First impressions: FX1000 vs Panasonic HMC150
 

Just a quick note to offer my first impressions of the HMC150 vs my FX1000s.

I like the HMC150 very much. I MUCH prefer the way the CCDs handle flash over the CMOS.

A shooter shot a couple of hours of footage in 720p for a wedding Saturday, and I like the way it looks.

AVCHD files are no walk in the park, however I presume upshift by VASST will handle that.

I miss that the Panasonic does not shoot in SD, which is how I shoot most of the time with the FX1000 now. (I did know about that prior to purchasing)

Overall, the footage looks very nice, film like.

I use a Juiced Link box for my audio with the FX1000, and I am so over that mess. It throws off the balance of the camera and I hate it. The box works great, but other than that the arrangement is cumbersome and unacceptable.

Of course you can purchase the Z5 for an extra $700, which would be a very good choice, since it offers tapeless also. I have lots more to learn about the Panasonic, and while I like it very much so far, I would, at this point, lean toward the Z5 simply because if offers the best of most worlds (16:9 SD and HD) and it offers a tapeless workflow and pro audio.

If you are looking strictly at image quality, I don't see either one is much better than the other. I have read the posts of us comparing images, etc., and I still believe the differences are too small to care about, but it is honestly too early for me to tell. As you can read below it turns out the settings were changed by an inexperienced operator and I cannot determine how good or poor the Panasonic stacks up.

Thanks Jeff, the question I have is.....is there a noticeable difference in low light?

I know you don't know the answer to that yet, but when you do, please give your input.

I will know in a day or two Tim. I have footage shot from both cams at the same event, but haven't downloaded the tapes yet. You can bet I'll report when I see. I already suspect the Panasonic is not quite as good, and I think we all know that it is slightly inferior in the low-light dept, but I'm not sure if it is a big issue.

If you had a Z5 (with the CF-recorder) you would have transferred the files long ago! Takes me max. 10 minutes to log & transfer an hour of shooting! So my advice is: get the Z5, it's really a fantastic camera, with even more features than the Z7. Like coloured peaking!

Luc, it takes me 10 minutes to download an hour's worth of footage from the Panasonic, I have pro audio, and it cost me $2500. The Z5 is a great cam, I'd love to have one, but for the price of the Panasonic the Z5 become a tougher sell for someone who runs three cameras and charges under $2k for a wedding video, which is my situation.

Granted, the current new price for the Panasonic HMC-150 is around $3500 at b&h, which is only $700 less than the Z5, but $700 is $700.

As I stated before, I would likely lean toward the Z5 because of the HD/SD ability but for those on a budget the Panasonic is hard to beat. I openly admit the Z5 it is a great camera and I'd love to have one (or three)!

Tim, there are some major differences in the footage, and there are too many variables for me to make a fair comparison. The Panasonic camera operator went out of auto mode, and some of the reception footage is blown out, while some other is very dark, even though she was using a light. She is too inexperienced to have gone manual, but she was a video school student on her first shoot. Luckily she was only present for training, as the customer only paid for one camera. I provided three, so things are probably covered just fine. I never imagined it would have been necessary to ask her to stay in auto mode.

I will be using the Panasonic this weekend placed next to an FX1000 and I will get a perfect comparison then.

I just downloaded the footage from the HV30 which was being used as a backup, and it is actually brighter than the footage from the Panasonic, so this tells me the settings were off, as the HV30 cannot possibly be better than the Panasonic regarding low-light capabilities. I am amazed at the HV30 in a well lit environment, amazing little camera.

Of course, Jeff. For me too, $ 700 buy me a lot of other equipment. Such as (almost) an HV30, which is my third camera, for steadycam operations. Which has, as you say, a marvellous image quality for it's price!

Images from FX1000/Hv30/HMC150
 

The following images do nothing to answer Tim's question about low light of the HMC150, but here they are anyway.

I find the HV30 to be a remarkable of performer in decent light. For a $400 (used) dollar camera is it quite good. The FX1000 looked very good of course, as this was a well lit church.

I don't have images from the HMC 150 of the reception (which would be much more useful to all of us) that are usable for comparison.

Please don't ask why the Panasonic was located where it was. I had given instructions that the Panasonic was to be in the balcony next to the HV30 but obviously the shooter had other ideas! If I were to place an unmanned camera down front off to the side the obvious place to me would be on the groom's side to catch the bride's face.

Thanks Jeff.

Was the photog down front popping off flashes during the ceremony?

I'm not sure Tim, I didn't notice when I was reviewing the footage. I'll try and take a look soon...I am about to get back to actual work, as I've been spending too much time gabbing and not enough editing!

Jeff, I've got the HV20 and think it's a great camera. But you can see the '1-chip signature' in the HV30 clip when you compare it to the FX1000. There seems to be a much greater color tonality in the FX1000 as a result of the 3-chips.

That's probably the single greatest issue in trying to match the little guys with the big boys. Sharpness & detail is rarely an issue, especially since some of the little cams actually have greater resolution than some of the big guys.

You're right, of course Ken, but the similarity of the colors, etc. sure is good, especially with auto white balance. Don't get me wrong, the HV 30 is definitely off a bit and not nearly as precise, but still pretty darn good.


In a darker church a few weeks ago I ran the HV30 and it the footage is virtually unusable. In good light it's great, but as soon as the light drops it's useless without additonal lighting.

Jeff, I recently bought a Sony XR500 and the low light of that 1-chip cam is truly phenomenal! The color balance is also much closer to my Z5 and your FX1000. I bet you'd have an infinitely easier time with 500 as your 2nd or 3rd cam.

Thanks for the info Ken. Sounds like a sweet little camera, but at over $2k it should be!

Is it better or comparable to a Z1 in low light?

Actually the price is much closer to $1,000.

I would say yes, it is better than the Z1 in low light. I've done comparisons with my Z5 and it's actually more grain-free than the Z5 at the same lux level!!! However, the image of the Z5 is brighter as are the colors, despite some minimal grain. But you won't find a camera with less noise at anywhere near this price or 3X its price for that matter.

However, as I mentioned, color-wise it has that same 'Sony signature' color...just not the same broad tonal variety. It's also got OIS that's beyond anything I've seen at any price. At times it almost looks like a steadicam...OK, not quite, but closer than I've ever seen with any OIS system. You can walk with it and see very very little shake.

Ken, that is remarkable. I was looking at a kit, of course. $1299, not bad. Very nice sounding camera.

Jeff, on the HV30 framegrab posted, is the focus a little off or is that as good as it gets for the camera. Based on those framegrabs alone, the FX1000 image appears to be superior to the other two's.

Wacharapong

Indeed, normally, the HV30 delivers a sharper image (see screengrab below). The biggest difference between the HV30 and the Z5 (or Z7, for that matter) is the washing out of bright objects, like the white shirt here. The dynamic range is not near as good as in the more expensive 3-chip camera's.

camcorderinfo's review of the fx1000 claims that it destroys the XHA1 in sharpness.. which probably means it destroys the hv20/30 and hmc. It states "approximately 900 lw/ph and a vertical resolution of 800 lw/ph".

Do you find this to be true?

Also, camcorderinfo states that it;s low light is worse than the xha1, however, many people have claimed that it's low light is in fact better than the HMC..

do you find this to be true?

thanks!

The trouble having avchd as the second cam is the footage has to be converted, to my mind shots can not be compared unless they are from the same distance and angle to the subjects.

Ron, I don't have an XHA1, but I do have an HV20. The Z5 (FX1000) does have greater detail, but not to the extent that I'd say it 'destroys' the HV20. Where the Z5 does destroy the HV20, is in low-light. Simply no comparison. The same is true of color rendition, exposure latitude etc.

Ken, how does the recording unit work for your Z5? I'm thinking of adding one onto to my FX1000.

By how does it work I'm asking literally how does it work? Are there cards involved or is is all self-contained? What kind of files do you get when capturing SD?

Jeff, the unit works well but does have a somewhat annoying 'lag' that you need to get used to. In other words (at least in the Z5 configuration), you hit 'record' on the camera and the card recording doesn't begin for about two seconds. So you need to anticipate your shots or simply keep it rolling.

I've found that faster cards reduce the lag time, but it's still there.

The card simply inserts into the reader once you open the door of the unit. Keep in mind the reader does reduce battery life (by nearly 20% or thereabouts). Although light, it does add a noticeable weight when attached to the rear of the Z5.

To be honest, I haven't shot with the unit in SD, but I believe the files are standard .avi.

Thanks Ken. Are the cards expensive?

Jeff, no, they actually use pretty standard CF cards. You just need a high enough write speed.

Here's a typical example:
SanDisk | 4GB Extreme III CompactFlash Card | SDCFX3-004G-A31

Thanks Ken.

Note that it won't work this way on the FX1000 -- it doesn't have the "SYNCHRO" function. To record to the MRC, you must hit the "record" button on the CF unit, not the cam. Also note that while the unit integrates seamlessly into the Z5, to use it on the FX you need the bracket and FW cable. Not dealbreakers, certainly, but things to be aware of.

From the brochure:

"SYNCHRO mode
"When using camcorders that support external rec
control, such as the HVR-Z5U, HVR-V1U, HVR-Z1U,
DSR-450WS, DSR-400 and DSR-250, recording to the
HVR-MRC1 or HVR-DR60 is directly controlled by the
press of the camcorder’s rec start button.*3
*3 In this mode, a rec start delay of approximately 0.5 seconds
may occur after the camcorder rec start button is pressed.

"FOLLOW mode
"When using camcorders that do not support
external rec control, such as the HVR-A1U and
DSR-PD170, the FOLLOW mode can be used to start
and stop recording by the HVR-MRC1 or HVR-DR60.
In this mode, the HVR-MRC1 or HVR-DR60
periodically checks whether the camcorder is in rec
mode or not, and follows this status.*4
*4 In this mode, a rec start delay of up to 2 seconds may occur
after the camcorder rec start button is pressed."

My understanding is that the FX series supports neither mode, but I could, of course, be wrong.

http://ws.sel.sony.com/PIPWebService...re_Final08.pdf

Thanks Adam, very important info you shared...

The files on the card are fat 32 and limited to 4gb each, right?

A friend of mine has two Hard disc drive recording units for sale (40GB each) and those sound like another good way to go to achieve a tapeless workflow. Upgrade those babies with 120GB HDs and it would be sweet.

What has happened is I have gotten a taste of the tapeless workflow thingy with my new HMC150, but am not at all in love with AVCHD. You need to rejoin the files, then transcode them, blah blah blah. It is an unlovely workflow. And yes I know about Cineform, but my first time with it on these AVCHD files the audio was a different length than the video.

On the other hand, I shoot primarily SD widescreen, and the Panasonic doesn't. The AVCHD puts a kink in my workflow. I dislike it enough that after a few nights of playing with these freakin files I am close to selling the camera less than a week after buying it, pro audio connections be damned. The footage looks good, but not THAT good.

I used the Panasonic as a back up cam for a half hour ceremony this evening and I'm not even going to bother to get the files off of the card.

Jeff I am not going to sound cynical or something but my advise is to sell both the FX1000 and the Panasonic (even if you loose some money) and get the Z5. I, (like you) soot SD widescreen at the moment and the combination of the Z5 and the MRC1 is just awesome!!!

Stelios

Stelios, you are just determined to get me to buy a Z5, aren't you?

Well, you might be getting close! I'm going to be putting the Panasonic up for sale, and I might take your advice and do exactly what you say.

Yes, and this is true of every HDD recorder out there as well. No way to get around joining the files as far as I know. Would love to hear if there is an alternative.

It is beyond me why they all go with FAT32.

Any Mac with a journaled HD will handle files bigger than 4gb, if I'm not mistaken...

Jeff you are not going to regret it. The Z5 is not perfect (no camera is) but certainly is value for money.

Stelios

Yes, the Mac file system handles files larger than 4GB without problems - nothing to to with journalling, which can be on or off.

FAT32 is a file system from twenty years ago, and should have been left behind quickly imo...

Sometime next year I hope to be able to buy a new cam that will replace my Canon HV30. I just need to find the money first! (Psst! Anybody wanna donate to Steve's Buy a New Camcorder Fund?? : ) )

I like the Canon, but would like more manual controls and a more capable lens with the ability to focus manually.

I'm looking at either the Sony FX1000 or the Panasonic AG-HMC150. If the footage I've seen on Vimeo is anything to go by, the Sony seems to have a sharper image. I also like its balanced colour gamut, while the Panasonic seems to have a bit of a greenish, slightly washed-out tinge to it.

The only thing I don't like about the Sony is that it uses tape. Card-based media would be much more convenient. On the other hand, it's good to know that the FX1000 can be mated with the HVR-MRC1 CF recording unit.

After reading those coments about the HVR-MRC1,this will be my
next $$$$$ for the Z5 !!

Franklin Bencosme !!



" We don't do videos, we do memories "

Yes, PCs handle files bigger than 4GB as well... I was talking about the tapeless on-camera recorders, like the Sony MRC, DR60, Firestores, etc, which are neither macs nor PCs, but are meant to work with both. All use FAT32 for some inexplicable reason and none can do a single file larger than 2 (or 4) GB, to my knowledge. If I could find one that did, I'd buy it (four of them, actually) in a heartbeat.

Are you kidding me Adam, they all use fat 32? That is crazy.

I am looking at ADS pryro drives from someone local tomorrow, I'm so disappointed to hear this.

I'd be better off in that case with the Sony unit, I suspect.

I agree and cannot figure it out. I posted a question about why this is over in the tapeless section and I hope someone who knows can explain this.

I think the reason is because they want a format that is compatible with both PC and Macs and NTFS doesn't work on Macs and HFS don't work on PCs. They should just make the cameras able to write to both formats.