Has that ever happened with a camera release before?
AG-DVX200 4K Large-Sensor Handheld Camcorder
- Thread starter Screenforme
- Start date
Has that ever happened with a camera release before?
Often it takes a few weeks to a few months for people to figure out the optimal way of shooting with a camera. I remember seeing the over sharpened and super contrasty footage from the Panasonic GH4 when it first came out, and everybody was cooking up their own recipe on the best settings for this camera, until things eventually settled down.
I don' t know. I was just thinking out loud since we all have many complaints and are assured that "this is not the final version of the cam" repeatedly. I guess another question is "have we ever had a case before of 'beta' version cameras being released to a bunch of people and the footage being spread everywhere?"
fastfinger
Well-known member
Looks like the extended warranty is not being offered with the DVX200. According to Panasonic USA "The DVX200 will have a standard 1 year warranty"
Barry_Green
Moderator
The base ISO is 500. As Josh said, +6dB = doubling the ISO. So 15dB of gain = about 3200 ISO.
You could also use the HIGH SENS setting; in that mode the base ISO is 1000. So you'd use 9 dB of gain to get to an equivalent of 3200 ISO.
Barry_Green
Moderator
The footage you've seen from the cameras out there has pretty much been done with version 0.30 to 0.34 of the firmware. The current version I'm using is 1.06. Some things are significantly improved, many things are comparable. Complaints about things like the iris lag and the focus ring not being repeatable, have been solved. Two significant imaging issues have been resolved. But there are other things that are limitations of what the hardware can do.
In general I'd say that the most representative footage would be the "A Day of Life" footage that Panasonic themselves put out. Even though there have been quite a few changes since that footage was shot, it was shot in VLOG, which bypasses most in-camera processing, and as such it is less affected by the various firmware changes. I would recommend viewing it on Vimeo for a more representative example of what it should look like; the version I saw on YouTube looked really bad in the aerial shots, it looks better in the Vimeo version.
・"A Day Of Life" (DVX200 sizzle reel)
Vimeo(En) https://vimeo.com/138581052
・"A Day Of Life -Behind The Scenes" FHD
Vimeo(En)https://vimeo.com/138593056
slidemaster
Well-known member
It does look better on Vimeo. I did not realize there was a significant difference vs youtube
That really does look very nice, for the most part. I hate to say it, but I still feel like I'm still seeing some of that funk in the skin tones. Best demonstrated in that shot of the couple coming out of the church. Look at the random grey patches on the skin of the various people. Even on the Vimeo version. Maybe something to do with VLOG post process?
:huh: Josh, do you get any enjoyment out of TV shows and Movies, or do you just spend so much time studying the picture quality that you can't follow the story, or if the picture isn't good enough you just can't watch (not intending to sound like an ass-hole, just a real question)?
Le Chat Errant
Active member
Excellent !
Any news from the EVF "eye sensor" ? Is it possible to use both, EVF + LCD, without shut off one of them ?
Just come across an interesting test video here
https://vimeo.com/137256075
There are some clips at the end that show that the low light capability is about comparable to a GH4 with a 2.8f 35-100mm lens. Not so good! News shooters will have to limit their nighttime coverage to big fires! But the stabilization looks good. You can download the original.
https://vimeo.com/137256075
There are some clips at the end that show that the low light capability is about comparable to a GH4 with a 2.8f 35-100mm lens. Not so good! News shooters will have to limit their nighttime coverage to big fires! But the stabilization looks good. You can download the original.
Barry_Green
Moderator
It is not possible. It is either one or the other, you cannot use both simultaneously.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Did they use the HIGH SENS option? Because I found that the DVX200 well exceeds what the GH4 with a 2.8 can do, when HIGH SENS is used. If they used only NORM SENS, then their observations are probably right, but in HIGH SENS the DVX200 is capable of notably better low light performance than a GH4 with a 2.8.
Le Chat Errant
Active member
Ok, thanks.
Hope it will be, at least, quickly selectable via dedicated or assignable button. Like GH4.
Ha! No offense taken. No, of course I like TV/movies. But when I'm EVALUATING A CAMERA PURCHASE BASED ON FOOTAGE FROM THAT CAMERA, this stuff is important. The first time I saw that issue (some of the older Japan b-roll), I was not looking for problems, I just happened to notice it, then went through the video more slowly to confirm what I thought I was seeing. Now I can't unsee it. The only reason it's probably not more problematic in that "Day in the Life" video is 'cause there're only a handful of shots where you see skin tones that are well lit like that. Most of the vid shows off the cam's strengths (bright blues/greens/reds, grass, skies, architecture), only a few shots devoted to skin tones. Problem is, many of us probably spend most of our time shooting PEOPLE, not those other things, so how human skin looks is super important. We're not talking about "when I swoosh the camera back and forth at lightning speed the way no one ever would in reality for any reason, I get SERIOUS ROLLING SHUTTER PROBLEMS! ARGGGGHGHGHGHHH THIS CAMERA IS BULLs*%t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Last edited:
philiplipetz
Veteran
In a previous post I talked about the same problems with faces, and note that I did not see them when an external recorder was used so that it appears to be part of the way the codec was implemented at that time. I have yet to see a single example that did not show face problems. The Japan tests featured models with heavy white face and that hid facial grey spots and other facial flaws. They could not have hidden them better if that was their intent.
The reason that we obsess about IQ problems is that this camera ticks so many other boxes expect for this codec issue and sensitivity. We can always add light but I previously had a camera tha left blue artifacts in faces and I could never clean it up in post. Sold it within two months.
The reason that we obsess about IQ problems is that this camera ticks so many other boxes expect for this codec issue and sensitivity. We can always add light but I previously had a camera tha left blue artifacts in faces and I could never clean it up in post. Sold it within two months.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
If it is comparable to a 35-100mm f2.8 lens on the GH4 how can you consider it not good? The 35-100mm f2.8 is a nice lens but it doesn't exactly cover a full range of fov options and can limit shooting. Having a full range lens that can go from a longer range than the 14-140mm lens is kind of the whole point of the DVX200. Lots of shooters find swapping multiple lenses during a face paced shoot a bit cumbersome. The fact that the DVX200 could in fact be as good as the GH4 with a f2.8 limited range zoom lens is actually a huge accomplishment for Panasonic. That means if you need to use some kind of a zoom lens the DVX200 could trump or at least match the GH4 with a zoom lens while also a massive amount of flexibility in how you frame your shots. Find another m43 lens for the GH4 that can go from 14-182mm that is brighter than f4.0-f5.6. Especially a lens with power zoom, par focal, built in ND filters and 5 axis stabilization. You will likely never see such a lens on a DSLR camera, ever.
Is the dvx200 a low light beast? Absolutely not but why is there still such an obsession with low light? Its already at least a stop faster than any m43 camera with a super zoom range lens which puts it about comparable to the low light capability of a APS-C DSLR with a similar super zoom lens. In fact the only combo that I think could be brighter with this type of lens is the Sony A7S with their 10x manual zoom lens. Still no where as much reach or convenient to use but yet it would be brighter. Keep in mind that combo costs as much as the dvx200 and cannot shoot 4k internally so yeah actually a much inferior combo excluding low light.
It has been said many times but you can't really compare the dvx200 to a DSLR with a f0.95 prime lens. I doubt any video camera will ever trump that combo. The dvx200 is more about replacing the limited ability of 1/3" video cameras but still giving the same kind of form factor and ease of use that those type of shooters require. Any person who thinks the dvx200 is a GH4 replacement is going to sadly be disappointed if all they care about is low light. If they care about having GH4 level quality on a video camera form factor to single handedly cover just about any type of shoot then the dvx200 is a stunning option. It beats the pants off of the GH4 with the 14-140mm lens and that to me is massive improvement in low light. I have spent a lot of money on adapted lenses trying to push the limits of what the GH1, GH2, GH3 and GH4 could do with a super zoom lens and have always been disappointed. Nothing ever really trumped the overall detail and quality of what I could get with the 14-140 lens.
Now basically the dvx200 is a camera with a very high quality detailed, sharp piece of glass with a bigger zoom range, much easier to use with parfocal, no shifting apertures during zoom, 5 axis stabilization and built in ND filters with the advantage of say using a Nikon 10x super zoom with the speed booster. Using a Nikon FF super zoom on the GH4 with the speed booster would likely be about as good in low light as the lens on the DVX200. I consider that pretty darn good for this kind of zoom range. In fact its kind of impossible to find anywhere else. Its also all in one perfectly engineered body.
Yeah the dvx200 is pretty good in low light actually and well worth the money.
fastfinger
Well-known member
Hey quick question, I downloaded his original 4k uploaded file and full res screen grabs don't look great. Is it because of v-log? He also converted first to pro-res then to MP4 before uploading. GH4 stills from video look pretty amazing and was hoping for the same results with the DVX200. Also anyone know where I can download an original non-vlog file from the camera?
philiplipetz
Veteran
The question is what bit rate is the conversion? You should be able to tell from the download.