Sure it does.

only in "USA" mode 60hz. Not in 50pn or 25pn

the ex1/3 lets you overcrank to 60fps no matter what hz you are in.

Can the HPX300 or 500 overcrank in 1080p or only in 720p like the HVX200.

Of course we want larger chips but can't really do it at $8500 and have a production grade shoulder mount camera for that price. The larger chip version of this camera is the HPX500, that you can get for around 10.5K without glass. If you plan on using a DOF adapter then that is the camera to go with and be done at around 20k with everything including 3 Zeiss ZF lenses. See: vimeo.com/3093799

True. But at that price point ($20k), you're getting into RED camera territory, which seems to be much more apt for digital cinematography. If you're looking for an ENG camera, this HPX300 has a dynamite feature set.

Sorry, but 20K is not RED territory and really never will be when you add up all of the parts and accessories. But more important RED is first and foremost a filmmaking camera, not exactly easy to use for portable use or with a small crew. It's not really a valid argument to say if you can afford a RED it's the camera for you. Like I've said in previous videos, pick the camera with the form factor, specs, price, type of use, speed of use, etc. that's right for the type of work you do. I like a RED if I'm shooting spots or a feature with a large crew and someone who knows how to edit it. But I like a camera like this to shoot a highend wedding, indie film, short, corporate video, news, etc. This camera really competes more with an EX3 then a RED. I love the ability to be able to use it as a run'n'gun shooter and then putting on a DOF adapter and have it become a filmmaking camera. Remember, there's an ass for every saddle.

Ive yet to use a red so i cant say much about it. The HPX300 looks really cool and i do like that full "F-Stop" control which definitely adds on to the cinema feel and overall production. The price is a plus because it looks like a full packaged camera that one can achieve great footage out of for 10K ( without other accessories obviously).

The Red camera also looks like a great piece of equipment but can get Very Very Pricey.
For the money one may spend on a RED camera I would personally just use to rent a film camera (but thats just because i prefer film over digital when it comes to bigger budget :).

Anyways Great Video once again ZACUTO you guys are great!.

And Many KUDOS to panasonic and their new Camera!

Yes, it's a nice and complete package. (Though to add the follow-focus, matte box, DOF adapter and all that you see in this video, you may spend another full $10k -- look at the prices.)

RED allows something that nobody else does: the ability to digitally develop your footage. It's a bit like shooting in RAW over JPEG-- you'll never go back once you know what it can do for you. Unless you're developing and grading your own 16mm film, you're never going to get anywhere near the control over the picture that you'll have with the Redcode RAW, and the cost is actually very low compared to professional processing, color grading, etc...: you can do it all right there in Final Cut Pro on your Macbook.

Very Well said Garrett. I never thought of it like comparing RAW to JPEG , Very good Analogy for me to think about! Yes I did not even think about the full use of Post Production with the RED, huge advantage i must say. I love using and look of film to death but i also love the new digital technology.

Thanks for your info!

Once again, I make my decisions on what to shoot with on the type of shoot it is. I've used a RED, but for you loyalists who live and die by RED, it's just not the camera for every job. You don't have defend the RED when every new camera comes out. RED is a great camera for certain types of jobs. To do it properly, it's not cheap either like some portray. And to think that when you hit a certain price point you have to go RED is just not wise. You go RED when it's the right camera for the right type of job. I think even Jim would agree with me on that.

This video for example. I use 5 HVX200's one with a DOF adapter. I want to shoot fast, import fast and bring this video to market fast. I don't need 4K, 2K or even 1K. I don't need to be converting RED files and waiting for that. The HVX200 is the right and correct camera for the job. The picture quality is great and the cost of 5 HVX200's makes this relatively inexpensive to shoot. Here is a perfect example of picking the right camera for the job.

True, true. You're totally right about a job-based camera selection, Steve.

I just don't see a 1/3" sensor-based camera as a strong digital cinema solution, just because you've got a DOF adapter on the end of it. But you're also right when you note that not all budgets and crews call for RED cameras.

nothing beats the ergonomics of an EX-1!
The power of the AVC-Intra codec is one of the things that mights attract users still concerned about sensor size to this camera as well. It has a much more professional feel I'm sure... I guess it depends on your shooting style, content you shoot, among other things.

I was being sarcastic about the Ex's ergonomics

I got that part,
and I hate the form factor of EXs,
but when they release 2/3", even if it's gona look like toilet seat, I still gona buy it :)

if it looked like a toilet seat then there is no excuse if your footage looks like sh**!

that's not nice bloom

I'd say HPX300 is a late response to the Sony S270

it's way better than the s270!

smaller cam dont give you all the feature that this type of cam will, by exemple the genlock, TC/in, TC/out, advanced gama control and even more,

smaller cam .... less feature

Those LCD panels you see are Panasonic LH-1700's, which are actually really nice broadcast quality panels. Check them out, you would be surprised at the quality. :)

Amen to that brother David.
I'm getting too many people that think you can put a real RED or SCARLET kit together for 20K and they are dreaming. Also what bugs me is that they think it is a panacea for all ills. I dig the RED and have used it and liked it but it's not for all jobs, nor is the HPX300 or any camera for that matter. So many of my friends that are shooters use a XL-H1/EX3/HVX200 plus a HPX500/XDCAM 350 plus a RED or film camera. They use the right camera for the right job

Amen

I used the XDCAM 350, it was the perfect cam for my project.

The red just had been useless since we didnt had the money and the post-production equipements to deal whit it.

What you are missing is use. The HPX300 is a shoulder mount camera meant for someone who needs to be able to shoot all day, comfortably on your shoulder. The GH1 has to have a ton of rigging equipment added to it to make it handholdable, or to modify it to be a filmmaking camera. Good audio will be difficult if not impossible. Multi-camera sync will be diffuicult if not impossible. Each camera is designed for a purpose. The GH1 was designed for photo taking, it's shape and size are made for that. I've tried using DSLRs for shooting video and a lot of compromizes have to be made. Having the shallow DOF is cool but we are still not quite there in the DSLR world for my useses. It will happen one day. Steve

How about using Bob Dylan's harmonica holder? Seriously though folks seems as though it's going to happen sooner rather than later and if you guys make a small and lightweight solution to this count me in. I already have your ex1/letus rig which is great. But the thought of filming people with their guard down with that kind of quality as the GH1 is pretty cool. There are some great time code based personal audio recorders (also really small) which would take care of audio. It's just the decision to put this small chip in such a big camera (HPX 300) seems goofy.
Aside from that I love your camera tests and round table discussions. Thanks a lot. And thanks for responding. (I didn't really think anyone was going to read what I said to be honest)

Another thing to consider is the codec that the HPX300 gives you. With the GH1 it can only record in AVCHD which will be fine for people who don't require broadcast quality output.

But a great feature that Panasonic added to the HPX300 is the use of AVC-Intra which gives a lot of ability to grade in post and is a broadcast grade recording format.

It depends on the final delivery format of your videos, and for the price the 300 is pretty nice.

I still think we are getting a bit hung up with numbers. I've used all of these cameras and all can look good and all can look bad. It's really how you master the camera you have.

But I will say that the HPX300 does not look nearly as good as a P2 Varicam even know it's sensor may be bigger. That's where these numbers can screw you up. You have to take so much into account, like color space, sensor size, through put and it's all way out of my league. That's why I give it the Steve Weiss test of side to side comparison. But as usual I state that my DP can make any one of these cameras look great. It's all about skill, lighting & experience. Those are the numbers that count!
Steve

You're preaching to the choir. No camera is right for every job. That's why there is a thriving rental market. I checked out your website, real nice by the way. But for your use a RED makes no sense. What you have an XH-A1 makes sense. For your uses, the RED is too heavy, too expensive, doesn't handheld well, you don't need 4K, 2K or even 1K for your use. You don't want to screw around with any kind of tapeless. For you job, the RED would be an anchor. But for many jobs it's the right camera.

PEOPLE: STOP EQUATING 50-100k CAMERA BUDGET AND THINKING RED IS THE ONLY WAY IN THAT BUDGET. I've noticed that a lot people on the web are starting joing camps, almost like religions, then they start trying to convert everyone to there equipment camp. It's an interesting life study (why can't one be comfortable in his own gear and comfortable with others owning different gear) I'm supposed to say everyone should buy Zacuto, but I realize it's not for everyone, every camera or every budget. That's cool and I've made my peace with it. I guess man is not comfortable with that. It's ok if you own one camera and others own another, it's not a slam to you or the manufactuer, to your desicison making process or intellegence. It's just a different need for a different use.

Please start picking cameras based on the exact use you are doing. Weight, size, shoulder mountable, ability to carry it all day if needed, features you want, form factor you like, budget, type of shooting you are doing and where you are going to be doing it: these are the criteria I'd like to see you using to make your equipment purchases.
Steve

Couldn't agree more with the use of the RED for what i do. Plus my turn around on videos tends to be 72hrs - and trying to make my iMac deal with the RED workflow would probably double that time.

It is funny how people pair up cameras though. When they see a XH-A1, you get the question "why didn't you get a HVX" - and there are countless A1 vs HVX forum threds with people quoting lines from the spec sheet.

Oh, glad you like the site....

I know, I like XH-A1 a lot, I'm older and not into tapeless that much either. Managing media over years is harder when you don't have tapes. We used to just shoot and trough the tape on the shelf. It was easy to find footage, no backup needed.

But again I've consistantly said, "there is a ass for every saddle".

I wish these discussions A1 vx. HVX would change to be more about the content and not how you got there. I never hear people ask if a film was shot with moviecam, panavision or Arriflex? The only thing they discuss is if it was good or not.

haha - thats such a strong point there "I never hear people ask if a film was shot with moviecam, panavision or Arriflex? The only thing they discuss is if it was good or not."

Thats exactly the point! And on Vimeo, people only ask 'what camera did you use' when they liked what you did....

That is a product that Hien at Letus would have to create. Contact him at Letus. Last I heard he was making it.