April 13, 2012 - 18:02
Just wondering, if there is a difference in the Panasonic HC-X900M and the HC-X900?
What's the "M" stand for?
Thanks in advance.
April 13, 2012 - 21:06
#1
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
Tony, the M version has 32GB Built-in Flash.
I had two of the non flash versions last month and sent them both back as not fit for purpose. The 2nd one was a replacement for the first which I was sure must be a faulty one but no 2 was no better.
In the end I gave up, wondering how on earth Panasonic had managed to wreck the performance compared to the TM900 that preceded it.
April 13, 2012 - 21:30
#2
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
Hi Tony, I had a quick look on line and came across the following very comprehensive review of the 'M' version http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HC-X900-Camcorder-Review/Design.htm
I still have no idea what the M means but the review suggests that the X900 is not significantly different from the TM900 and in many respects is slightly inferior; so if the previousTM900 model is still available and cheaper I would think this represents a better option
John D johnross93.freeserve.co.uk
April 13, 2012 - 22:40
#3
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
Thanks Claire and John for the info.
I have the tm900 and love it. I was going to buy another one and seen its replaced with the X900.
Might hold off a while then.
Thanks again.
April 14, 2012 - 08:20
#4
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
Hi Tony. I've had the opportunity to compare both the SD900 and the HC-X900. So far as I'm concerned there is no difference in actual output; both are exceedingly good in definition and there's little doubt that the TM900 is the same. The main difference between the TM900 using internal recording and the SD900 to the X900 is glaringly obvious in that it has that amazing OIS and hand held filming with it is a marvel! My daughter had the opportunity to try the TM against the SD and was happy to inform me that there's no difference in final output, just the method of recording and she prefers the SD card system. She and I compared the SD and X900 and we are satisfied that all three produce the same quality. It's that OIS which makes the X900 stand out and I've ended up purchasing it.
I originally became interested in the Z10000 because of its 3D ability but decided on the X900 in case I wish to test the 3D filming side of life without quite so much weight in the camera. (Getting quite old now and find it sometimes a problem!)
Where I have a complaint is in the closeness and positioning of the 'buttons' after being used to a larger, heavier camera which somehow is easier to control as well as the 900 series being so small. However, for its size, the 900 does have an element of weight which assists the hand-held working.
I think Clare was very badly unlucky; and that is sadly sometimes the case with video cameras.
April 14, 2012 - 20:26
#5
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
Hi Ron, thank you for that.
Without seeing the x900 I did think that the picture quality would be just the same. I would have been happy with another TM900 but now that there is a newer model out I wanted to try and find out a little about it first, before i buy.
Like your daughter, I prefer the card system too, it suits my workflow best.
Yes, the smaller camera takes a little getting used to but as you know its worth it, when you see the picture it produces.
Thank you again Ron, that was interesting.
April 15, 2012 - 00:15
#6
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
I was surprised at the mediocre results I got from the two X900's I tested, taking the same scenes with my TM900 it was clearly the winner, a quick glance at the playback on my HDTV was enough to tell the difference between the cameras. I wondered if the lens on the X900's were faulty in some way it was that bad, like the results I would get with my old single sensor Sony A1E HDV camera in poor light, rather than the pristine quality and equisite definition of the TM900 in 50P mode.
Then what has happened to the dynamic range, it's worse than the TM900 which is already it's weakest point. In sunlight flowers burn out too soon changing them from things of beauty to indistinct blobs of defocussed colour unless the exposure is darkened to a unacceptable level
The stop start recording and zoom buttons on the TM900 LCD are absent from the X900. If like me you use these buttons to switch between manual focus and iris to adjust exposure when your right hand is occupied holding the camera still and rotating the lens focus, then without these physical buttons you need to use the X900's substitute for them which is.. wait for it.. yet more icons on the LCD screen! Unfortunately showing these icons means the icons to switch between focus, WB, shutter and iris are not on screen, it's one or the other, no way to make a quick scene adjustment without changing the menu display, this was a MAJOR problem while filming.
The Wider angle lens was nice to have had the image definition been better, the addition of roll correction to the OIS is incredible, these were the actual reasons I wanted this newer model.
The higher resolution LCD screen on the X900 was not something I noticed, perhaps the screen is not large enough to benefit from the extra pixels, but I did notice occasional artifacts when something with fine detail came into the scene, not recorded, just seen on the camera's LCD, I have never see that happen on my TM900's LCD screen.
I really would like to know if I was just unlucky with what might have been two faulty ones from the same batch, a very early batch, they came from Europe but not gray imports, genuine UK models.
April 15, 2012 - 08:06
#7
Re: HC-X900M and the HC-X900, any difference?
You may well have been unlucky, Claire because it was reported some time ago that a number of vid cams from Japan suffered from inferior products supplied by other than Japanese companies following the disaster in that country.
Also, I think we would both agree that somewhere along the line in the matter of comparisons, there is always a valid criticism depending on usage and handling as well as perceived level of actual camera efficiency by some which is not particularly objected to by others.