Bassman2003
Veteran
Great hear from you Barry. Can you find out more info on the codecs and if there is any hope of 10bit 4:2:2 in HD? Thanks.
AG-DVX200 4K Large-Sensor Handheld Camcorder
- Thread starter Screenforme
- Start date
I don't disagree with you at all... this camera looks like a nice solution, but definitely doesn't fit the need for a professional AF100 successor with improved sensor and broadcast codecs. They didn't even have to change that goblinish little body...
Oh well. Thankfully, other camera companies have a few contenders to fill that gap.
filmguy123
Veteran
Now that I have let all my negativity out... on a more positive note I am very intrigued by what the 5 axis stabilization is. Not that I will be buying one of these, but in concept and on a technical level I would really like to know more about it.
My gut says it can't be that cool, because they didn't seem to talk about it that much - but if it was gyro level stabilization built into a handheld lens that would an insane selling point. But given that it's only had a brief mention and not a tech demo, I highly doubt this camera will allow for steadicam level control handheld. If it did, though, it would be pretty revolutionary for being built into a camera.
Also, if they were going to go this route, I personally would have rather seen a shorter zoom lens to gain an extra stop - say 10x at a constant F/2.0 or 2.8 would have been very interesting. Also, if they were going this route, I think an S35 sensor would have been more interesting. The sell of M4/3 mount to me has never been the sensor, it has been the lens mount. Since there is no lens mount, I think a larger sensor to help compensate for a slower lens (espec if they could have got it slightly wider, faster, and constant f-stop) would have been pretty killer. Then, f/2.0 on an S35 ain't so bad either for lowlight or DoF.
In short.. DVX200 with:
S35 sensor w/14-15 stops DR
35mm equiv 24-240 f/2.0 or 2.8 constant aperture (or something in this ballpark) [also easier to obtain that wide w/s35)
5 axis in built gyro level stabilization
As much as I would have lamented the loss of a lens mount, I think this would have me pretty intrigued as the specs would just play off each other so much better in terms of what would be artistically achievable.
Also, there seemed to be no mention of slow motion which was strange. The stats all mentioned up to 60p in any mode, but no mention of what the camera can do for VFR in 1080p which is a loss.
I think a little more robust of a codec would have been big, too.
Anyway, I know this back to discussing what the camera is not but I could see the appeal of a fixed lens that much more if the compromises were far less - what I described here might have been enough to make me go "ok, yeah, I could work with that". But M4/3 with a 28mm and F2.8 max is not really cutting it for me, especially since rumored ISO announcements didn't materialize. If they could have pulled an A7S and got lowlight on M4/3 @ F2.8 that looked like a GH4 at f/1.2, hey, again, that could have been something at least... (though not enough to answer the desire for shallower DoF and a slightly wider angle)
My gut says it can't be that cool, because they didn't seem to talk about it that much - but if it was gyro level stabilization built into a handheld lens that would an insane selling point. But given that it's only had a brief mention and not a tech demo, I highly doubt this camera will allow for steadicam level control handheld. If it did, though, it would be pretty revolutionary for being built into a camera.
Also, if they were going to go this route, I personally would have rather seen a shorter zoom lens to gain an extra stop - say 10x at a constant F/2.0 or 2.8 would have been very interesting. Also, if they were going this route, I think an S35 sensor would have been more interesting. The sell of M4/3 mount to me has never been the sensor, it has been the lens mount. Since there is no lens mount, I think a larger sensor to help compensate for a slower lens (espec if they could have got it slightly wider, faster, and constant f-stop) would have been pretty killer. Then, f/2.0 on an S35 ain't so bad either for lowlight or DoF.
In short.. DVX200 with:
S35 sensor w/14-15 stops DR
35mm equiv 24-240 f/2.0 or 2.8 constant aperture (or something in this ballpark) [also easier to obtain that wide w/s35)
5 axis in built gyro level stabilization
As much as I would have lamented the loss of a lens mount, I think this would have me pretty intrigued as the specs would just play off each other so much better in terms of what would be artistically achievable.
Also, there seemed to be no mention of slow motion which was strange. The stats all mentioned up to 60p in any mode, but no mention of what the camera can do for VFR in 1080p which is a loss.
I think a little more robust of a codec would have been big, too.
Anyway, I know this back to discussing what the camera is not but I could see the appeal of a fixed lens that much more if the compromises were far less - what I described here might have been enough to make me go "ok, yeah, I could work with that". But M4/3 with a 28mm and F2.8 max is not really cutting it for me, especially since rumored ISO announcements didn't materialize. If they could have pulled an A7S and got lowlight on M4/3 @ F2.8 that looked like a GH4 at f/1.2, hey, again, that could have been something at least... (though not enough to answer the desire for shallower DoF and a slightly wider angle)
philiplipetz
Veteran
It is OIS combined with active frame shift on a sensor with "4x active area." (That can't mean what it looks like on first glance, or does it?) Barry describes it as "superb" and he is in a position to talk with the highest levels of Panasonic imaging.
Last edited:
Mike Harvey
Veteran
I think Panasonic's strategy to a degree is why come out with a proper AF200, when they're about to give the GH4 Vlog? I kinda think they looked at the volume of GH4's they've sold, and decided they would sell a lot more DVX200's than AF200's that would be competing with Sony, Canon, Black Magic, and JVC. As much as I think that's a mistake, something tells me they didn't feel they would sell enough AF200's with the DVX200 and GH4 also in their line-up, and saw the potential for a lot more sales of the DVX200 than AF200.
filmguy123
Veteran
That may be right Mike! Maybe they'll have something up their sleeve next year with a GH4... a GH5 and a GH5 Pro? Who knows.
Just out of curiosity --
Those who wanted more, who wanted this, that, and the other thing --
How hard did you try to communicate all of this directly to Panasonic? What exactly did you do to make your wish list heard?
It just seems like some are taking this as being personally slighted by Panasonic. So what did you personally do to express what you wanted, to them?
If you didn't do ANYTHING, well, what could you really expect? How do you figure to have your prayers answered if you never pray? I'm not saying it would have worked, but it definitely won't if you don't try.
Those who wanted more, who wanted this, that, and the other thing --
How hard did you try to communicate all of this directly to Panasonic? What exactly did you do to make your wish list heard?
It just seems like some are taking this as being personally slighted by Panasonic. So what did you personally do to express what you wanted, to them?
If you didn't do ANYTHING, well, what could you really expect? How do you figure to have your prayers answered if you never pray? I'm not saying it would have worked, but it definitely won't if you don't try.
Depends what you consider "anything..."
I posted in the several "what do you want" AF threads that emerged.
I sent emails to Jan when she was around. I sent a few emails and questions to Panasonic support via PASS(?)
I spoke for the original AF years after many had dismissed it (and still will, it still works reasonably well for HD production)
I bought m43 system lenses, Panasonic m43 bodies, and waited anxiously for something newer.
Yeah. I'm just one guy with one camera. A station manager with a contract for dozens of units might be heard just slightly more. I did what I could, so if I ***** and moan, it's at least not without prior squashed effort.
I posted in the several "what do you want" AF threads that emerged.
I sent emails to Jan when she was around. I sent a few emails and questions to Panasonic support via PASS(?)
I spoke for the original AF years after many had dismissed it (and still will, it still works reasonably well for HD production)
I bought m43 system lenses, Panasonic m43 bodies, and waited anxiously for something newer.
Yeah. I'm just one guy with one camera. A station manager with a contract for dozens of units might be heard just slightly more. I did what I could, so if I ***** and moan, it's at least not without prior squashed effort.
Boils down to simple fact:
What customers want ≠ what companies want (make most money)
Bassman2003
Veteran
That is about all "we" can do at this level (mcbob's post). Not that Panasonic wants our input. Barry posted some info gathering from Panasonic's consumer division about the future of the GH4 line. I do not know if this camera is included or not.
But I think it goes without saying that folks want strong codecs and light gathering/low noise from all cameras to be used in a professional situation. We should not have to feature request to get beyond AVCHD.
But I think it goes without saying that folks want strong codecs and light gathering/low noise from all cameras to be used in a professional situation. We should not have to feature request to get beyond AVCHD.
They are not competing with Sony, which is not competing with Canon, which is not competing with Nikon, which is not competing with Panasonic.
The way it shapes up so far is this --
Panasonic has the sole 4K DSLR type camera under $2,000 with GH4, LS100 and FZ1000. None of Canon, Sony, Nikon or Olympus (partially owned by Sony) has an entry in that market segment.
Sony has a sole DSLR/SLM 4K camera in the $2,500 range in A7s, which needs to record its 4K externally onto a Shogun or Q7.
Panasonic has the sole small sensor pro camcorder for $3,500.
JVC has the sole s35 MFT 4K IL camcorder for $4,000.
Panasonic will have the sole large sensor 4K camcorder, once DVX200 comes out, for $5,000.
Canon will have the sole 1080p pro IL camera in C100 MK II for $5,500.
Sony has had small sensor 4K camcorders in the $4,500-$5,000 range.
Sony has a sole 4K pro ILC camcorder for $8,000.
Canon has the sole 4K pro camera for $16,000.
All these are very neat and tidily arranged like chess pieces.
Of course, there is nothing accidental about how the chess pieces are arranged. And this looks far too convenient to be accidental as well.
Well, maybe someone ought to slide a media card in and push the record button. You never know what might happen, plastic shell or not.
Samsung is a South Korean company and thus has no connection to the Japanese "keiretsu" practices.
In Japan, cartels are legal. In the US, the Justice Department Anti-Trust division would have a big problem with that ... had it been practiced by the US based company. Here, they're looking the other way.
If you're e-mailing the Panasonic powers that be, then you're communicating directly with them. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work, and at least you tried. So if you tried to communicate with them, then I feel for you.
But if you're just posting on message boards, and expecting them to know what people want, then that's something entirely different. They're not shooters; they're engineers and sales people. They can only know what professionals want by professionals telling them, and I don't see why anything would go without saying.
From their point of view, their MASSIVE successes in the low-end professional and prosumer markets were fixed-lens cameras, one of which they're trying to evoke with this one. Their only interchangeable-lens model didn't do anywhere near as well. You say that it's what "professionals" want, but they see what people bought.
As for the codecs and low-light performance, they again look at what sold. The GH4 was apparently a big hit with those codecs, when other cameras offered more robust codecs.
My point is, you can't expect them just to KNOW what it is you want. You also can't cry foul if they don't make something you never actually asked for. If enough people had -- as in, had actually communicated with them, directly or with their $$$$, then things might have been different.
It's very possible that the people who DID communicate with them asked for exactly what they put out. I'm not them, and I don't know who communicated what, but if 100 people ask for one thing, and only 2 ask for another, which do you think is more likely to happen? More voice, more result.
But if you're just posting on message boards, and expecting them to know what people want, then that's something entirely different. They're not shooters; they're engineers and sales people. They can only know what professionals want by professionals telling them, and I don't see why anything would go without saying.
From their point of view, their MASSIVE successes in the low-end professional and prosumer markets were fixed-lens cameras, one of which they're trying to evoke with this one. Their only interchangeable-lens model didn't do anywhere near as well. You say that it's what "professionals" want, but they see what people bought.
As for the codecs and low-light performance, they again look at what sold. The GH4 was apparently a big hit with those codecs, when other cameras offered more robust codecs.
My point is, you can't expect them just to KNOW what it is you want. You also can't cry foul if they don't make something you never actually asked for. If enough people had -- as in, had actually communicated with them, directly or with their $$$$, then things might have been different.
It's very possible that the people who DID communicate with them asked for exactly what they put out. I'm not them, and I don't know who communicated what, but if 100 people ask for one thing, and only 2 ask for another, which do you think is more likely to happen? More voice, more result.
Darren Levine
Veteran
I have a less kind question than you have poised, David.
For those of you outright complaining about panasonic over this, and what the camera should have been...
Is complaining about it making you feel better in some way? Do you think if enough people complain that panasonic will somehow hear and want to make a camera specially so that some forum'ers will love them again?
Maybe i should complain about my cell phone not having a s35 sensor and record RAW. oh wait, that would be silly.
For those of you outright complaining about panasonic over this, and what the camera should have been...
Is complaining about it making you feel better in some way? Do you think if enough people complain that panasonic will somehow hear and want to make a camera specially so that some forum'ers will love them again?
Maybe i should complain about my cell phone not having a s35 sensor and record RAW. oh wait, that would be silly.
hscully
Veteran
I'm a very happy AF100 shooter. I've upgraded to something else but still have my AF100 and still use it. For years after the release of the AF100 it got the snot beat out of it on this forum. If I were Panasonic, I'd run as far and and as fast as I could. I find it disingenuous, at least, that so many pine for a camera that got such a universal drubbing here. Maybe they were listening then, when Jan was our advocate, I don't know. But if they guided their actions by what was written here about the AF100, it's no huge doubt to me why they would not have followed it up.
philiplipetz
Veteran
What happened to Jan?
Dave Rochelle
Member
This is my situation exactly - so you are absolutely not alone in that. And I definitely think for many the DVX200 may be the perfect jack of all trades camera that covers most of what they need a camera to do. For me, I like to select the camera (and quite often also the lens) appropriate for the exact job I am doing, and the breadth of work I do supports that method and justifies the collection of gear necessary to accomplish it... to a point.
I have a run & gun small sensor cam with a long zoom, and I have DSLRs, but much of my stuff needs a cinematic treatment "on a budget" - and the AF100 was THE camera for that when it debuted. I slowly but surely acquired more & more m43 lenses and DSLR bodies and have enjoyed the interchangeability across the gear lineup. The size, price and quality combination has been tough to beat... but without a m43 format successor to the AF100, I'm in the same boat you (and probably many others) are... switch to a different format (whether it be Canon, Sony, etc.). That hurts - not just in the wallet, but in terms of workflow and comfort. I agree with Filmguy that much of the negativity around the DVX200 announcement has far less to do with the camera itself and more with the rapidly fleeting possibility that Panasonic (or anyone else) will ever create another m43 camera that functions like the AF100.
The additional hurt at this point, is that I had pretty much resigned myself to this fact a year ago and was mentally gearing up for an FS7 when I started hearing rumors about another Panasonic AF camera again. So kinda got my hopes up all over again. That's no one's fault... just trying to offer an explanation for some of the vitriol post-Panasonic NAB announcement. Those of us in this boat are frustrated that Panasonic doesn't see the market we represent as viable enough to create a new camera. At the end of the day they're running their business as they best see fit, and we will simply have to choose another product.
Yes, actually, it's very cathartic... a lot like complaining about taxes and .gov waste - I don't expect a damn thing will change, but it's nice to voice an opinion on the off chance that it sways anothers' opinion somewhere. Just maybe, enough voices....
If your cell phone company hinted for years that it would put S35 Raw video in your phone, demonstrated for years that it could and would put S35 and Raw separately in various products of similar size, and then yesterday said "a BIG announcement is coming for you all regarding S35 and Raw!" and then debuted a too-large tablet with compressed S35 video... complaining just a little wouldn't be all that silly.
If your cell phone company hinted for years that it would put S35 Raw video in your phone, demonstrated for years that it could and would put S35 and Raw separately in various products of similar size, and then yesterday said "a BIG announcement is coming for you all regarding S35 and Raw!" and then debuted a too-large tablet with compressed S35 video... complaining just a little wouldn't be all that silly.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Hey, I think we all have a right to like or dislike a product offering. After all, we are the ones it is aimed at, aren't we? This camera is probably made of balsa wood right now, so voicing some opinions *may* instigate a firmware change or something of the like. Though probably not...
For the record, I have stated many times that I wanted this type of camera. So I am happy they made it, just not happy that it falls short next to my PX270 in terms of acquisition. If they can make the PX270 without me asking them, why can't they make the DVX200 in the same way? I know the processing for 4k might be a heat issue, but what about 1080p or 720p? I do not think it is asking too much for 10bit 4:2:2. Maybe it is in there, but If they do not lead with it, then chances are slim.
For the record, I have stated many times that I wanted this type of camera. So I am happy they made it, just not happy that it falls short next to my PX270 in terms of acquisition. If they can make the PX270 without me asking them, why can't they make the DVX200 in the same way? I know the processing for 4k might be a heat issue, but what about 1080p or 720p? I do not think it is asking too much for 10bit 4:2:2. Maybe it is in there, but If they do not lead with it, then chances are slim.