's just no comparison.

If you're stuck on AVCHD then the Panny chipset and algorithms will win out compared to the competition, but if your'e after ultimate color and image quality the P2 cams are King of the Hill in any compressed codec, period.

John Mitchell October 17th, 2009 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Lane (Post 1320897)
The debate about the viability of P2 has been raging since it's inception, as does comparisons between HDV, DVCPRO and now AVCHD.

To wit, the greatest benefit of any P2 camera regardless which model is the 4:2:2 color space compared to 4:2:0 in both HDV and AVCHD. That may not seem like much - until you've hit your head against the proverbial wall of the limiting color gamut/dynamic range of 4:2:0 with easier blown-out highlights and less shadow detail.

If counting pixels on a chip or the cost of the memory cards are your biggest selling points for purchasing an HD cam then you just don't understand what you're missing out on with the 170.

Then, add all the not-so-obvious but superbly beneficial features the 170 has (see Barry's post) not to mention that DVCPRO is both an editing AND delivery codec which takes far less resources in any NLE than even AVCHD... there's just no comparison.

If you're stuck on AVCHD then the Panny chipset and algorithms will win out compared to the competition, but if your'e after ultimate color and image quality the P2 cams are King of the Hill in any compressed codec, period.

Well not quite - see Convergent Design's Nanoflash and Flash XDR for even better alternatives. May not be 10bit yet but as many point out the value of 10bit colour is limited in a 100Mb intra codec. Of course it will set you back $US2895, but that is cheaper than many P2 accessories.

Logically Panasonic must already realise they'd be selling a lot more cameras in the sub $10,000 market if they abandoned P2 for CF or SDHC. This is a recent development with the advent of the GY-HM700 and to a lesser extent the Sony EX series (where you can use SDHC via a budget adapter). Is anyone arguing that if Pansonic made the same camera with two SDHC slots at the same pricepoint it wouldn't be easier to sell? I don't think so. All Robert is saying is that Panasonic's compression schemes are better - the flash memory format is immaterial.

P2 is a great system, but very proprietary and a much higher entry price than other flash memory products. Like digibeta and a bunch of other broadcast formats it should suit the higher end of the market who don't mind spending extra up front for a tried and proven system. On the other hand lower budget operators will jump at SDHC and CF for a significantly lower entry point and eventually the codec argument will be a moot point, as everyone will have a good one.

TingSern Wong October 17th, 2009 09:11 PM

I think all these arguments about cost of P2 cards is becoming moot. Previously, before the E-P2 cards made its appearance, cost per GB was a legit concern. I don't think it is a concern anymore since the E-P2 cards came into the scene. I have one 8GB, and 3 16GB P2 prior to the E-P2 cards. I just got 2 64GB E-P2 cards for a cheaper price than 2 16GB older P2 cards I paid previously.

Jeff Regan October 17th, 2009 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Heath (Post 1239305)
What I was trying to get over is that camera costs (and value for money) should be calculated thinking of the total system cost (camera plus memory), not just the straightforward camera body cost. That's all. Hence, two/three hours of P2 recording only adds a small fraction to the cost of a high end P2 camera like a 3000, but virtually doubles the basic cost of the 171.

David, two 32Gb P2 E cards will record for two hours and forty minutes at a cost of $1200 at 720/24PN, two 64Gb P2 E cards will record for two hours for $1960 at 1080/24P. This does not "virtually double" the cost of an HPX170 at around $5000 USD before any Panasonic rebate program. Obviously, A series P2 cards would have a higher cost, but other than a news organization, I can't think of too many users who would benefit from A series cards.

A Sony 32Gb SxS card costs around $850 USD, so they aren't exactly cheap, although it yields 140 minutes of record time due to the low bit rate, 4:2:0 color space and Long GOP frame structure of XDCAM EX.

I put an HPX170 into our rental inventory a year ago and it has been very successful, and worked well as a B-camera for our HDX900. We also have an EX1 and it provides amazing images for the money as does an HPX300. Now that we have an HPX2700 P2 Varicam, I would love to see an HPX170 form factor/similar price point camera that offered AVC-Intra capability--be it CCD or CMOS.

The camera rental business is very simple these days--make back the investment in a year and sell by the 2nd year(if there is any resale value left)!

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

David Heath October 18th, 2009 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Regan (Post 1434040)
David, two 32Gb P2 E cards will record for two hours and forty minutes at a cost of $1200 at 720/24PN, two 64Gb P2 E cards will record for two hours for $1960 at 1080/24P. This does not "virtually double" the cost of an HPX170 at around $5000 USD ..........

I must point out that comment you quoted from me was made around two months ago, prices are changing all the time, and I'm not even sure if E-series cards were common at the time. Additionally, 24p is not a Region50 standard, and the comments were referring to 720p/50 and 1080i/25 modes - so 100Mbs bitrate.

I've just checked the figures again on one of the main UK sites, and currently they are selling the HPX171 for £3,440, and 64GB E-series for £640 (all prices excl tax). Hence, for 2 hours of 720p/50 recording, £1280, for 3 hours, £1920. So I'll accept that "virtually double" may now be an out of date figure - it may now be more accurate to say "adds around 50% for 2-3hours of recording time".

But the point remains that 2-3 hours recording media adds a substantial amount to a 171, far less percentage wise to a 151 and similarly to such as a high end P2 camera such as a 3000. (The same site lists that at about £26,000 without lens, so say about 5-10% extra for the 2-3 hours of P2 cards. )

But leaving all that aside, it's the chips and codec that now seem so dated with the 171. The 960x540 chips just can't compete with the 1920x1080 of most of the newer models, and the sub-sampling of DVCPro-HD can't compete with AVC-Intra or any other full raster codec.

So here I fully agree with you, Jeff: "Now that we have an HPX2700 P2 Varicam, I would love to see an HPX170 form factor/similar price point camera that offered AVC-Intra capability......". I'd only add, "and 1920x1080 chips".

Jeff Regan October 24th, 2009 09:37 PM

David,

1080X1920 chips aren't the end all, be all for me. I bought the HPX2700 over the HPX3700 because many clients like 720P and the ability to do 60P. The 2700 does 1-60 fps in one frame increments, the 3700 has no 720 capability or frame rates over 30 fps, is not as light sensitive and has higher power consumption.

AVC-Intra does provide more detail even in 720P, as you know. To me, the 2700 is the true successor to the original Varicam series. There is more to the look of a camera than pixel count.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:10 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network