PDA

View Full Version : Panasonic DVX200 at EVS on August 18th & 19th



Jim Martin
07-30-2015, 10:04 AM
Hey everyone here in LA, We are having the DVX200 visiting EVS on August 18th & 19th from 10-5. Stop in and get your hands on this exciting new camera coming in October. We'll have it set up on monitors so you can check out all the features that are coming in this neat new package.....
http://www.evsonline.com/store-events/

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Jim Martin
08-05-2015, 08:53 AM
Got a few calls on this......From what we can tell, the camera we'll have is from the latest batch.......probably the same units that were used in Japan and what Barry green has now....

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

demoboy
08-05-2015, 09:41 AM
Got a few calls on this......From what we can tell, the camera we'll have is from the latest batch.......probably the same units that were used in Japan and what Barry green has now....

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Thanks Jim. I'm excited for your team to also test the new firmware of the LS300. The new LOG and dynamic range now seems important.

Jim Martin
08-05-2015, 02:27 PM
Thanks Jim. I'm excited for your team to also test the new firmware of the LS300. The new LOG and dynamic range now seems important.
Yes...we'll upgrade our free demo "try & buy" cameras and get some footage out. The JVC rep just left but we've not been given a firm day of release yet.

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

lovecameras
08-06-2015, 09:50 PM
LS300 seems a better option

Jim Martin
08-07-2015, 04:35 PM
LS300 seems a better option
Different animals in a way.....both are big chip cameras doing 1080 & 4K, cinema looks and frame rates close if not the same....but the DVX has a built in power zoom and that's something the reality shooters have been asking for. While they like working with the Canon C series, the thing that was lacking was an affordable power zoom option. The RedRock was the least expensive option at around $2500 vs the standard set ups costing $9-13,000. The new DVX is going to be a perfect solution for those needing this zoom feature.
The new firmware updates that are coming on the JVC will be a great addition to that camera......I think it will be a clearer picture once Panasonic announces pricing. If they are close to the JVC's price, I wouldn't be surprised if JVC reacts and lowers their price....but who knows.....exciting times for all!

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

PS- Reminder that we will have the DVX200 here at EVS on Tuesday & Wednesday the 18th & 19th so if you're in LA, plan on coming over!

demoboy
08-07-2015, 07:05 PM
Different animals in a way.....both are big chip cameras doing 1080 & 4K, cinema looks and frame rates close if not the same....but the DVX has a built in power zoom and that's something the reality shooters have been asking for. While they like working with the Canon C series, the thing that was lacking was an affordable power zoom option. The RedRock was the least expensive option at around $2500 vs the standard set ups costing $9-13,000. The new DVX is going to be a perfect solution for those needing this zoom feature.
The new firmware updates that are coming on the JVC will be a great addition to that camera......I think it will be a clearer picture once Panasonic announces pricing. If they are close to the JVC's price, I wouldn't be surprised if JVC reacts and lowers their price....but who knows.....exciting times for all!

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

PS- Reminder that we will have the DVX200 here at EVS on Tuesday & Wednesday the 18th & 19th so if you're in LA, plan on coming over!

I agree with Jim. The only real problem I have with the LS300 is sensor coverage. I like to believe that it's been optimized for S35mm coverage in relation to cine lenses. Ive always been curious of pixel density science from th variable scan mapping off the LS300. Cropping around seems practical, but what's the best coverage for the LS300's 4K capture? For instance native MFT CP2 is optimized for MFT sensor coverage, not S35mm coverage. We have to use the PL adapter and standard s35 cine lenses for optimiz3d s35mm 4K capture. This is my assumption. I'm not against MFT. I believe the new M.Zuiko Pro series are the best MFT lenses atm.

Jim Martin
08-10-2015, 08:58 AM
If you use the re-map feature, as you go in from S35 to 86%, the 4K graphic pops up on the screen, MFT at 80%...and the same if you go down to, I think it is 56%, the S16 graphic pops up......

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Jim Martin
08-17-2015, 09:58 AM
Reminder, Tomorrow and Wednesday the camera will be here at EVS.....I still have not been able to confirm which "batch" it is from....I suspect the same batch as what Barry has.....

Jim Martin
evsONLINE.COM

Jim Martin
08-18-2015, 02:41 PM
Consistent turnout so far today.....lots of good conversations as we all are discovering the camera. Also, Jonathan Lawrence stopped in to give us some insight to his shooting experience in Japan with the camera....

True North
08-18-2015, 04:19 PM
Sooooo...what's the verdict? Does it suck or is it good :)

R Hudson
08-18-2015, 05:48 PM
Sooooo...what's the verdict? Does it suck or is it good :)

Yeah, Yeah.........opinions???

Barry_Green
08-18-2015, 06:43 PM
Sooooo...what's the verdict? Does it suck or is it good :)
That's the thing -- that opinion is entirely subjective on what you want to do with it. Some people will think it's the perfect camera for them; others will think it's totally the wrong one for them.

The only thing we can really definitively say is -- there's nothing else like it at its price point. It's unique. It's got some great aspects, but it's not an FS7. Then again, it's nearly 1/3 the price of the FS7 (with lens) so -- it would be unrealistic to expect it to be.

It's not a super low-light monster -- if your entire camera-shopping priority consists of the question "how is it in low light", then you probably aren't the target market for the DVX200. It's about comparable, maybe a little better, than the AC160/HPX250/PX270 series in those terms. But if you've got sufficient light, the pictures it makes are exquisite... and its usability is simply unparalleled for a large-sensor camera in this price bracket, or anywhere near this price bracket, especially for a 4K camera...

Some of you will love it, some won't care for it. The camera itself is a good camera -- but it depends on whether it suits your priorities or not.

philiplipetz
08-18-2015, 07:23 PM
That's the thing -- that opinion is entirely subjective on what you want to do with it. Some people will think it's the perfect camera for them; others will think it's totally the wrong one for them.

The only thing we can really definitively say is -- there's nothing else like it at its price point. It's unique. It's got some great aspects, but it's not an FS7. Then again, it's nearly 1/3 the price of the FS7 (with lens) so -- it would be unrealistic to expect it to be.

It's not a super low-light monster -- if your entire camera-shopping priority consists of the question "how is it in low light", then you probably aren't the target market for the DVX200. It's about comparable, maybe a little better, than the AC160/HPX250/PX270 series in those terms. But if you've got sufficient light, the pictures it makes are exquisite... and its usability is simply unparalleled for a large-sensor camera in this price bracket, or anywhere near this price bracket, especially for a 4K camera...

Some of you will love it, some won't care for it. The camera itself is a good camera -- but it depends on whether it suits your priorities or not.

Several times you have said it is not a FS7, what do you mean? It is obviously strongly in your consciousness.

Also, is the low light as bad as the GH4. That frankly was not acceptable to me for my needs. And then there is the issue of the GH4 taking brighter lenses, so is the total package less sensitive than the GH4? You compared the DVX200 to 1/3" 3MOS all-in-one sensor cameras with the reputation as being definitely not low light monsters, or even good in low light.

david_p
08-18-2015, 07:30 PM
I'm wondering about its low light abilities as well. i guess even if its a 1/2 stop better than the GH4 (not much) it gets diminished because you can never get faster than f2.8....and only worse when zoomed in. at least a GH4 you can put on a 1.4 or faster lens to save the day in really low light.

i know Barry is apprehensive of saying definitive things since its still a pre production camera but comparing its low light capabilities to the AC160/HPX250/PX270 is pretty disappointing but can see that the speed of the lens is much in play with this weakness. still i believe there will be much to like about this camera and for $4,200 the price is like Panasonic is daring people to not buy this camera.

I'm still hopeful and optimistic!

david

fastfinger
08-18-2015, 07:58 PM
That's the thing -- that opinion is entirely subjective on what you want to do with it. Some people will think it's the perfect camera for them; others will think it's totally the wrong one for them.

The only thing we can really definitively say is -- there's nothing else like it at its price point. It's unique. It's got some great aspects, but it's not an FS7. Then again, it's nearly 1/3 the price of the FS7 (with lens) so -- it would be unrealistic to expect it to be.

It's not a super low-light monster -- if your entire camera-shopping priority consists of the question "how is it in low light", then you probably aren't the target market for the DVX200. It's about comparable, maybe a little better, than the AC160/HPX250/PX270 series in those terms. But if you've got sufficient light, the pictures it makes are exquisite... and its usability is simply unparalleled for a large-sensor camera in this price bracket, or anywhere near this price bracket, especially for a 4K camera...

Some of you will love it, some won't care for it. The camera itself is a good camera -- but it depends on whether it suits your priorities or not.

I'm interested in how well stabilization works in 4k? Also 1080p. What camera would you compare it to?

Barry_Green
08-18-2015, 08:43 PM
Several times you have said it is not a FS7, what do you mean? It is obviously strongly in your consciousness.
The FS7 is a great camera, and up until now it's really been the only large-sensor camera that had the type of lens that could conceivably make it usable as an events type of camera. The DVX200 now becomes an even more suitable type of camera for that, but it's not going to compete against the FS7's larger sensor, interchangeable lenses, or 240 fps. It's in a different class.


Also, is the low light as bad as the GH4. That frankly was not acceptable to me for my needs. And then there is the issue of the GH4 taking brighter lenses, so is the total package less sensitive than the GH4?
Well, probably, yes. If you put a Voigtlander on a GH4, it's going to be more sensitive, at any given ISO, than a DVX200 will, because the DVX200 can't open up to f/0.95.


You compared the DVX200 to 1/3" 3MOS all-in-one sensor cameras with the reputation as being definitely not low light monsters, or even good in low light.
I compared it against cameras that I tried against it, which delivered generally similar sensitivity. The larger sensor is definitely more sensitive in the DVX200, but the wider f-stop of the 1/3" cameras brings them back in line and makes them somewhat comparable. If you look at the published specs of the cameras, the DVX200 is listed as F/11 at 2000 LUX, at 3200k. The HPX250, IIRC, was F/10 at 2000 LUX at 3200K. The HPX250 opens up to f/1.6, vs. the DVX200's maximum of f/2.8, so that makes a big difference.

I find that the DVX200 is about 2/3 stop better in terms of noise performance than the 1/3" cameras, so you can go to ISO 800 and reap similar noise performance as the other cameras at about ISO 320, so there is some advantage. But it's not going to be like a 20,000 ISO DSLR with an f/1.2 lens on it.

Barry_Green
08-18-2015, 08:49 PM
I'm wondering about its low light abilities as well. i guess even if its a 1/2 stop better than the GH4 (not much) it gets diminished because you can never get faster than f2.8....and only worse when zoomed in. at least a GH4 you can put on a 1.4 or faster lens to save the day in really low light.
That is an advantage you're always going to have with an interchangeable-lens camera. Fixed lenses and long zooms never open up as bright as prime lenses. The Voigtlander f/0.95 lenses just let in so much more light than any zoom lens is going to.


i know Barry is apprehensive of saying definitive things since its still a pre production camera but comparing its low light capabilities to the AC160/HPX250/PX270 is pretty disappointing but can see that the speed of the lens is much in play with this weakness.
I'm just relaying it as I have discovered it. I am hoping to get a PL sample soon and will see if it's improved the situation any, but I'm not really expecting it to, or if it does, it will likely be a modest improvement, not a night-and-day improvement. I found the HPX250 an PX270 to be decent performers in any reasonable lighting condition, and the DVX200 is a bit better still, depending on what gamma you use (VLOG darkens the images noticeably, as all log gammas do, and would not be my first choice for a lower-light environment).


I still i believe there will be much to like about this camera and for $4,200 the price is like Panasonic is daring people to not buy this camera.
There is a LOT to like about it, yes. Like I said, you just have to evaluate what it does, against what you need. If this is the right style of camera for you, I think you'll probably like it a lot. If what you really want is a 20,000 ISO small DSLR with interchangeable lenses, then this camera won't make you very happy. It is something new, and it's different from everything else out there. It's not perfect, you have to be practical in your expectations, but yes, the lower price makes it seriously interesting.

If you've been using something like the HPX250, PX270, AC160 etc., then this camera gives you a comparable-sized unit with all the usability, connectivity, and features that you're used to, along with much shallower DOF and hyper-crisp 4K resolution, 120 fps slow mo, and a whole bunch of other features (like a 16-pole color matrix, VLOG gamma, etc). It is an all-in-one that lets you replace your existing HPX250, EX1, and DSLR, with one camera that can do it all (such as shooting a concert or sporting event and then going into an office and setting up a film-style shallow-DOF interview, or working conventions during the week and making your films on the weekends, etc). However, there are certain practical limitations that come with a 13x power zoom with video-style autofocus and image stabilization, and one of those limitations is that the lens doesn't let in as much light as a prime lens will. That limits the overall sensitivity back to where it's on par with the existing 1/3" cameras or thereabouts. So it's not a step back from the existing cameras, it is in fact a little better in sensitivity even after factoring in the iris on the lens, but it's not a quantum leap forward from the prior 1/3" cameras in terms of sensitivity. (meaning, even though it is notably more sensitive, the lens's minimum f-stop is more open on the smaller-chip cameras, which lets more light in, which about compensates for the DVX's bigger chip's sensitivity advantage).

philiplipetz
08-18-2015, 08:52 PM
when can we expect your book? such a book would definitely boost sales, especially for people not used to cameras with so many settings/

Mike Harvey
08-18-2015, 08:53 PM
Several times you have said it is not a FS7, what do you mean? It is obviously strongly in your consciousness.

Also, is the low light as bad as the GH4. That frankly was not acceptable to me for my needs. And then there is the issue of the GH4 taking brighter lenses, so is the total package less sensitive than the GH4? You compared the DVX200 to 1/3" 3MOS all-in-one sensor cameras with the reputation as being definitely not low light monsters, or even good in low light.

Depends on what you define as good in low light. For a 1/3" camera, the PX270 seemed to do pretty good for low light. It wasn't an S35 camera with a F1.4 lens on it, but for folks doing event work coming from 1/3" cameras, if the DVX200 does any better then the PX270, that's a win in my book. I mean, I just shot an event with my GH4 because it was so much better with an F2.8 lens than my HMC150. If the DVX200 is more sensitive with better noise at higher ISO's than my GH4 at, say, F3.5, then I think there will be a segment of the market that will be quite pleased.

Barry_Green
08-18-2015, 09:00 PM
when can we expect your book? such a book would definitely boost sales, especially for people not used to cameras with so many settings/

I don't know for sure when it'll be done, but I'm aiming for in October.

Mike Harvey
08-18-2015, 09:10 PM
I don't know for sure when it'll be done, but I'm aiming for in October.

Awesome, your AF100 book was incredibly helpful with a lot of the fine details of the camera.

mattjeh
08-19-2015, 02:59 AM
You've compared the dvx200' low light against some other cameras, all of which I've never used, how would you say it compares to the trusty ex1 in low light?

Ron Evans
08-19-2015, 05:54 AM
Barry, my interest is UHD at 60P so am only interested in low light performance better than my FDR-AX1 ( which is really like the HC-X1000) or at HD my NX5U which I expect is not quite as good as the newer AC160. I appreciate the lens/sensor size issue as my Sony AX100 ( 1" sensor max f2.8 ) is if anything slightly less sensitive than my Sony NX30 ( 1/3" max f1.6 ) with similar gain settings.

Bassman2003
08-19-2015, 06:39 AM
You've compared the dvx200' low light against some other cameras, all of which I've never used, how would you say it compares to the trusty ex1 in low light?

The EX-1 is ~f10 @ 2000lux So pretty much the same as the HPX-250.

Regarding the sensitivity, the only spec I am waiting for is how long one will be able to stay at f2.8 as you zoom through the lens. This will make a lot of people happy or sad.

joe 1008
08-19-2015, 07:48 AM
Regarding the sensitivity, the only spec I am waiting for is how long one will be able to stay at f2.8 as you zoom through the lens. This will make a lot of people happy or sad.
I placing my bets lower. I'm hoping for constant f/3.5 for the "general narrative focal length range" (28mm x3)

Barry_Green
08-19-2015, 07:49 AM
Regarding the sensitivity, the only spec I am waiting for is how long one will be able to stay at f2.8 as you zoom through the lens. This will make a lot of people happy or sad.
Well, depending on where you're coming from, the news is either slightly encouraging, or cause for weeping and lamentation. If you're used to using the 14-140, then you may be overjoyed (or at least reasonably happy) with this lens, since it maintains pretty much a 2/3 to 3/4 stop advantage over the 14-140 throughout the 14-140's range. Obviously it's a full stop faster at 12.8 vs. the 14-140's 4.0, but over the bulk of the zoom range it's about 3/4 stop faster.

For those of us who were hoping for a long zoom range at f/2.8, well, ... no. The versions I have used ramp off of 2.8 quite quickly.

In terms of actual iris at zoom position, it ramps from 2.8 to 4.0 over the range of 12.8 to about 30.5. Then it holds 4.0 to 4.2 all the way out to about 96mm. It holds 4.5 from 96mm out to 167.

Based on that, if you want to treat it as a fixed-iris zoom, you can think of it as an f4 from about 24mm to 167mm; it's within about 1/3 of a stop of f/4 over that whole range.

If you're shooting HD, you have potentially another option, which is to use the (essentially) visually lossless i.Zoom function, that extends the zoom range up to about 1.54x. So using i.Zoom, you could set the iris at f/2.8 and use a very limited optical zoom (from 12.8 - 13.4mm) and then use the i.Zoom to extend that effective zoom range to 12.8 - 20.6mm. Ain't much, but could be useful in a situation where you're shooting an interview in a small office and you need all the iris you can get to make the shallowest DOF possible.

I know for a fact that the lens in this unit is not final and that the actual lens hardware is going to change before the production version, but I do not expect substantial improvement in the iris positions.

I'm disappointed that it doesn't hold f/2.8 for a lot longer. But I temper that with the notion that I've been using the 14-140, and this lens is approximately 1,000,000,000,000 times better than the 14-140 in every imaginable way, and is about 2/3 to 3/4 stop faster than the 14-140. So in that context, I don't mind it. But it's not a fixed f/2.8 like many of us were hoping for.

joe 1008
08-19-2015, 08:01 AM
So with the digital zoom in HD I would get 12.8 x 3mm @ f/3.5? Don't know if I'm happy now or if that would be too tricky (I'm mostly interested in the DVX200 as a HD camera).

I mean, digital zoom would affect sensor size and hence DOF - AND noise grain would become proportionally bigger. These two factors could wipe out the advantage of a slightly faster aperture. I wonder if it would be better to stay @ f/4 in HD.

Bassman2003
08-19-2015, 08:29 AM
Thank you for the info Barry. Sad that the f2.8 is more of a marketing number or "token" f-stop number instead of a real world use approach. I was hoping to keep f2.8 until the FF eq. portrait range (85mm-100mm) for shallow DOF interview use. But I have to say this is a strike against the DVX-200 as an all around camera. f4 with the sensor size is not the greatest compared to a s35, FF or even a GH4 with a fast prime. I am still a fan but this lowers the value and street cred in my eyes.

Barry_Green
08-19-2015, 08:40 AM
So with the digital zoom in HD I would get 12.8 x 3mm @ f/3.5? Don't know if I'm happy now or if that would be too tricky (I'm mostly interested in the DVX200 as a HD camera).
Well, yes, at f/3.6 or faster you'd have an optical range from 12.8 to 27.3, and then the i.Zoom (not digital zoom, i.zoom, it's different) would extend that to effectively 42mm. So you'd have the ability to go between 12.8 to 42mm at f/3.6 (or faster, at the wider end). So that would be a 3.3:1 zoom range at that iris. It isn't the most convenient way in the world to work, but it is possible. And only in HD.


I mean, digital zoom would affect sensor size and hence DOF - AND noise grain would become proportionally bigger. These two factors could wipe out the advantage of a slightly faster aperture. I wonder if it would be better to stay @ f/4 in HD.
Well, the i.Zoom isn't a typical digital zoom. In digital zoom, they blow up the existing footage. In i.zoom, they crop in a little bit further on the sensor, but they still have massive oversampling to work with, so you still get the fully-resolved 1080 image. Digital zoom is a complete loss in resolution right off the bat; if you go to 2x digital zoom, it's basically doubling every pixel, so half resolution. In i.zoom, it's still fully resolved 1080 footage.

In the HC-X1000, the i.zoom goes to a full 2x, and when zoomed in at 2x you do see definitely more noise. In i.zoom, it's limited to 1.54x and the grain still looks very good.

I'm not saying this is a perfect solution, just that it's a possible option for those who are shooting 1080.

Barry_Green
08-19-2015, 08:44 AM
I was hoping to keep f2.8 until the FF eq. portrait range (85mm-100mm) for shallow DOF interview use.
Me too. Unfortunately, it isn't; it's f/4 up to about 85mm equivalent. Beyond that it's f/4.2 So it's not night and day different, it's just a stop different. That stop counts, I know, but it's not like the 14-140 where it was more like 1.5-1.8 stops different.


But I have to say this is a strike against the DVX-200 as an all around camera. f4 with the sensor size is not the greatest compared to a s35, FF or even a GH4 with a fast prime. I am still a fan but this lowers the value and street cred in my eyes.
I do agree; that's one reason why I was very glad to see that the street price is quite a bit lower than what we were originally thinking. I think the price is reasonable given the functionality that the camera has, but as a buyer I would have been concerned if they'd priced it at $5,000. At $4195 it's much easier to accept that it's generally an f4 lens.

Jim Martin
08-19-2015, 08:44 AM
We had a steady flow of people yesterday and should have more today.....most were glad to get there hands on the camera, see live footage in 4K, a get a real "feel" of how the camera is going to perform....and we got some orders....SO, if you are in town, come on down!

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com
818-552-4590

philiplipetz
08-20-2015, 04:55 AM
It's not a super low-light monster -- if your entire camera-shopping priority consists of the question "how is it in low light", then you probably aren't the target market for the DVX200. It's about comparable, maybe a little better, than the AC160/HPX250/PX270 series in those terms. But if you've got sufficient light, the pictures it makes are exquisite... and its usability is simply unparalleled for a large-sensor camera in this price bracket, or anywhere near this price bracket, especially for a 4K camera...



Barry, perhaps I missed something but in the main DVX200 thread you implied that the DVX200 with high sensitivity boost and shooting in HD should deliver good results through ISO4000, only some small luma noise but clean chroma. This would seem to indicate that it should be better than the listed cameras, even including the dimmer lens on the DVX200. Yet, you say that they are roughly equivalent. I am sure I missed something obvious but could you please tell me where i went wrong in my reasoning.

Barry_Green
08-20-2015, 06:35 AM
Barry, perhaps I missed something but in the main DVX200 thread you implied that the DVX200 with high sensitivity boost and shooting in HD should deliver good results through ISO4000, only some small luma noise but clean chroma. This would seem to indicate that it should be better than the listed cameras, even including the dimmer lens on the DVX200. Yet, you say that they are roughly equivalent. I am sure I missed something obvious but could you please tell me where i went wrong in my reasoning.
Well, there are two different criteria here we're talking about. One is "if set to the same noise level, how do they compare?" And on that basis, I am saying that the general performance, once the lens difference is factored in, is generally comparable.

The other criteria is: "how far can you push it?" In my experience, in HD mode, I'd be perfectly happy pushing the DVX200 to at least 2000 ISO, and perhaps 4000, depending on what shooting mode (4K or HD, VLOG or no VLOG, etc).

The missing piece here is: how far would I feel comfortable pushing the 1/3" cameras? And I didn't run that test. It's possible that they'd remain comparable at comparable levels of gain, or it's possible that the DVX200 would pull ahead, I don't know. The gain performance from the HMC40 to the AC90 was tremendously improved; the AC90 showed practically no increase in grain from 0dB up to maybe 12dB, and beyond that it seemed to just get "flatter". The HC-X1000 seems to have gain performance more in line with the HMC40. From my initial testing on the DVX200, it seems to be somewhere inbetween. There is an increase in grain as you gain up the ISO, but it doesn't seem to get as grainy as the HMC40 did (unless you go to the extremes, 16000 and 32000 ISO).

Now, doubtless there are people who are going to pixel-peep and say "bah, I can see noise in the shadows even at 500 ISO." Well, yes, if you pixel-peep, you will see noise, surprise surprise. But I've had four people gathered around a 4K monitor, at 3-4 feet distance, and challenged them to look for noise, and all of us came back saying basically "ain't none", as in -- yes, it's there if you stare, but in general there just isn't anything there to pay attention to. So it's a question of: are we asking if it's noise-free, or are we asking -- would a reasonable person at a reasonable viewing distance say that the image is noisy? I'm saying that no, in my opinion a reasonable person would not look at DVX200 footage on a monitor at a reasonable viewing distance and say "ugh, that's noisy." It's not that there's no noise, it's that it just isn't an issue in reasonable viewing distances. I have used an Odyssey 7Q+, it has the ability to magnify the image at a zoom ratio of 4:1 or more, and yes, you can see lots of noise if you blow the image up to 400%. But if you play it out on a 40" 4K TV, it just looks really, really good. In my opinion.

Jim Martin
08-20-2015, 08:59 AM
It's still here at EVS so if you are in town, come on down!

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

el jeffe
08-23-2015, 11:21 PM
Does this camera have the same bayo mount as the hpx170? Hoping to use the century extreme fisheye on it since they are both 72mm filter thread cameras

Jim Martin
08-24-2015, 09:23 AM
We checked out the 16 x 9 wide angle adapter, converter, and fisheye.....they all screwed on fine but the WA adapter and fisheye showed a fair amount of CA in the outer areas. Now the fisheye's CA was ok enough to use, giving it a "artsy" look, you probably wouldn't like what the WA adapter did. The WA converter seemed acceptable. We are trying to see what Century has to offer.....

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Jim Martin
08-24-2015, 09:33 AM
And the camera is still here today so come on down!

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com