Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DVX200 - is this still a relevant camera? 10-bit or not?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    DVX200 - is this still a relevant camera? 10-bit or not?

    Hello all fans of DVX200

    I have been able to get 2 of these beasts at a great price.

    I have been filming primarily on Blackmagic Pocket and URSA, so I am used to work "cinema style" with switching prime lens, instead of Zoom, etc.

    Tried the DVX200 on a couple of jobs and it did pretty well, like it was much faster to setup and shoot. But the image quality of a 8-bit codec was lacking in comparison with the Blackmagic RAW.

    That is the reason I listed 1 of the cameras on Ebay at a very low price.
    Even though, it seems there is not much of an interest to this model at this point, no potential buyer has come up.

    So I am looking for any feedback, do you think it is still a relevant camera in this age of RAW codecs and big sensors?

    I know the DVX200 can output 10-bit, but never tried it. Does it make a big difference in the image quality?

    #2
    It's always relevant for someone, but in general...no, it's not relevant.

    IMO, it was a rather disappointing release after the success of the first one and it quickly became irrelevant as the world moved into larger sensors and better tech.

    As far as the 10-bit output; it makes no difference (or very little for most people). Not just in this camera, but in dozens of others. Some people can barely tell the difference between 8-bit and RAW, you know?

    If you're patient, you might just find the right set of eyes looking for a DVX200, but for the most part not many will consider it for over $1K.

    Just my own thoughts, and I do hope you get every penny you're asking.

    Comment


      #3
      Yes I think you are right.

      I will sell only 1 camera and will keep the other one, just in case, some jobs really require documentary style shooting and the clients could never tell the codec is 8-bit or whatever.

      On a further note, could you, or anyone else, recommend a better ENG camera from Panasonic? Maybe the CX350 ?

      Comment


        #4
        CX350 is their best one (with a fixed lens).

        But, IMO, Canon's XF605 is the best one that's currently available around this price range. (Just started shipping a few weeks ago.)

        https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...camcorder.html

        Comment


          #5
          Wow ok, XF605 looks very promising especially with that dual pixel autofocus, thanks for the tip

          Comment


            #6
            Yes, it's relevant in the right situation and at the right price. Sure, compared to current offerings it falls short with some of it's specs... but then again some of the cameras mentioned fall short compared to the 200. Using a Ninja V, and shooting Vlog-L with 10 bit is quite an improvement over the baked in 8 bit. If you're paying full retail in 2021 and your use case scenario isn't a good fit with it's limitations, then it's a bad call. If you got a smoking bargain and the use case is appropriate, then it might make a lot of sense. It's quirky and it has compromises, but doesn't every camera have compromises of some sort?

            I purchased one six months after release. I've used it to shoot a wide variety of genres ( a lot of ENG, corporate) with the exception of a film. At one point, It fell from tripod at extended height. I had the VF replaced and was put back in action. I'm currently using it with a Ninja V (Vlog-L) for shooting corporate execs in a studio/ green screen on a monthly basis. It does great there. I wish it had 10 bit internal at purchase and a faster lens, but I purchased it knowing that. In spite of it's "jack of all trades- master of a few" vibe, it has been worth it. I'm going to use this thing until the paint comes off. At some point I will add another camcorder... if they still make them at that point ;-O .

            Long story short- at the right price the DVX200 can be very relevant, even in 2021.

            Comment


              #7
              Great advice, I havent tested it with the Ninja, cannot argue about 10-bit being pretty robust. The problem with "V-log at 8-bit" is purely technical - you cant really squeeze the whole V-log within 8-bit, but at 10-bit, its another game.
              I already sold one DVX200 and after much thought, I decided to list the 2-nd DVX200. It is still live at Ebay at around 2000 EUR, which I think is a great bargain, considering current prices. I will continue to shoot with the Blackmagic Pocket, although the workflow is very different, slower and the lack of a smooth "zoom" is a key negative...

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by emilian View Post
                Great advice, I havent tested it with the Ninja, cannot argue about 10-bit being pretty robust. The problem with "V-log at 8-bit" is purely technical - you cant really squeeze the whole V-log within 8-bit, but at 10-bit, its another game.
                I already sold one DVX200 and after much thought, I decided to list the 2-nd DVX200. It is still live at Ebay at around 2000 EUR, which I think is a great bargain, considering current prices. I will continue to shoot with the Blackmagic Pocket, although the workflow is very different, slower and the lack of a smooth "zoom" is a key negative...
                Good luck with your DVX200 sale. Part of the reason I've held onto the DVX200 is my preference for the camcorder form factor. As you discovered, they are typically so much faster to deploy and with far less rigging, with internal ND's etc. After shooting with DSLRs , I still prefer an integrated camera. I'm just hoping the DVX200 is not the last of the larger sensor camcorder breed ;-(.

                The 1 inch sensor cams are a big improvement over the preceding 2/3 and 1/3 inch cameras, but the 4/3 sensor was a sweet spot IMO, at least for my purposes. The new Canon is looking pretty good. Time will tell.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I think the DVX200 was kind of an odd duck and I don't see Panasonic following up with a new version. Camcorders are most often used for shooting events where a large dof is needed and these cameras have bad AF with bad servo lenses that can't be reliably adjusted while filming. 4/3 is problematic for this reason and it makes the camera big the lens doesn't have a large reach and the shallower dof is more of a con than a pro. Camcorders sensor have been getting larger but this was mainly to support 4k recording which 1/3 couldn't. 1" has become the winning size larger enough for to accommodate 4k and providing improved light sensitivity and dynamic range .

                  Another thing the camera manufactures like to do is abandon a camera and start different model. There is probably a business reason that you can sell more cameras this way. But regardless it's impossible to determine what these manufactures will do this is because they are determined by business criteria we aren't privy too like sales and marketing data.

                  DVX200 is a little long in the tooth (5 years) and it feels like they aren't going to update it. The general trend in camcorders has been smaller and lighter.
                  Last edited by Peter C.; 12-13-2021, 03:34 PM.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Peter C. View Post
                    I think the DVX200 was kind of an odd duck and I don't see Panasonic following up with a new version. Camcorders are most often used for shooting events where a large dof is needed and these cameras have bad AF with bad servo lenses that can't be reliably adjusted while filming. 4/3 is problematic for this reason and it makes the camera big the lens doesn't have a large reach and the shallower dof is more of a con than a pro. Camcorders sensor have been getting larger but this was mainly to support 4k recording which 1/3 couldn't. 1" has become the winning size larger enough for to accommodate 4k and providing improved light sensitivity and dynamic range .

                    Another thing the camera manufactures like to do is abandon a camera and start different model. There is probably a business reason that you can sell more cameras this way. But regardless it's impossible to determine what these manufactures will do this is because they are determined by business criteria we aren't privy too like sales and marketing data.

                    DVX200 is a little long in the tooth (5 years) and it feels like they aren't going to update it. The general trend in camcorders has been smaller and lighter.
                    I cut my teeth on 2/3rds cams in news and shot with a DVX-100, 100B, HVX-200 and a HPX-170, and a HVX300 for a long time. I get it. I agree and I disagree with your points. The DVX 200 camera concept has worked for me, warts and all. I still prefer a sensor larger than 1 inch, if it is done right. I suspect that Panasonic was concerned with meeting a conservative price point with the DVX200 and so they went lean and mean on some tech specs. They may have also wanted another camera to stick the GH4 sensor in. Who knows? Although I've had a GH2,3,4 and currently a GH5, the DSLR form factor is a hurt factory. I use one because of the confluence of features that it offers at the price point. Ergonomics speed of operation and usability are definitely not plusses.

                    While significantly different in many ways, the DVX200 was a conceptual successor to the HVX200. IMO, it is a mistake to discontinue a camera concept that has trandscendent design going for it... and greater potential to sell more glass in Panasonics case. I also think dropping and adding models can lead to a more porous and transitory customer base.

                    Now that mirrorless hybrid FF cameras have taken the stage, a 4/3 hybrid is eclipsed on the stills side of things by the FF cams. GH6 or not, going forward Panasonic may have better luck returning to an upgraded interchangeable lens cine/ camcorder form factor. Aka a new and improved AF200. That would distinguish it from the me too mirrorless hybrid FF competition. It would provide strong reasons to continue to invest in M43. As it is now, my thinking goes like this: If I have to continue on with hybrids for the benefits they provide, then why not go FF for the better stills quality? Ultimately trying to compete in the hybrid world with a M43 dslr may be a fools errand.

                    The thing is I love M43- I just don't see Panasonic providing compelling reasons for me to continue investing in the platform. It's a weird irony.
                    Last edited by hotchkiss; 12-14-2021, 08:14 AM.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      The 4/3 is a ratio suited for photography and yet Panasonic put it into cameras that would eventually be use exclusively for video that uses 16:9. I wouldn't be surprised they stuck the GH 4/3 sensor into the dvx200 because they were trying to find as many ways to repurpose the same sensor. But the industry has settled on 1" and I don't think there is a compelling reason to continue with 4/3 in a camcorders. Once the sensor is cropped down to 16:9 it's not much bigger than 1". The way these manufactures operate is befuddling. It's not to say I don't like the DVX200 it probably could have been improved but it's in a weird spot, that's a recurring theme of Panasonic with cameras that are in awkward segments of the market where it's difficult to succeed.
                      Last edited by Peter C.; 12-13-2021, 06:22 PM.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Peter C. View Post
                        The way these manufactures operate is befuddling. It's not to say I don't like the DVX200 it probably could have been improved but it's in a weird spot, that's a recurring theme of Panasonic with cameras that are in awkward segments of the market where it's difficult to succeed.
                        Totally agree, with the caveat that there's more DOF control with M43 and fast glass. Your comment about them being in awkward market segments is spot on. I've thought for some time that Panasonics unwillingness to double down on M43's advantages and strengthen the lens lineup (a top quality version of the 14-140 as a ENG-ish like lens would be nice), and/or ditch the DSLR form factor may be the nail in its coffin. I love my 10-25, but what took Pansonic so long to introduce this lens and now the 25-50 ?

                        If there is not a DVX follow up, I'd like to see a less compromised CX-350 update: with a top quality VF and a faster lens for starters. I hate crappy VF's.

                        I'm in wait and see mode. I've got a fair bit invested in top M43 glass (42.5 Nocticron,10-25, the 2.8 zoom twins ) and I would invest more, but Panasonics mixed messages are giving me pause. In the mean time I'll happily carry on with what I've got. My DVX200 and GH5 are plugging along just fine. If they pull the plug on M43, I may just pick up some deeply discounted M43 cameras and shoot them til they rust.

                        At this point in my career I'm not at all eager to invest in FF. I would, but only if push came to shove.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by hotchkiss View Post
                          If there is not a DVX follow up, I'd like to see a less compromised CX-350 update: with a top quality VF and a faster lens for starters. I hate crappy VF's.

                          I'm in wait and see mode. I've got a fair bit invested in top M43 glass (42.5 Nocticron,10-25, the 2.8 zoom twins ) and I would invest more, but Panasonics mixed messages are giving me pause. In the mean time I'll happily carry on with what I've got. My DVX200 and GH5 are plugging along just fine. If they pull the plug on M43, I may just pick up some deeply discounted M43 cameras and shoot them til they rust.

                          At this point in my career I'm not at all eager to invest in FF. I would, but only if push came to shove.
                          I agree the view finders/lcd and lenses are crappy. For as long as I can remember slow variable aperture kit lens with poor servo controls have been used in camcorders. That's what the industry had decided what's good enough for the segment. Anything below broadcast eng level cameras will always be the same. They probably like it that way too and I can't see it ever changing.
                          Last edited by Peter C.; 12-14-2021, 09:07 AM.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Peter C. View Post
                            I agree the view finders/lcd and lenses are crappy. For as long as I can remember slow variable aperture kit lens with poor servo controls have been used in camcorders. That's what the industry had decided what's good enough for the segment. Anything below broadcast eng level cameras will always be the same. They probably like it that way too and I can't see it ever changing.
                            I’m afraid your right. I’d certainly pay more for more refinement in the VF department. Operating solely from a LCD is not feasible in my locale, nor do I enjoy it. Considering how much the 2/3 broadcast market has shrunk, you’d think they would get the hint. Sadly, in the reviews I’ve read the same of the new Canon camera ( I forget the model #) , the vf apparently suffers from the same low spec issues.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by hotchkiss View Post

                              I’m afraid your right. I’d certainly pay more for more refinement in the VF department. Operating solely from a LCD is not feasible in my locale, nor do I enjoy it. Considering how much the 2/3 broadcast market has shrunk, you’d think they would get the hint. Sadly, in the reviews I’ve read the same of the new Canon camera ( I forget the model #) , the vf apparently suffers from the same low spec issues.
                              It's not unique to Panasonic or camcorders. There was a running joke that Sony had excess inventory of old low res lcd that they would continually put in cameras like the A7 III and IV despite the fact that even the cheapest smart phones have better screens.

                              Most of the time I believe it's their way of segmenting the lower end from higher end models. They also could see it as the industry practice is to add a high quality field monitor to judge exposure, color, and focus, so they're going to save the money of adding a quality lcd because pros won't use it. But who really knows.
                              Last edited by Peter C.; 12-16-2021, 07:11 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X