Member of the Month

JalmarKalmar
April, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

HMC150 vs. HMC40

profile picture
Frosty
Posts: 1738 - Karma: 797
So I think I've narrowed down my choice of video camera to the HMC150 or the HMC40. I was considering the HVX200 but I didn't want to deal with the P2 cards. I know the 4:2:2 color is superb, but in my opinion, it was not worth the price.

So my question is, what makes the HMC150 so much more expensive than the HMC40?

Pros and cons of both would be helpful as well.
Jun 14 2011 3:42AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
FYI, hvx200s you will buy online will come with p2 cards, so you don't need to buy any

(like mine for sale with 32gb p2 and .6x century wide angle for 2500)




but, for your question, them hmc40 is the hmc150s little brother, very similar cameras, the 40 has smaller chips/sensors so its worse in low light and color. Other than that, very similar.
Jun 14 2011 3:45AM
0 0
profile picture
Frosty
Posts: 1738 - Karma: 797
Your HVX is tempting...

But if I find myself not needing superb low-light performance, then the HMC40 would suffice?
Jun 14 2011 3:51AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
TC shoots with the hmc40, it produces a nice image. but nothing compared to 422 dvcprohd from the hvx:)


Also, the hmc40 uses a converter to use xlr mics, not sure if thats a big deal for you.
Jun 14 2011 3:57AM
0 0
profile picture
Frosty
Posts: 1738 - Karma: 797
Aghh you make your deal so much more tempting. I've watched your videos and seen the colors that it produces, and they are amazing.

Does the 150 or HVX need a converter to use xlr mics?
Jun 14 2011 4:00AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
nope, they both have dual xlr mic inputs. the hmc150 and hvx200 are also similar, only real difference is the codec and the tape deck(which is pointless) on the hvx. the hmc is slightly sharper, but not noticeable unless you have a 60" 1080p showing the image.
Jun 14 2011 4:03AM
0 0
profile picture
Coalescent
Posts: 4871 - Karma: 2,063
in the right lighting, the hmc40 can actually be more sharp than the 150. (First hand experience as a good friend as the 150). Once you step into low light (wedding receptions) it blows without a light.

Evan, I know you've had the HVX for a few years. I'm looking into the HPX as I can't really afford the Af100 with all I would need. Have much info on that? I know its close to the HVX200a.

I would be selling my 40 then.
Jun 14 2011 7:47AM
0 0
profile picture
KellyK
Posts: 1781 - Karma: 706
rumor has it the hmc40 uses a shared ring for the focus/zoom..? and this ring is crappy and extremely unresponsive. anyone know anything about that?
Jun 14 2011 11:08AM
0 0
profile picture
Coalescent
Posts: 4871 - Karma: 2,063
you can change it for zoom or focus. i always just use it for focus. havent had anyproblems
Jun 14 2011 11:29AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
the hpx and hvx are similar but the hpx is 3 cmos sensors while the hvx is 3 ccd sensors. They produce a similar image, hpx is a little better in low light. other than that, they're the same. the hpx has a few small features that the hvx doesn't have but theyre not that big.
Jun 14 2011 1:48PM
0 0
profile picture
deleted2
Posts: 958 - Karma: 107
nope the hpx170 is ccd's, theyre relatively the same thing except sdi out and some stuff that is available on the hpx, also its lighter(no useless tapedeck) also the new lens upgrade that comes with the hpx170 and hvx200a is better in lowlight than the original hvx200
Jun 14 2011 5:02PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
The lowlight isn't better because of the lens, its because of the sensors. You were right, they're CCD BUT the hmc40 is cmos, not ccd.
Jun 14 2011 5:08PM
0 0
profile picture
Frosty
Posts: 1738 - Karma: 797
More info on this would help me alot
Sep 5 2011 6:16PM
0 0
profile picture
andstuff
Posts: 1118 - Karma: 61
Why would you not get an HVX? They're dirt cheap used, often come with cards, and p2 is one of the best workflows available. With an HMC150 you're spending more and getting less, even though they are quite nice.

Also, the HPX170 is essentially an HVX200a on steroids.
Sep 5 2011 6:21PM
0 0
profile picture
iLLbiLLy
Posts: 2865 - Karma: 2,631
Pretty much what evan said. HMC-40 does great in good lighting and but is pretty weak in low light. If you want to see some footage you can look at my vids. pretty much everything from last year was filmed with it. Here's one that has a lot of low light footage so you can see what i'm talking about.
*NOTE* some color correction is applied to these shots and I'm using a shitty wide angel lens

Sep 6 2011 11:14PM
0 0
profile picture
50in07
Posts: 3070 - Karma: 1,471
What was the song in that edit?
Sep 6 2011 11:28PM
0 0
profile picture
NJurkiewicz
Posts: 1597 - Karma: 697
I think it is Skinny Love by Bon Iver
Sep 6 2011 11:31PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
The only reason why I am choosing the HMC40 over the HVX is because I would need to drop 2.5k on this fucker if I got the HVX.

Click for larger image
Sep 7 2011 8:24AM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
(im talking about the fisheye)
Sep 7 2011 8:25AM
0 0
profile picture
iLLbiLLy
Posts: 2865 - Karma: 2,631
das kapital remix
Sep 7 2011 10:54AM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31039 - Karma: 29,013
Click for larger image
Sep 7 2011 11:09AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
and you're wrong. that fisheye is fucking stupid, its maybe 3-4mm of focal length wider than my .6x wide angle i had it just basically adds shitty distortion...
Sep 7 2011 1:23PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
Click for larger image
Sep 7 2011 6:10PM
0 0
profile picture
miroz
Posts: 10333 - Karma: 3,947
Gross. Eww so grozz. Don't forget this is newschoolers, where filming matters. Skateperception is right over there ---------> http://www.skateperception.com/

lulz.
Sep 7 2011 7:11PM
0 0
profile picture
family_vacation
Posts: 6200 - Karma: 7,842
So the plan is to use your money wisely to get a worse camera with a terrible lens. Okay then...
Sep 7 2011 7:17PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
Click for larger image














I fucking hate skiing.
Sep 7 2011 8:56PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
It's not our fault you're the idiot in the situation.
Sep 7 2011 9:03PM
0 0
profile picture
deleted2
Posts: 958 - Karma: 107
lol, not another skate filming vs. ski filming argument..
Sep 7 2011 10:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
Im tired of hearing people like you who think "my way of doing things is the best everybody else who thinks otherwise is an idiot". I like fisheyes for certain filming situations and I dont want to cheap out and get a shitty .45 or .6, thus why Im not getting the hvx (also Im not sure if my macbook can handle the big p2 data rates of dvchd alone). Get the fuck over it and stop hating. Media and arts its just filled with copy cats all producing the same bullshit videos. I barely enjoy watching skiing anymore.
Sep 7 2011 10:05PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
the fact you still think you need that 2500 dollar fisheye proves to me how stupid you are. The .45x and .6x lens adapters are not shitty at all man, they work very well and produce a very sharp, wide shot. The .45x has distortion just like a fish eye and only will cost you 200-300 dollars to buy it used.

Also, the fact you think your computer can't handle p2 footage shows how stupid you are too. p2 came out fucking 8 years ago man, pretty much any computer with a dual core processor and 2gb of ram can run p2 footage.


And i will never stop hating shitty, generic, skateboard footage. If you think every edit is the same and you cant enjoy watching skiing anymore, maybe you need to branch out of SG and look around the video section and M&A. So many edits with great filming that are not boring to watch, unless you find shitty, generic, skateboard filming to be good then you probably should just go to skateperception.
Sep 7 2011 10:23PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
Branch out from ski gabber? lol. Out of the miniscule amount of time I spend on this website compared to others, 90% is spent bouncing between latest videos, top rated, and M&A. I don't remember the last time I visited ski gabber, Its just as stupid and boring as your videos.
Sep 7 2011 10:31PM
0 0
profile picture
alexat955
Posts: 2732 - Karma: 112
you guys should just fight in real life
Sep 7 2011 10:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
If he comes to IF3 and Im drunk enough.
Sep 7 2011 10:46PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
And the personal attacks ensue...

I'm sorry that you feel so heated because you are the kid sitting here spittin' game like you know everything, and your backpedaling because you know that you're wrong. You dont need a 2500 fisheye for an hvx and the other fisheye/wide angle options are not shitty and actually work very well. Maybe if you spent that 90% of the time you spend looking at videos that are shitty and boring and did some research, maybe you'd know a thing or two about film making and wouldn't make a complete ass out of yourself. Unfortunately, it seems that you favor website that is full of douche bag skate filmers who still jerk off to their vx21k every night before they jizz at some more deathlens vignetting on some skaters nollie heel over a 5 stair.
/rant on skate filming
Sep 7 2011 10:48PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,814
ha oh man did i really make you that mad? i was just calling you out on things you said that were wrong. If you really choose to not get an hvx because you think you need that lens adapter, you're making the wrong choice. But, its your choice not mine.


On a side note, skate filming gettings me really riled up, it shocks me that people produce professional movies with shitty vignetting the whole time and thats "cool".
Sep 7 2011 10:56PM
0 0
profile picture
kootenayklaus
Posts: 3914 - Karma: 2,179
LOUD NOISES
Sep 7 2011 11:28PM
0 0
profile picture
Brock.
Posts: 5698 - Karma: 1,327
Click for larger image
Sep 8 2011 8:22AM
0 0
profile picture
andstuff
Posts: 1118 - Karma: 61
Artists need to quit being pussies.

That is all.
Sep 12 2011 10:09PM
0 0
profile picture
cum
Posts: 308 - Karma: 8
hahahaha 10/10
Sep 13 2011 10:18PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
HPX170 ftw. The lovechild of HMC150 and HVX200
Sep 13 2011 11:49PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,327
Personally I'm really stoked on the 130/160, sure they won't have 422 but they look really dope. Hopefully the HMC150 will drop down in price too.
Sep 14 2011 1:07AM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
Much more stoked on HPX250. I'd rather have an xf100 over the ac series
Sep 14 2011 1:18AM
0 0
profile picture
gordie.
Posts: 2014 - Karma: 84
Aren't you like 16
Sep 14 2011 1:44AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,327
I'm in a huge dilemma right now. I found a used HMC150 on my local craigslist for $2000 with a shotgun mic, a boompole, and an extra battery. It might have some other things included but the guy deleted the posting so I'm not sure. He gave me an email today saying he still has it and will sell it without the mic and boom for $1700. The camera has like 300 hours on it though, should I be worried about that? My other option is to buy an HMC40 online since I can't find a used one in my area. I've found some for around $1500 with extra battery, some filters, low hours, etc. I think the 150 is a better deal, but it's quite a bit heavier and I will need to buy a new tripod head and glidecam. It also might be a little more camera than I actually need. The 40 is smaller but it has such a shitty lens, lcd, VF, and is ugly as hell. It's also a little more within my price range, but I would have to buy one online. Sooo what do you guys think?

Spark notes: Found a good deal on an HMC150, not sure if I need that much camera, local sale, will need to upgrade stabilization, high hours. Some nice HMC40's online, am aware of the downfalls of it, cheaper than the 150, worried about out-growing it. Can't decide which camera to buy.
Sep 14 2011 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31039 - Karma: 29,013
if that deal is legit, take the 150. Hours mean nothing on a non-tape camera
Sep 14 2011 11:30PM
0 0
profile picture
andstuff
Posts: 1118 - Karma: 61
Unless you are a soccer mom, I guarantee you will outgrow an hmc40 in no time.
Sep 14 2011 11:33PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,327
Okay, and is it foolish to buy it without the mic? The problem is it's at the top of my budget, and I'm not sure if an external mic would be all that important for what I'm doing. Mostly extreme sports, haven't done any short films or anything, every now and then some friends want me to film something for them. Video is just a hobby for me. Can you explain why I would outgrow the HMC40 so easily?
Sep 14 2011 11:42PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,327
Also should I wait for the AC130 to come out? It might lower prices on 150's
Sep 14 2011 11:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Downtofilm
Posts: 6896 - Karma: 20,399
lold.
Sep 15 2011 12:19AM
0 0
profile picture
ILoveOhio
Posts: 1793 - Karma: 253
Opteka .4x fisheye on an HPX170 with a spacer.

I like it atleast..... you have to look very hard to see slight vig.

Sep 15 2011 1:20AM
0 0
profile picture
ILoveOhio
Posts: 1793 - Karma: 253
just click anywhere in the video, not embedding for some reason....

Sep 15 2011 1:21AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)