dvx 100 prices moniter: blame the hdx100

[geffy]

theres been lots of speculation about the effect on dvx 100 prices of the new camera, lets end the speculation and post here the decreasing prices! remember the xl1s reduced by over a third until its demise as dealers stocked the xl2, please
note the uks a rip off dont be shocked by uk prices, my experience is 2995 gbp latest offering now 2400! prices over the next few months could be interesting!

[GlowMatt]

Jan pretty much stated the camera won't drop in price for a long time, as the new camera is not intended to be an upgrade or replacement to the DVX. Different animal altogether. I hop this is the case, as I'm about to drop some cash on the DVX!

[geffy]

hi
id wait a couple of weeks if you can, the dealer i dealt with emailed me pretty sharpish, so i checked on the net and found this site......... he didnt mention anything of the new cam, and interestingly enough now ive seen ex demos appearing for sale in uk shops id expect usa to be even better wouldnt an ex demo better than second hand, ill guarentee the price will fall some how!

[geffy]

and to add to the pressure on prices " In fact a new lighter version of the DVX is planned later this year as well".................whod have guessed:-)

[Neil Rowe]

..i dont know about you but id rather have the camera heavier. why? because that extra wight helps stabilize the camera and reduce shake. theres a reason that bigger cameras get more stable footage .. its because they wont flop around in the wind in your hand with every little lightest muscle twitch you have or every bump you hit. sure they generally have better OIS systems too but ALOT of times it comes down to the fact that its alot harder to shake a 10lb rock than it is to shake a 3 lb one. thanks to physics its inherantly more stable.

i seriously would not want a lighter DVX. its light enough as is IMHO.

[geffy]

im more worried new camera may have better specs or be cheaper, anyways the resale value of the old dvx would be affected, not to mention the old stock and demo market! id wait..........................

[bilgami]

a good wieght for a cam should tip the scales at least 10 pounds and at the most 20 with all the bats and lights on it.

[alpi69]

i would not expect the DVX to drop drastically. as someone said in another thread: a 5 series BMW does not hurt the 3 series really.

the HDX will be 6000-10000 (with the P2) so the 3000 for the DVX will actually appear a bargain for many.....and it is ;D

[geffy]

"i would not expect the DVX to drop drastically. as someone said in another thread: a 5 series BMW does not hurt the 3 series really".
unless it runs into the back of one ;D
but maybe the pressure from the new model dvx will affect prices more than the hdv, which i think your saying, id only buy the old model at a good price and i think prices will come down just a question fo how much?

[Jan_Crittenden]

and to add to the pressure on prices " In fact a new lighter version of the DVX is planned later this year as well".................whod have guessed:-)
Hi,

The camera will actually weigh about the same but will be lead free, this will happen in the fall to comply with the ROHS inititive. And in all honesty, I don't see the price of the DVX changing. You will always see the shaky gray market deal but the authorized product with the Magic Bullet, and the DVX Book should be stable.

Best regards,

Jan

[Flintstone]

I agree with the others, I really don't think it's going to affect the price of the DVX. The HDX will be in a category of it's own at several thousands of dollars price delta. Besides, DVCProHD is a beast onto itself, and certainly no match to HDV.

[Jan_Crittenden]

*Besides, DVCProHD is a beast onto itself, and certainly no match to HDV.


I am assuming what you meant is that HDV is no match for DVCPROHD. Right?

Jan

[braw]

I am assuming what you meant is that HDV is no match for DVCPROHD. *Right?

Jan

He must have. Perhaps it's the language barrier. I doubt anyone could genuinely mean that! :P

[geffy]

"The camera will actually weigh about the same but will be lead free, this will happen in the fall to comply with the ROHS inititive. *And in all honesty, I don't see the price of the DVX changing."
*so the price of the new one will be the same as the old so maybe old stock bargains for people needing a second cam! dealers will be happy to offload cheaper if the new ones the same price............

[Isaac_Brody]

I doubt that dealers will be advertising that the new "version" of the DVX is lead free. From what I've read about the ROHS initiative my old DVX will probably outlast those that are lead free.

The new is the old is the new, don't see how that will affect price. But if you feel like not buying a camera for the next six months be my guest. Six months is a lot of lost work.

[geffy]

"But if you feel like not buying a camera for the next six months be my guest. Six months is a lot of lost work. "
not if you have one already! two would be nice along with a crane and a rich wife! Or someone elses, camera *or crane that is ;)

[galt]

DVX100a price pressure does not come from HDX, but from SOny FX-1 which sells now for same price as DVX with rebate. Panny will have to adjust down IMHO to be $400 - $500 cheaper than FX1 to retain most market share, and even at that they may lose some. I am waiting until after NAB to buy anything.

Heres a rumor -- DVX100b with 16.9 chips. ::)

[geffy]

:-X "the DVX100B, which Jan said will be lead-free. *As far as I know, though, no other feature has been announced for it. *Jan said that she's trying to get some extra features in, but she doesn't know if she'll be able to"
so if there are extra features the price of the old dvx 100 should drop like a piece of lead :'(

[Isaac_Brody]

Like the lead dropping off the new dVX100... Sorry, that pun was dangling and I had to pop it.

[geffy]

:o can we start to name some names and prices in the uk the price has dropped from 300 to 2400 , i cant believe how cheap it is in the states, i think europe is even more cos of the euro!
it converts to 2,400.00 GBP Uk Pounds * *= * 4,547.45 USD *:'(

[Flintstone]

I am assuming what you meant is that HDV is no match for DVCPROHD. *Right?

Jan
Yes, you are correct. *My bad. *And for the record, just to make things much clearer: *DVCProHD = Awesome! * *HDV = Crap!


Braw: Perhaps it's the language barrier?
Funny! *But you have a point! *Although I am bilingual, French being my native tongue, I do have some slip ups; and for that I apologize.

[braw]

Funny! *But you have a point! *Although I am bilingual, French being my native tongue, I do have some slip ups; and for that I apologize.

I did mean that as a joke. I saw that you have a Canadian flag next to your name. No offense. ;D

[Flintstone]

I did mean that as a joke. I saw that you have a Canadian flag next to your name. No offense. *;D
None taken whatsoever! * ;) And I did have a good laugh at it too!

[geffy]

iv added another choice for those that want to buy an xl2 or other hdv camera etce,
Just read on uk site that the filmic motion on tv is an american thing something to do with ntsc, which you dont see with pal, this could explain the disproportionate number of users on your side of the pond, pd150 was very popular here along with the canons, indeed trainspottings director danny boyle shot 28 days later with xl1s, and a great filmsuffered in some ways through lack of definition, if you view the extra material on dv he explains that ironic backgrounds just couldnt be defined at a distance. great film though, behind the scenes material shows cutting edge small format, with a big budget!

[braw]

Just read on uk site that the filmic motion on tv is an american thing something to do with ntsc...

I am definitely no expert on either PAL or NTSC, but something just doesn't sound right about that. 25p is exactly half the rate of 50 which is PAL right? I think it would be more an aligning frame rate/evenly divided rate thing.

Can anyone help me out on this?

[Barry_Green]

I don't know what they're referring to.

In America, film is shot at 24 frames per second, and transferred to NTSC video using 3:2 pulldown (which means that every two frames of film get transferred to 5 frames of video; even frames go to 2 video fields, odd frames go to 3 video fields). So two film frames = 5 video fields, and if you do that 12 times per second, you end up with (2x12)=24 frames of film become (5x12)=60 fields of video.

In PAL, film gets shot at 25 frames per second. Each frame of film gets transferred to two fields of video.

So 25p on PAL looks more like projected film than 24p displayed on NTSC, but both look like film on video.

[geffy]

I am definitely no expert on either PAL or NTSC, but something just doesn't sound right about that. 25p is exactlyhalf the rate of 50 which is PAL right? I think it would be more an aligning frame rate/evenly divided rate thing.

Can anyone help me out on this?
hi ill just quote site:
Beware of transatlantic comparisons, the starting point is different. The review is a valid comparison, but only from a US point of view. When an American talks of "film-look" or "film-motion" he'll be talking of something we rarely see in the UK. Film motion, to an American, is largely due to the "2:3 pull-down operation that is done to get 59.94 fields from 24 frames in a second, scanning frames alternately twice or thrice. This gives a jerkiness to motion at both 24Hz and 12Hz, rather than at the 25Hz that we're used to in the UK. The 25Hz jerkiness that stems from the "2:2 pull-down" process is relatively smooth and is exactly the same process as is seen in all cinemas world-wide, but the 2:3 process is peculiar to NTSC. So any comparison of cameras and systems using NTSC as a base will give different opinions from those derived using a 50Hz system such as PAL
i dont understand technical video, i have a photography background, i sold my xl1s to buy a panasonic though ;D ;D

[braw]

In PAL, film gets shot at 25 frames per second. *Each frame of film gets transferred to two fields of video.

So 25p on PAL looks more like projected film than 24p displayed on NTSC, but both look like film on video.

So that's why I'm thinking that 25p on PAL looks similar to 30p on NTSC. Mathematically speaking. 24 probably looks a little more noticeable on 60i land where 25 doesn't look wierd at all in 50i land.

Isn't film usually shot at 24 pretty standardly across the world?

What about on a progressive tv that can display the 24p on a DVD through composite video? Would that look significantly cleaner motion wise?

[geffy]

i think we are talking about film perception, obviously the jerkiness, but also a psycological and physiological thing, the still frame at 24 can be processed by us and more *information understood than from a constant stream, ie our brains bandwidth copes better! allows it to appreciate it more :-/

[geffy]

more brain food from the same site:
As an example, I recently saw a film on Channel 5 ("One of our spies is missing") that as clearly shown from a standards-conversion of a tape, recorded from film in NTSC. So it exhibited both the nasty 2:3 pulldown for US TV and the 6:5 effects of the standards-conversion for UK showing. It looked awful. But it's nothing to do with the film itself, only to the peculiar processing chain that delivered it to me.

This may seem to be nit-picking, but when a video camera shoots at 24 frames/second and does the 2:3 pull-down effect to generate a film-look in NTSC, the results are grossly different from a camera running at 25 frames/second to get a film-look at 50Hz for PAL. That difference alone can conceal other problems by distracting the eye. ???

[Jan_Crittenden]

I would say that the folks that did the conversion of the NTSC with 2:3 pull down to PAL, should have extracted the 24P and then converted to 25P/50i with a small speed up. This way would have been vastly cleaner and would only require a small pitch change. Sort of the reverse of what folks do when they shoot in PAL and then go to film, they just make it a slo-PAL.

Best,

Jan

[Flintstone]

Hey geffy, can I ask a favor? *Can you avoid red text? *I find it very difficult to read, and hard for the eyes :o. Thanks :)

[geffy]

Hey geffy, can I ask a favor? *Can you avoid red text? *I find it very difficult to read, and hard for the eyes :o. Thanks :) sorted now in bold *:)
The world according to a mr sid........: now for the info gained from a drunken sales person in the pub, sid:
1)the sony is the choice of pros :-/
2)most people wanted canons cos they used to have canon stills and the xlses attract attention and impress people :-[
3) xl2 is murdering the opposition :o
4)tv companies in uk now have 16:9 in their guidelines to contributers ::)
5)hdv cameras are the only long term cameras :'(
6)hed only buy a dvx if it was a good kisser :P(anna karina. bande a part)

[Barry_Green]

I think what you're saying is that the XL2 is enjoying good success in Europe? Is that what you meant? Because in Europe, yes, some broadcasters are specifying 16:9 delivery requirements. So I can see why some users would be drawn to the XL2 (even though the DVX in squeeze mode delivers an image that's just as high-resolution, in 16:9, as the XL2 when it's set in "low" vertical detail, which is the appropriate setting to use for display/broadcast on interlaced televisions).

[Flintstone]

(even though the DVX in squeeze mode delivers an image that's just as high-resolution, in 16:9, as the XL2 *when it's set in "low" vertical detail).
Hey Barry, I'm sure that you have that somewhere; do you have resolution chart pictures (and other comparative shots) showing that?

[Barry_Green]

Somewhere, yes, but I don't know where.

I just posted here a week or two ago showing the FX1 against the DVX/Squeeze, and they're the same vertical resolution. The XL2 was shot in "norm" detail so it was a lot higher, but in "low" (which they specifically note should be used for interlaced televisions) it's about the same as the DVX in 24p/squeeze/thin.

[Flintstone]

Are you serious? If it's the case, and I'm sure it is, then what would be the discriminator between a DVX in squeeze mode and a DVX with an anamorphic adapter, detail wise?

[geffy]

Somewhere, yes, *but I don't know where.

I just posted here a week or two ago showing the FX1 against the DVX/Squeeze, and they're the same vertical resolution. *The XL2 was shot in "norm" detail so it was a lot higher, but in "low" (which they specifically note should be used for interlaced televisions) it's about the same as the DVX in 24p/squeeze/thin.
for the tests click here:
http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX2/YaBB.pl?board=Events;action=display;num=1108111339 ;start=0#0

[geffy]

1)im not good on technical video but with regard the comparison, bigger must mean better ( so an amamorphic would give similar benefits?)your point seems to be theres no way to make use of the larger format at the present but what about film transfer, i allude back to 28 days later which needed the speed of shooting but suffered in far background *resolution, and "grain". i would have thought there would have been advantage from gradation if not resolution from the larger format?Resulting in a higher quality image?
As a footnote the xl1s was famous for blobing at a distance, new ones been mentioned also as its pixels are so small :-/

[Barry_Green]

what would be the discriminator between a DVX in squeeze mode and a DVX with an anamorphic adapter, detail wise?
Used properly, the anamorphic adapter would give about 33% more resolution vs. squeeze mode.

Look at the pictures geffy kindly linked to: imagine that instead of it saying "XL2" on that first shot, imagine that it said "DVX/Anamorphic". Because that's about what the resolution would be, so you could compare that against the last picture (DVX/squeeze) to see the difference.

[pptphoto]

Will the new DVX require unleaded fuel to run properly?

[mr._guiyotinne]

Pptphoto maybe it´s a Diesel cam... But it wolud be far better to be able to use fuell cells... ;D

[geffy]

rumour has it its fusion but locked in a garage cause the saudis bribed the inventor ;D

[mr._guiyotinne]

in fact Panasonics HDX is the first antigravity camera system so you don´t have to worry about the dollys or jibs, just program its embedded alien UFO to do what you want.

PUBLICTY : Forget about FXs! Get a real Stratosphere freefall due to our new technology LAI (little alien inside) wich will allow to to make your family gasp! Animals rights association won´t sue you cos Xenophorms are not included in their lists. And it´s powered with CO2 and brussels sprouts!

Enjoy your new machine... Color may change...

[Flintstone]

LOL

[geffy]

apart from being lead free, more than likely the only technological advance is that it will come in a smaller cardboard *box :)
heres a user quote for dvx voters
" his weapon of choice is a Panasonic AG-DVX100 progressive scan Mini DV camcorder. Darren thought long and hard before deciding on the Panny, but the deciding factor was its progressive scan mode, Darren says this is ideal for the type of films he makes as it saves hours in post production trying to get that “Film-Look” which can be very involved with filters, colour correction, gamma levels and who knows what else, the Panasonic AG-DVX100 does it all in-camera so you don’t have to bother"
and heres his work, excellent?
http://www.channel7.org.uk/

[geffy]

british video show quote may affect your vote !

"buzzword at the show was “HD” and it would appear that 2005 is going to be the year of HD. Sony, Panasonic and JVC all had HD camcorders on display with speakers from Sony and Panasonic explaining in depth the current state of affairs with this great format.

Panasonic had their DVC Pro HD models being demonstrated whilst Sony had their Pro HDV and consumer HDR-FX1 and HVR-Z1E HD camcorders being demonstrated. The quality from these cameras via the HD screens was absolutely stunning; the pictures were so sharp I had to stand back from the screen in fear of cutting myself. The colours were beautifully saturated with great depth, tonal and contrast range. For anyone who hasn’t had a chance to see HD in action, take my word for it, the quality is absolutely stunning, even from the HDR-FX1 consumer model; I could not fault the picture at all. It was every bit as good as the best D9 or DigiBeta footage that I have seen.
I am sure that standard definition camcorders now have a limited shelf life, I mean the Sony HDR-FX1 cost just £2,400 and the professional version the HVR-Z1E cost around £3,500, which is little more than the VX2100 or PD170. The latter two camcorders will be dropped this year for sure and from what I can gather a professional version of this particular HD format will be out later in the year. This will almost certainly be along the lines of the current DSR570 DVCAM camcorder and will be priced similarly to the 570. We will then have a shoulder mounted version that sports the great quality that this particular version of HD has to offer, but with true professional features such as a removable lens with back focus adjustability and a true focus ring that actually stops at infinity and macro.
At the pro end of the scale, SD will also disappear very soon. Sony are also keen to remove their Digibeta format simply because the HDW750 is now the same price as Digibeta and it’s a far superior camera, and does both HD and SD." nigel williams http://www.dvuser.co.uk/

[24pordeath]

Guys DVX100A is 3999$ canadian dollars in toronto with a dealer. He just called me yesterday as I already bought one in Jan to see if I need another one.

[geffy]

well ive decided on the new hd cameras, probably the panasonic: heres why:
"does anyone know if the new hd cameras, which are all 16:9 could just be used as dv cameras it would save any messing about with adaptors or squeeze mode, and make the dvx redundant? "
by barry green:"Yes both the Sony cameras offer regular DV recording, and the new Panasonic will offer high-def, DVCPRO-50, and regular DV recording."
problem now will be which one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and does it make sense to buy a hd camera and not use it for hd!

[Flintstone]

problem now will be which one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and does it make sense to buy a hd camera and not use it for hd!
The HDX will make sense regardless if you use HD or not, if only for DVCPro50, that is good enough for me!

[Isaac_Brody]

Be careful quoting things as fact, especially when quoting people out of context. We know it's coming, but people need to chill and go shoot some films until it comes out.

[geffy]

"Be careful quoting things as fact, especially when quoting people out of context. We know it's coming, but people need to chill and go shoot some films until it comes out."
http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX2/YaBB.pl?board=Links;action=display;num=1108317220
Its not out of context! id hate to see someone spend a lot of money without having at least an indication of what theyre getting into, 16:9 is so important here, people have to be aware of everything, salesmen arnt the most unbiased of people :o :) *

[Barry_Green]

16:9 is quite important in Europe, yes, moreso even than it is in the US. *Although the US is seeing some rapid adoption of 16:9 televisions as well. *All over-the-air non-HD broadcasts in the US are still 4:3, but in Europe I understand that at least Britain, and probably other countries as well, are requiring 16:9 masters.

For SD broadcast/DVD, the existing DVX (in progressive/thin) can do 16:9 on par with "native" 16:9 cameras like the PDX10 and the FX1 (when downsampled to SD, or when used in DV mode). *The XL2 does it with even higher resolution, and the forthcoming Panasonic should as well.

[SimonMW]

Geffy, don't write the SD cameras off just yet. Officially the PDW510 has replaced the DSR570, and it says as much on one of Sony's websites. Further to this I wouldn't bank on the SD line such as the PD170 being dropped either. Sony are releasing 4 new professional SD shoulder cameras at NAB. Now, I don't know about you, but this fact says to me that even Sony themselves don't expect a massive HD explosion any time soon.

The cameras they are releasing are;
DSR-400(P) 4:3 DVCAM camcorder
DSR-450WS(P) 4:3 & 16:9 DVCAM camcorder
MSW-970(P) MPEG-IMX camcorder
DVW-970(P) Digital Betacam camcorder

Despite rumours of an HD version of XDCAM nicknamed "XDCAM jnr" it appears that this may well only be a prototype. We shall see.

Something that everyone forgets is that people replace equipment as expensive as this when it NEEDS replacing. Even then all those SD cameras have to go somewhere, and most often sold on to someone else. So SD cameras will be in circulation and use, and probably more dominant than HD, for a very, very, very long time yet.

[Flintstone]

The cameras they are releasing are;
DSR-400(P) 4:3 DVCAM camcorder
DSR-450WS(P) 4:3 & 16:9 DVCAM camcorder
MSW-970(P) MPEG-IMX camcorder
DVW-970(P) Digital Betacam camcorder

Wow, they actually have the nerve to bring out a 4:3 native camcorder? Also, I'm very surprised that they are releasing a new DigiBeta camcorder, as they droped the line when IMX came out. It's not that it's bad news, 90Mbps 10bit SD is a great thing. I guess Sony can't manage to ignore it's customers for too long.

[Barry_Green]

Wow, they actually have the nerve to bring out a 4:3 native camcorder?
Well, yeah. Considering that *all* cable and over-the-air broadcasts in the USA are 4:3 (except for the few HD broadcasts out there), and the USA's not that small of a market, and you get better 4:3 video from a 4:3 chip than you do from a 16:9 chip... yes there are good reasons to introduce a 4:3 camera.

With the adoption of 16:9 televisions going the way it is, I would expect to see a shift in that attitude a few years from now, but if someone's producing content *now* for distribution *now*, there's nothing wrong with using the broadcast shape that's in use now...

[David Jimerson]

Contrary to myth, 4:3 TVs are not disappearing. I just checked out several big-box stores this weekend, and 70% of the TVs -- including brand new LCD and ED TVs -- were still 4:3.

Granted, they're pushing the 16:9 TVs the hardest, but a quick check of the price tag will tell you why.

And anecdotally, every single TV going out the door was 4:3.

[geffy]

my 4:3 tv can do letterbox for films which i prefer via the dv player,AND THE FREEVIEW, it also has switch to unletterbox tv progs, which in uk are 16:9 nothing to do with hdv! also any indie will do 16:9 for the film look!

[Flintstone]

Well, that's it. 16x9 is easily letterboxed on 4x3. And the show/program/short/feature will be future proof for 16x9 displays. Most of the programs I watch on my 4x3 TV are letterboxed anyway. So my point remains, even for today, except maybe for news and sports, most of the programs are letterboxed... so why bother with 4x3?

[Isaac_Brody]

I'm guessing that different broadcasters have different requirements. If they want 4X3, then that's what you'll give them.

Everytime I hear the word Futureproof I don't know whether to laugh or take it seriously. I know it's a valid point of trying to insure that media will be relevent and maintain quality ten years from now. But there's no telling if film will be the main source of entertainment in ten years. Maybe I should just get three DVX's, jam em together for 3d so that my films are future proofed.

I also question just how much you can proof television material. Unless there's a unique show like the Old Star Trek, or a sitcom, I generally steer clear of old television. With the old television that I do watch I associate the look with a sense of nostalgia. Who's to say that future proofing material isn't destroying nostalgia?

What about past proofing material? A lot of programs that are newer are using effects to mimic old footage, like sepia, scratched film, etc. What if DV compression becomes an effect?

Alright, enough stoking of the fire. Future proof, past proof, one hundred proof. 8)

[Flintstone]

Then I say one hundred proof! ;)

But you do make a good point, Isaac... and Barry too! ;)

[Shaw]

What if DV compression becomes an effect?

E-gad!

[geffy]

"Sorry, there are things I can discuss, like workflow on P2, DVCPROHD, DVCPRO50, what are they? how do they work? *But the only answers I can give on this new camera specifically is under 10,000, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, DVCProHD, 24P and on a P2.
Wish I could say more.
Best, Jan"
what i cant understand is why anyone would buy a dvx just now full price, dvc pro 50, 24p, 16:9, yet people still voting in for buy now, methinks they just dinnae want to see they re investment depreciate before they get rid o it, *;) ill probably come across to ny to buy a hdx in the summer should be halfish of the price here, good old weak dollar!

[Isaac_Brody]

Because under 10,000 is much higher than buying a fully kitted out DVX for 3 grand. And as has been mentioned before there's no HDDVD yet. And SD is going to be around for at least five more years.

[Zig_Zigman]

And because you will have to wait six months for the new VunderKam...

[geffy]

And because you will have to wait six months for the new VunderKam...
and i was hoping it would have back to the future like controls so i could come back to now, to show you what it looks like ;D

[Flintstone]

So the HDX will be equiped with a Flux Capacitor? ;D

[Isaac_Brody]

And Jarred's making batteries that run on plutonium at 1.21 GIGAWATTS!!! ;D

[Flintstone]

Great Scott! Where does he get that? The corner pharmacy?

[geffy]

im back! A younger me said:
"and i was hoping it would have back to the future like controls so i could come back to now, to show you what it looks like" *ive been to the future..................... and bought a sony! ;D buy non panasonic later , the panasonic hdv had software problems :'(

[Shaw]

?

[Flintstone]

Shaw, aren't you up to speed on your Time Paradox studies? *You should have deciphered that in a jiffy! *- Pun intended -

[geffy]

im back! A younger me said:
"and i was hoping it would have back to the future like controls so i could come back to now, to show you what it looks like" *ive been to the future..................... and bought a sony! ;D * buy non panasonic later , the panasonic hdv had software problems :'(
just ignore what the other me said, ill never be like that, hes an arrigant sod its that new wifes money thats changed him, i wonder where he found her, maybe that buying holiday to the states for the new panasonic...........

[geffy]

its been suggested that the new panasonic wont be ready till october :'( so is the sony dv so bad, or is dvcxpro worth the wait?

[Zig_Zigman]

Tell you the truth, if you have to shoot right now, I'd get the Canon XL2. But you've got to add a 3x wide angle and other stuff so you are pushing 6k. Sell it in October for ??? Hmm. 4500 probably.

[Flintstone]

Actually, in my opinion, if a camera must be chosen now because of NEED (not necessarily "want"), then one of the key questions you should ask yourself is: Is threre an absolute need for native 16x9? If you can get by with just letterboxing, then get the DVX100. *This cam will be less of an investment in the short term, and if you decide to pursue the HDX when the time comes, you can either sell it, or use it as a b-roll cam... And hopefully, most accessories will be able to work on both.

[geffy]

Actually, in my opinion, if a camera must be chosen now because of NEED (not necessarily "want"), then one of the key questions you should ask yourself is: Is threre an absolute need for native 16x9? If you can get by with just letterboxing, then get the DVX100. *This cam will be less of an investment in the short term, and if you decide to pursue the HDX when the time comes, you can either sell it, or use it as a b-roll cam... And hopefully, most accessories will be able to work on both.
point of the poll was to gauge the market for the 100 in the next few months due to changes upcoming, because a lot of people are buying, im looking for a second camera:16 x 9 is the killer even if its just for dvd, the adaptors ive used in the past have been a nightmare and the xl1s was a spectator sport i have an dvx 100 but the prospect of dvpro just has me drooling , how will mixed footage look? its drama so i think i have leeway, the whole question is for second camera really, any new camera would relegate dvx to second, im thinking of hdv camera, but not using hd mode, is that silly? ive also just been offered an e model cheaper than second hand a, is the difference worth 600 dollars!

[Jan_Crittenden]

i have an dvx 100 but the prospect of dvpro just has me drooling , how will mixed footage look? its drama so i think i have leeway,


The signal coming off the same camera head will look the same if shot in DV or DVCPRO. *The new camera will be a different look to the DVX footage.


the whole question is for second camera really, any new camera would relegate dvx to second, im thinking of hdv camera, but not using hd mode, is that silly?

It is if you thik that the DV footage from the HDV camera will look better than the DVX100A. *It won't and you will also lose the latitude and low light performance. *Plus as you say this will be the main camera with the DVX as second. *I do think this is very silly.

My .02,

Jan

[geffy]

The signal coming off the same camera head will look the same if shot in DV or DVCPRO. *The new camera will be a different look to the DVX footage.


It is if you thik that the DV footage from the HDV camera will look better than the DVX100A. *It won't and you will also lose the latitude and low light performance. *Plus as you say this will be the main camera with the DVX as second. *I do think this is very silly.

My .02,

Jan
it would look better itd be 16:9 full frame, which for me is the problem with dvx100, also shooting dv allows me to process the footage. lat and light performance lost from hdv to dv or new hdv to dvx100? very silly or just misunderstood? :-/

[Shaw]

The Sony HDV cameras have a significantly lower latitude than the DVX due to the fact that they have a LOT more pixels packed into the same sized area. If you're going to be going to DVD then it seems a bit silly to shoot interlaced HD which won't provide as nice an SD image. If you need an HD master then the Sony may very well be the way to go. Depends on your needs really.

If 16:9 is a worry you can always use the Canon XL2 or shoot in squeeze mode. Squeeze mode is the highest resolution that an interlaced display can handle without flicker. You will see a difference between this and, say, anamorphic footage, on an HD display. Again, it depends on your needs.

[geffy]

wow we were worried might look like a ray gun or 8mm well it looks more like 8mmmmh yummy and 16:9, move over sony and less than 5000 dollars!! or is this another balsa mockup from panasonic research and design team? :-/

http://www.epropsource.com/i/Hollywood%201/tn_MOVIE_CAMERA.jpg

[steadicamsteel]

Does it really matter WHAT we shoot on? Just go out and start bloody shooting something, whether its Super8mm, Hi8 Video, DV, HDV....who cares! Just shoot something and enjoy and learn.

[Jan_Crittenden]

it would look better itd be 16:9 *full frame, which for me is the problem with dvx100, also shooting dv allows me to process the footage. lat and light performance lost from hdv to dv or new hdv to dvx100? very silly or just misunderstood? :-/


Two things. The 16:9 on the HDV should be compared in resolution to the DVX squeeze. You may well be surprized. Combine that with the fact that the HDV camera does not do a progressive capture(no 24P or 30P), less dyanmic range and a cinegamma, that looks on a scope more black compress. I still fully believe the DVX would win out in this DV to DV comparison. You should do this one for yourself before you purchase.

Best regards,

Jan

[geffy]

Does it really matter WHAT we shoot on? Just go out and start bloody shooting something, whether its Super8mm, Hi8 Video, DV, HDV....who cares! Just shoot something and enjoy and learn."
course it matters! as you will no doubt learn when you view your footage, or when an editor turns round and says why didnt you......... if you shoot to pass the time.. enjoy yourself :)
"The 16:9 on the HDV should be compared in resolution to the DVX squeeze. I still fully believe the DVX would win out in this DV to DV comparison."
"The 16:9 on the HDV should be compared in resolution to the DVX squeeze. You may well be surprized. Combine that with the fact that the HDV camera does not do a progressive capture(no 24P"
id love to, why dont you send me one, it would answer everybodys question, no progressive capture! i dont want one!! are you sure your talking about the new panasonic?

[Barry_Green]

No she's not talking about the new Panasonic, because the new Panasonic is not HDV. She's talking about the Sony HDV camera.

[geffy]

No she's not talking about the new Panasonic, because the new Panasonic is not HDV. *She's talking about the Sony HDV camera. "The new camera will record high-definition video, using DVCPRO-HD (not HDV
so is it really different or is it the same thing with different names?

[Isaac_Brody]

Have you read any of the other threads in this forum? No they're not the same. Read (or reread) all the threads in this forum for differences.

[geffy]

Have you read any of the other threads in this forum? No they're not the same. Read (or reread) all the threads in this forum for differences.
"5) *The new camera supports several recording formats: high-definition using DVCPRO-HD (with 4:2:2 color sampling in a 100-megabit data stream); standard-def using DVCPRO-50 (with 4:2:2 color sampling in a 50-megabit data stream, basically a recording format equivalent to Digital Betacam); and standard-def video using miniDV or DVCPRO-25 (4:1:1 video in a 25-megabit data stream) "
point is im not talking about the sony but the panasonic! so the 16:9 being compared is not the sony hdv but the panasonic dvpro, which was the point in the first place! to make it easy ill spell it out, apart from price and time why buy dvx100 with or without squeeze lens if the new panasonic hdx? p2? can record dv or better in 16:9 native! and how would this looked mixed with dv100 footage

[Michael_Bott]

You said you were thinking of using an HDV camera and that is the question Jan answered. New camera is not HDV.

[CineCell]

Excluding all the legit VIDEO techs and videographers here-

You hopeful movie makers that frequent these types of lists are becoming way too dependent on technology. I understand the social connection here but really, these new cameras and their differences mean nothing.

The "filmmakers" here, which is an overused term by the way, need to look at FILM or high end HD cameras anyway for making movies. And this is not the job of writer or director really generally. It's a decision that comes much later down the line when money is going into an account.

You should stop wasting your parents/friends/your money on gear. You aren't going to build a "studio" with it that will ever return the cash. These micro DV movies that are spit out every year are also a drain on the guys making real ind. films. It's also sad to see so many young guys get talked into the fact that tehy can do "anything" from their well0meaning parents. Chances are extremely good that it will never go anywhere... this leads to more depression and anxiety problems that at least us in the more developed countries do not need more of!

And yes, I know all about the micro few films (videos?) that have made it from a DV source. But you know what their chances are? About 1 in 6000, if that. Not something you should think about, plus people, meaning audiences, are getting tired of it already. There needs to be a reason to go out to a theatre!

[Michael_Bott]

Excluding all the legit VIDEO techs and videographers here-

You hopeful movie makers that frequent these types of lists are becoming way too dependent on technology. I understand the social connection here but really, these new cameras and their differences mean nothing. *

The "filmmakers" here, which is an overused term by the way, need to look at FILM or high end HD cameras anyway for making movies. And this is not the job of writer or director really generally. It's a decision that comes much later down the line when money is going into an account.

You should stop wasting your parents/friends/your money on gear. You aren't going to build a "studio" with it that will ever return the cash. These micro DV movies that are spit out every year are also a drain on the guys making real ind. films. It's also sad to see so many young guys get talked into the fact that tehy can do "anything" from their well0meaning parents. Chances are extremely good that it will never go anywhere... this leads to more depression and anxiety problems that at least us in the more developed countries do not need more of!

And yes, I know all about the micro few films (videos?) that have made it from a DV source. But you know what their chances are? About 1 in 6000, if that. Not something you should think about, plus people, meaning audiences, are getting tired of it already. There needs to be a reason to go out to a theatre!

I've never heard such arrogant nonsense. What is your purpose in coming into one of the most creative BBs on the net and rubbishing people for what they enjoy, aspire to and (in many cases) earn a living from? These people aren't sitting on their arses waiting for something to happen - they are out there doing, learning and earning and they happen to share on this board. They happen to have a wonderful tool available that allows them to make movies/docs NOW and be creative NOW - to speculate with their ideas and make them a reality without waiting for 'THE MONEY'. Why so threatened by that? If you're excluding all 'legit' contributors from your rant, who do you think is left?

From a 50 year old videographer who earns his living by what he does, who loves the film look and is determinrd to do the best work he can with a little help from his friends here.

[geffy]

lighten up its only dv or is that dxdv ;)

[mr._guiyotinne]

CineCell: People, audiences or public, are not getting tired of Minidv films. In fact, they are starting to appreciate it by what they are. Stories.

If i want make short films or features i don´t wanna go for the big money. Look what happened to The Aviator tonight. If you take so good script as Million Dollar Bay is, Take Clint away, take the big names away, and change everything from DV to borrowed Locations, you get (well not the same) but a pretty good story ANYWAY. And people will wach it regarding the resolution in the screen.

More, audiences are eager to choose this little films because they aren´t probably the same as big studios ten in a row fotocopies.

If they don´t earn lot of money, well, good thing they haven´t been expensive. If they are a hit, they will be remembered for what they are, rulebreakers, auteurs, foresighting people, whatever. I wanna be one of those rather than get suck in the system. If i don´t reach that far... man, it´s impossible i don´t reach that far; i LOVE writing, if i´m not good i have edditing, if i´m not good, i love producing, if i´m not good, i will always have directing (and directing is more of knowing how to ask people surrounding you and good common sense than other thing, and i have lot of that.)

For the price of a CineAlta, or a Varicam, or a renting for four weeks equipment people here in this place can make really good things. Heart and mind do more than HD or 35mm. If you don´t believe it, take a look around.

[geffy]

most important thing is everybody starts somewhere and if anybody wants to do something creative they have to be encouraged where it leads isnt importent its being on the path...................

[Michael_Bott]

Thank you for being more level - headed Mr Guiyotinne ::)

[mr._guiyotinne]

geffy you are right. if you tell somebody: You won´t go anywhere with DVX, go for Varicam and big bucks, most people would give up (if it was real, lucky it is not). it´s like you need to go for film shcool to do something worth the try. If i were not so kind person i would feel insulted. But it just makes me smile.

[geffy]

[quote author=mr._guiyotinne link=board=HDV;num=1108567176;start=90#95 date=02/28/05 at 01:15:50]. if you tell somebody: You won´t go anywhere with DVX, go for Varicam and big bucks, most people would give up quote]
I always liked the nike add "just do it" i just wished theyd expanded a little ie. "in the end just do it" Anyone who puts you off doing things is just worried about their own situation. As long as you do things thinking and preparing , it'll always be worth it, success , personel development, happiness, natashi ;)..................

[geffy]

in answer to a recent email i sent: "hi im interested but as its an old model im not sure what are th differences between it and the a?" Mainly the difference is the auto focus with 25P and some differences with 16:9 - not 100% sure as "Im not a techie... "
ultimate link for dvx100?
http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/#Whats_the_DVX100P

[eat@me]

He must have. Perhaps it's the language barrier. I doubt anyone could genuinely mean that! *:P


A Canadian language barrier, that is!

[geffy]

poll update:
seems a lot of dvx owners are pushing their cams before they sell them on ebay ;D

[ddh]

Most of the folks on this forum are interested in independent film making (even if they are only making money as a shooter or producing standard video) and shooting on film is just not an option for most. What the DVX100 and what a similar high definition cam may offer is a closer feel to film and that's the point. The DVX100 is a god send for most of us small producers. All I hope is that future cams get better resolution, a few more options on lenses and maintain an affordable price range.

[earon_k]

CineCell: People, audiences or public, are not getting tired of Minidv films. In fact, they are starting to appreciate it by what they are. Stories.

If i want make short films or features i don´t wanna go for the big money. Look what happened to The Aviator tonight. If you take so good script as Million Dollar Bay is, Take Clint away, take the big names away, and change everything from DV to borrowed Locations, you get (well not the same) but a pretty good story ANYWAY. And people will wach it regarding the resolution in the screen.

More, audiences are eager to choose this little films because they aren´t probably the same as big studios ten in a row fotocopies.

If they don´t earn lot of money, well, good thing they haven´t been expensive. If they are a hit, they will be remembered for what they are, rulebreakers, auteurs, foresighting people, whatever. I wanna be one of those rather than get suck in the system. If i don´t reach that far... man, it´s impossible i don´t reach that far; i LOVE writing, if i´m not good i have edditing, if i´m not good, i love producing, if i´m not good, i will always have directing (and directing is more of knowing how to ask people surrounding you and good common sense than other thing, and i have lot of that.)

For the price of a CineAlta, or a Varicam, or a renting for four weeks equipment people here in this place can make really good things. Heart and mind do more than HD or 35mm. If you don´t believe it, take a look around.


HEAR! HEAR! BRAVO!
earon

[Aidan]

ok, so say the prices do drop, when does anyone think it will happen? 2 months, 6 months......

[geffy]

shame the poll results are not here they got lost in the revamp, but at the time i was struck by the obstinate belief that the best time to sell was when the new camera appeared and it wasnt worth hanging off to buy it if it was feasible, very weird

[steindj]

i seriously would not want a lighter DVX. its light enough as is IMHO.

That's for sure!! It's almost too light.

[Bob Diesso]

Gee - It hadn't occurred to me that DVX prices had changed much from when I bought mine, but after reading this string I checked - unfortunately. B&H is selling new DVX's for $3400. After Panasonic's $500 rebate, price nets to $2899.95 - PLUS a free battery and tape. It's a great deal, but this is about $1200 less than I paid for mine (plus battery, etc.) about a year ago. The internet has even lower pricing but as Jan says, it's probably shaky gray market stuff.

eBay has used DVX100's selling for $1190.

This is rather sobering, as I had hoped to recover greater value selling my DVX when the HVX delivers. What happened???

[Barry_Green]

eBay has used DVX100's selling for $1190.
Doubtful. Scam artists abound in trying to sell people used expensive electronics. Legit prices for used DVX100s are probably more around $2000 or so.

[geffy]

"shame the poll results are not here they got lost in the revamp, but at the time i was struck by the obstinate belief that the best time to sell was when the new camera appeared and it wasnt worth hanging off to buy it if it was feasible, very weird"
just enjoy quoting myself!
enjoy the fun, im off to polish my xl2!

[Bob Diesso]

Barry, why do you say "unlikely"? Here's the link to a DVX owner in Tucson apparently trying to sell his DVX.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Panasonic-AG-DVX100-camorder_W0QQitemZ7555862339QQcategoryZ20332QQrdZ1 QQcmdZViewItem

Bids are up to $1250 so far. The guy seems legit and there's no sign of a scam that I can see. Is there something I missed? It may be worth watching how the bidding ends up. $2000 would be great, but he's a long way from that now.

My problem is how Panasonic themselves seem to have driven the value of my camera down. $2899 PLUS batteries and tapes is a far cry from what I paid only a year ago. The DVX is a great product. Thousands of owners like me really believe in this camera. Why does Panasonic feel compelled to cheapen it?

[Barry_Green]

Bids are up to $1250 so far. The guy seems legit and there's no sign of a scam that I can see. Is there something I missed?
Just look at completed auctions. Don't bother with auctions that are in progress, that's no way to judge, as items usually leap dramatically in value in the last 5 seconds of bidding. Look at the completed auctions. There are lots of DVX100 and DVX100A auctions completed in the last month; it's hard to sort through them but ignore all the "buy it now" ones, and you'll see lots of DVX100A's at $2900 or $2600 or $2300 or so. The very, very cheapest one was $1600.


Why does Panasonic feel compelled to cheapen it?
Panasonic feels compelled to sell product. They do what it takes to move the product.

A year ago the competition was very, very different -- there was no FX1, no Z1, no HD100, the HVX wasn't even announced, and the only competition was a much-more-expensive XL2. Now things are different. So their marketing has responded.

[Bob Diesso]

There are lots of DVX100 and DVX100A auctions completed in the last month; it's hard to sort through them but ignore all the "buy it now" ones, and you'll see lots of DVX100A's at $2900 or $2600 or $2300 or so. The very, very cheapest one was $1600.

Panasonic feels compelled to sell product. They do what it takes to move the product.

A year ago the competition was very, very different -- there was no FX1, no Z1, no HD100, the HVX wasn't even announced, and the only competition was a much-more-expensive XL2. Now things are different. So their marketing has responded.

This is not what I'm seeing. Who in their right mind would buy a used DVX100 for $2600, as you say, when a new one can be had with batteries and tapes for $2899?

Well, I love the product but Panasonic's "marketing" has certainly devalued my investment. Canon introduced the XL-H1 at about $10k and the HD100 sells for $5900 and the Z1 for maybe $5400. The DVX is a GREAT camera at its original price. Lots of people like me bought it. Why does Panasonic feel compelled to undermine our investment just so they can sell a few more?

[geffy]

the new canon looks great as does the new panasonic, itll get better then the only difference between amateur and professional will be opportunity and talent, just like now:-)

[Jan_Crittenden]

This is not what I'm seeing. Who in their right mind would buy a used DVX100 for $2600, as you say, when a new one can be had with batteries and tapes for $2899?

Well, I love the product but Panasonic's "marketing" has certainly devalued my investment. Canon introduced the XL-H1 at about $10k and the HD100 sells for $5900 and the Z1 for maybe $5400. The DVX is a GREAT camera at its original price. Lots of people like me bought it. Why does Panasonic feel compelled to undermine our investment just so they can sell a few more?

Hi Bob,

In response to your question, I don't see that what we have done as devaluing your purchase. The list price has remained the same. We have promoted the DVX100A in light of the fact that there is increased competition, from all sides actually, and an incoming product that is its replacement. When we brought in the DVX100As, many complaints were had on the fact that they had just purchased at the same price the DVX100, and there was much angst on that idea for at least 6 months after the fact and even today I suffer through one or two complaints. So keeping that idea in mind for the last 2 years, we approched this introduction with some trepidation. So we have offered an incentive rebate for the purchase of the DVX100A and have introduced the 100B at the same price. It is a pretty tough world out there and just to maintain market share, sometimes you need to entertain some agressive strategies.

The Z1 sells for $4995 every day of the week, and the FX1 can be had at $3999. The Canon XL2 is selling for $3595, a major decrease from their initial list price of $4995. So yes there is competition.

Best regards,

Jan

[Jim Arthurs]

Hey, buying cameras and speculating on their resale value is not the way to achieve financial success... you have to look at the value you get out of their service along with the resale price to determine total value.

I sold my DVX last November on Ebay... I did so because I was purchasing a Z1 and didn't want any greater loss due to the competition by waiting and selling later. I got a good price.

I then sold my Z1 in June (knowing that the HVX was THE camera for me) to get the greatest value out of it before it had HDV competition in the form of the JVC. I got a good price.

Basically, I optimized my return, but at the expense of not having the cameras in service for several months waiting for the next "big thing".

This was acceptable to me because neither camera were income earners. If you're actually making money with these cameras, then it's pretty irrelevant what the resale value is, IMO.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[philnerd]

This is not what I'm seeing. Who in their right mind would buy a used DVX100 for $2600, as you say, when a new one can be had with batteries and tapes for $2899?

Well, I love the product but Panasonic's "marketing" has certainly devalued my investment. Canon introduced the XL-H1 at about $10k and the HD100 sells for $5900 and the Z1 for maybe $5400. The DVX is a GREAT camera at its original price. Lots of people like me bought it. Why does Panasonic feel compelled to undermine our investment just so they can sell a few more?

You know, this reminds of all the complaining that went on when Hasbro/Kenner re-released some of the really hard to find star wars toys (stuff like the early 80's A-Wing fighter and Sand Skiff - stuff that goes for $500 to $1K+ in the collector market).

Like it or not, a manufacturer - of whatever - is trying to sell product. Period. They are completely not responsible for ANYTHING in the used market. Now you mentioned that Canon's XLH1 is priced at about 10K (actually, its 9K isn't it?). You don't mean to imply that Canon priced it that high to protect XL2 owner's camcorder investment, right? If so, rest assured, Canon priced it that high to protect THEIR Xl2 investment. I'm sure they were fully aware that a 5-6K XLH1 would have taken away sales of the XL2. And they're out to sell product. As someone else mentioned, the XL2 has actually dropped a ton in value. People were paying 5 grand for XL2s at launch. Now I can order the thing for $3600 - and that's from B&H!

I could be wrong, but I think these 3K+ cams are pretty much designed for the working crowd. Most of the people that purchase these make money with them and the cam pays for itself many times over. Any resale after that is just icing. Now I'm not implying that you've done this, but anyone that purchases a cam at this price point for fun or personal projects and fully anticipates a high resalve value.. well, they probably shouldn't have dropped so much money on a cam to begin with. If someone's not rich or making money with video, a 3K camcorder is just a bad idea. A motivated individual can make some great content with a $500 camcorder and they won't be in debt or have to worry about resale value if the transmission on the car dies.

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com

[geffy]

found a dvx in the bottom of a cornflakes packet, what a rip off i wanted a plastic wallace and gromit, guess ill try ebay:-)

[Bob Diesso]

Hi Bob,

In response to your question, I don't see that what we have done as devaluing your purchase. The list price has remained the same.

When we brought in the DVX100As, many complaints were had on the fact that they had just purchased at the same price the DVX100, and there was much angst on that idea for at least 6 months after the fact and even today I suffer through one or two complaints. So keeping that idea in mind for the last 2 years, we approched this introduction with some trepidation. So we have offered an incentive rebate for the purchase of the DVX100A and have introduced the 100B at the same price. It is a pretty tough world out there and just to maintain market share, sometimes you need to entertain some agressive strategies.

Best regards,

Jan

Jan, respectfully, it isn't the list price that I'm concerned about. It's the market price that's the concern, and the fact that Panasonic has intentionally driven the price down via dealer price redutions, rebates, free goods or whatever. I respectfully understand you have to sell cameras in a competitive market, but you should keep in mind the good faith investment people make in your product TODAY.

If it isn't possible to sustain pricing integrity, then perhaps you'd be kind enough to let us all know what the HVX will be selling for NEXT year. At least then we could buy today with some foresight as to Panasonic's plans for degradation of our investment.

[Bob Diesso]

A Panasonic response would be appreciated.

[Jan_Crittenden]

Jan, respectfully, it isn't the list price that I'm concerned about. It's the market price that's the concern, and the fact that Panasonic has intentionally driven the price down via dealer price redutions, rebates, free goods or whatever. I respectfully understand you have to sell cameras in a competitive market, but you should keep in mind the good faith investment people make in your product TODAY.

If it isn't possible to sustain pricing integrity, then perhaps you'd be kind enough to let us all know what the HVX will be selling for NEXT year. At least then we could buy today with some foresight as to Panasonic's plans for degradation of our investment.

Hi Bob,

Sorry, I have been a little busy which is why I have not responded sooner.

First, I have not reduced the price of the camera to the dealers and if you can show me a marketing bulletin that says that I will give you $500. The fact is you will not be able to. I have not reduced the price. I have made the camera competitive with what else is out there vying for the consumer dollar with an attractive rebate and free goods. If I didn't then I would not sell as many as needed.

In the world of mini-DV camcorders you can and should expect that the minute you start to put hours on your camcorder you have lost about half the value of the camera. Done deal. The fact that you can get an HDV camcorder for the same price as a DVX makes for a very competitive environment. However the list price of the camera is still $3995. This is why I didn't change the list price of the product. A year from now if some one asks what was the price of the camera, as they do in the insurance industry, I say $3995. Value sustained. Two years from now $3995. Three, etc. The reality is the camera still has the same list price. Long after the gray market issues (another little problem) go away the camera will be remembered as a $3995 camera. Point is, in a competitive environment especially with the DVX100B coming in, I ran a special program. I do not happen to agree with you on your interpretation of that marketing effort.

In the meantime, go make money with it, it does not become more valuable with age, it is not an investment. It is a tool, tools are not investments in and of themselves, they are an investment in your ability to create something. It should enhance your abilities and in doing so allow you to sell your creative ideas over your competition. This is the first rule in the video business. I know guys that 7 years ago bought a Betacam BVW-D600 with lens for about $56,000. That camera isn't worth $5,000 today, actually the lens is worth more than the camera. But during the last seven years they paid for the camera that allowed them to be creative and make video that was attractive. You cannot expect a camera to hold its market value over time, the video business just does not work that way.

The replacement for the DVX100A is the 100B, guess what, the price is $3995.

As far as plans for the HVX, well that is a tough crystal ball isn't it? The camera does and doesn't have competition. Some would say HDV is competition, but I don't see that, the performance is vastly different. The workflow is vastly different. The pricing is vastly different. I don't see another small frame based codec camera in the neighborhood. But as I have with the DVX camera, I will do the best job I know how to maintain its market value, and make it the most desireable camera in the market place.

Best,

Jan

[dregenthal]

Barry, why do you say "unlikely"? Here's the link to a DVX owner in Tucson apparently trying to sell his DVX.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Panasonic-AG-DVX100-camorder_W0QQitemZ7555862339QQcategoryZ20332QQrdZ1 QQcmdZViewItem

Bids are up to $1250 so far. The guy seems legit and there's no sign of a scam that I can see. Is there something I missed? It may be worth watching how the bidding ends up. $2000 would be great, but he's a long way from that now.

Hi Bob- I checked the auction you referenced (above) which has ended, and guess what? The camera sold for $1920.00 What's really interesting is that it was not a DVX100A . . . it was in fact, the original, a DVX100.

Very cool, no?

[geffy]

the simple guide is this subtract selling price from buying price, divide by number of hours used and that gives you a value per hour of enjoyment, cinema is about 2.50 per hour to view a hookers about 30 quid, you can use the same formula for a marriage, though you have to evaluate a multiplier for the relative enjoyment factor in both cases,
gef

[Bruce Morgan]

An early post on this thread someone stated that
he wished the dvx had more weight ---------

I agree
my 35mm bell and howell eyemo is at least 15 lbs
and it serves as a counter weight to my upwards arm strenght
to cause stabalization
zI have enjoyed many years of hand held work often mistaken for chapman crane work when shot at 32fps ....!!!!
For the dvx there is a aftermarket thought
to add a ballast box or a weight box via plate and thread to the bottom of the Dvx .this box could have varable weight .

Sort of a mini cine saddle bag would be nice to have for the dvx
it could facilitate :thumbsup: quick hand held shots ending in a "set down ' shot with the camera on a rock , bench or top of of a wall ..
Cheers
Bruce :thumbsup:

[geffy]

An early post on this thread someone stated that
he wished the dvx had more weight ---------
as in the power to hire or fire, or to deceide where to eat or in the allocation of limited resources, call it dvxmba, that should do it:-)