Mike Harvey
Veteran
Two things...
1) I've been to Onagawa and Ishinomaki twice for tsunami relief. That short really, really made me miss Japan.
2) That footage is stunning... and it's from the internal codecs. All I have to say is...
AG-DVX200 4K Large-Sensor Handheld Camcorder
- Thread starter Screenforme
- Start date
Two things...
1) I've been to Onagawa and Ishinomaki twice for tsunami relief. That short really, really made me miss Japan.
2) That footage is stunning... and it's from the internal codecs. All I have to say is...
I have a rode ntg-2 already housed in a handheld cradle, but not practical to swap to the camera, the AT-897 and ME66 look to be similar lengths. Can you recommend a shorter shotgun mic other than the Panasonic AG-MC200G/HVX200E, I used the sony ECM-XM1 for many years which was perfect for my needs, but old tech nowadays.
Edit: Audio-Technica AT875R looks reasonable.
Last edited:
Mike Harvey
Veteran
ME64. It's more or less just a shorter ME66... the bonus being that the capsules are interchangable, should you ever want a longer shotgun.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I've only been there once, and yeah, it sure did make me miss it too. Disappointed I couldn't go this last week! I had a whole plan... was gonna stay in The Godzilla Hotel and everything. Sigh. Next time...
Yeah, it did look pretty good. Slow-mo always looks good; he said he shot it in 4K/50P. I'm glad to see someone got some pretty good looking footage from the camera given their limited exposure to it. It will only get better from here.
Actually, the fact that he shot in V-LOG may explain why it looks so good, from another aspect -- when using V-LOG, you don't really use any of the other image controls. They're all disabled, because V-LOG is almost raw-like. With V-LOG, almost all you need to do is get the exposure right; everything else is done in post, so you wouldn't need to know that much about the camera itself to get the footage right in-camera; you could spend your time using your editor instead (which, apparently, Sebastian knew quite well). He made wise choices given the circumstances.
What I like about the DVX200 is that it's a camera with incredible flexibility... ranging from the film-like V-LOG/post-production approach, to the paint-it-extensively-in-camera and deliver-finished-footage approach. I'm glad to see he got good results using the onboard codecs and a fixed zoom lens... it's also capable of 4:2:2 10-bit output to an external recorder if someone wants to go through that process. But it's equally capable of doing live events, corporate films, in-office interviews... Sure, it may not be the absolute ideal camera for any particular given purpose, but it looks like it will be a quite capable camera for many given purposes, and in that way, it really does feel like the original DVX100 is back. I wasn't entirely on-board when they told me they were naming it the DVX200, but I can definitely see that now.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well -- same division, yes, but different teams. The VariCam introductory footage was some of the best I've ever seen a factory put together. Probably cost a lot too...
I do understand what the factory is trying to do with this tour, I'm just not sure that releasing early footage is going to get the kind of results they'd hope for. It seems to me it'd be a difficult task for most anyone, to take a brand new prototype camera sight-unseen and go deliver VariCam-style footage with it. It just seems like there's opportunities for less-optimal footage that way. If the shooters could get ahold of the camera for, say, a couple of weeks first, and then come on the trip, I think they'd be able to do a better job of making more representative footage. I understand what the factory's trying to do; I'm just not sure that this is the best way to do it. I'd rather see them bring in one DP, get him some face time with the engineers and let one of the engineers serve as a D.I.T., let that DP describe what he wants to have the image look like and let the engineer who built the camera set it up to deliver that look, and then see what that DP could do.
With the trip that they arranged, you should understand that a big part of it is for the factory to hear back from the people they invited. To get them hands-on experience, and then to hear their feedback, what they liked, what they didn't, what they should change, what they MUST change, etc. You won't see any of that reflected in the footage that was produced, obviously. Those discussions are part of a non-disclosure agreement, and it's valuable feedback for the company. So they have several purposes for arranging these types of trips. It is NOT about making footage for promotional purposes; that's an ancillary thing and one that (in general) I think should be de-emphasized... but, if they do happen to get some brilliant footage from it, then that's a bonus for them.
Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
Not bad, but not good either. I think the graded footage lacks any real contrast and shows very little dynamic range. It gets muddy and considering this is 4k video it doesn't look to detailed.
Alex Maranda
New member
The DR is there at capture, he just graded flat (artistic tri-tone choice). Vimeo doesn't do 4K so that's a scaledown. What bothered me was the bokeh, clearly an engineering sample.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
I know it's not going to be for everyone, and for specific purposes there are much better cameras in this price range and for a little more. But live events, corporate films, and in-office interviews is 95% of what I do... having one camera that produces a much better image than my HMC150, without having to worry if I'm going to miss a shot in surgery because I'm changing lenses like my AF100, or worry about juggling multiple lenses while in some far away remote Vietnamese village like I did this past winter with my GH4? To say I'm a little giddy for it is an understatement. This is exactly the camera that I need for how I make my living.
The detail simply isn't an issue - not with down sampled 1080 vimeo compressed footage.
Detail will be an issue to consider when there's uncompressed files available to download - and they're not "heavily graded".
But considering that, there's a lot to be encouraged about.
But please, the things that can be determined - at what point does the lens graduate from f/2.8.
I think one of the things that real surprised me was finding that the XC10 only had f/2.8 at it's widest setting.
I really hope that's not the case with this camera - give 2.8 to 150mm and it's a big deal.
Detail will be an issue to consider when there's uncompressed files available to download - and they're not "heavily graded".
But considering that, there's a lot to be encouraged about.
But please, the things that can be determined - at what point does the lens graduate from f/2.8.
I think one of the things that real surprised me was finding that the XC10 only had f/2.8 at it's widest setting.
I really hope that's not the case with this camera - give 2.8 to 150mm and it's a big deal.
Im going to concur with Barry here. Ive had DVX200 footage for weeks now. Spent probably 8 hours shooting with it when I could between other things. In addition, as the engineering version I had was quite an early version and put together by hand there was a lens issue causing me some trouble. I want to be clear here - a lens that was probably slightly misaligned in that process of putting it together. It was very tempting for me to put the footage together and say first DVX200 footage, however I thought this was disingenuous because of this reason and moreover because I didn't think it would be of any assistance to anyone genuinely considering this camera / wanting to see what it could do, so instead I made notes and gave them to Panasonic.
What I can conclusively say here and this is from my note to Panasonic on this -
Im sure this was covered somewhere in the previous 74 pages, but what camera are they trying to protect by crippling it to 420 8-bit? This thing ticks so many boxes as a run n gun "large" sensor fixed lens weapon. I can even accept the ramping lens since the reason for that is not having a tiny sensor. We're having to decide on run n gun style cameras for a upcoming broadcast doc that have to be 4K and this thing came so close. The Z100 has a fantastic codec (XAVC 422 10-bit) but is horrible in low light.
Alright Atomos, time to make a 4K Ninja Star! They have said they have some big announcements coming in the next 4 weeks. Hmm?..
Alright Atomos, time to make a 4K Ninja Star! They have said they have some big announcements coming in the next 4 weeks. Hmm?..
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Sigh -- again, folks shouldn't be making judgements like that off of recompressed Vimeo footage...
Let me just say -- detail is not a problem. The DVX200 is extremely sharp. Extremely. As an example -- I dug up a resolution chart Adam Wilt did on a Red One, in 4K mode, using a Zeiss Ultra Prime 50mm lens. That shot was interesting to me because I've also got a shot of the DVX200 shooting the exact same chart, at nearly identical framing, so it made for a very simple comparison. Simply put, the DVX200 is substantially sharper than the Red was -- and that's even ignoring that the Red was S35 vs. the DVX's m4/3, and the DVX's fixed Leica lens vs. the Red a lens that costs 3x as much as the entire DVX200 package. Now, granted, the Red One is about 7 years old at this point, so it's not "state of the art" anymore, but it was a legitimate 4K camera (marketed with a "Resolution To Burn" slogan), and the DVX200 is just substantially notably sharper than it was.
If anyone can point me to a DSC 4K chart shot from a 5K Epic, I'd be very interested in seeing how they compare; I think the little DVX200 will be quite competitive against that.
There may be legitimate gripes to make about the DVX200 at some point, but resolution is not one of them -- it's hella sharp.
What has really changed in the last few years has been the technology advances that have led to the ability to fully read a sensor primarily designed for stills, at video frame rates AND deBayer/downscale them in real time. That is what I suspect we are seeing here - and why I suspect the results will be a quantum leap ahead of the AF100. (And not solely due to 4K either.)
It seems that in many ways cameras are now getting to a point that cars may have got to some while ago. Where the basic performance of even cheaper models is more than enough for the big majority of users. Where even cars with small engines have top speeds well in excess of maximum speed limits, and acceleration may normally be limited far more by other traffic than the car itself!
That performance may not be enough for enthusiasts, but for most people buying choices start to be decided more by other factors - is it big enough/too big for what I'll be carrying? What accessories come as standard? What's comfort level like? But performance starts to become taken for granted as "good enough".....
And similar with cameras. It's increasingly becoming the case that they are all starting to have a base performance so good that differences in perceived quality are becoming far more down to lighting, operation, etc etc. There ARE differences still, of course - but now far more down to factors such as lens angle, zoom range, ergonomics, ability to fit accessories - with basic image quality becoming increasingly something to take for granted. (And be good.) That's what I see with this camera, and the same with others from various manufacturers. And (amazingly) the sheer video image quality from some stills cameras now surpassing that of expensive dedicated video cameras from not long ago. (Even if they are still a pain to use in many ways.)
My understanding is that for any product of this type, production has to start quite a while in advance of launch to enable a build up of stock in time for that launch. Which in turn means certain production tooling has to be finalised well before that. So to meet shipping dates, then whilst firmware etc changes and other "tweaks" may well be possible, major hardware changes wouldn't be. It may well be possible to fix (say) gripes about viewfinder displays - but not (say) comments about inconvenient button positioning etc. I'd expect any serious user consultation to have happened much earlier (and it may well have done so) with an early prototype - when there was still time to implement even hardware changes.
So if it's too late to do major changes, then why do this now? Why not do it a bit later when the camera is nearer it's final stage? And if Panasonic are inviting these people over - presumably at some expense - and NDO'ing them about feedback discussions, then why on earth not make the NDO's cover non release of material if the consensus is it's not typical of what the final product will be?
It seems that in many ways cameras are now getting to a point that cars may have got to some while ago. Where the basic performance of even cheaper models is more than enough for the big majority of users. Where even cars with small engines have top speeds well in excess of maximum speed limits, and acceleration may normally be limited far more by other traffic than the car itself!
That performance may not be enough for enthusiasts, but for most people buying choices start to be decided more by other factors - is it big enough/too big for what I'll be carrying? What accessories come as standard? What's comfort level like? But performance starts to become taken for granted as "good enough".....
And similar with cameras. It's increasingly becoming the case that they are all starting to have a base performance so good that differences in perceived quality are becoming far more down to lighting, operation, etc etc. There ARE differences still, of course - but now far more down to factors such as lens angle, zoom range, ergonomics, ability to fit accessories - with basic image quality becoming increasingly something to take for granted. (And be good.) That's what I see with this camera, and the same with others from various manufacturers. And (amazingly) the sheer video image quality from some stills cameras now surpassing that of expensive dedicated video cameras from not long ago. (Even if they are still a pain to use in many ways.)
It just seems to me odd timing. What you talk about ("their feedback, what they liked, what they didn't, what they should change, what they MUST change, etc") I'd expect to have happened quite a long time ago to stand any chance of making it in to a camera destined to ship within a few months?
My understanding is that for any product of this type, production has to start quite a while in advance of launch to enable a build up of stock in time for that launch. Which in turn means certain production tooling has to be finalised well before that. So to meet shipping dates, then whilst firmware etc changes and other "tweaks" may well be possible, major hardware changes wouldn't be. It may well be possible to fix (say) gripes about viewfinder displays - but not (say) comments about inconvenient button positioning etc. I'd expect any serious user consultation to have happened much earlier (and it may well have done so) with an early prototype - when there was still time to implement even hardware changes.
So if it's too late to do major changes, then why do this now? Why not do it a bit later when the camera is nearer it's final stage? And if Panasonic are inviting these people over - presumably at some expense - and NDO'ing them about feedback discussions, then why on earth not make the NDO's cover non release of material if the consensus is it's not typical of what the final product will be?
Last edited:
LoganMackay
Well-known member
Man, if this camera was internal 10 bit 422 ��
I've defended 420 and 8 bit quite heavily in the past, and to a large extent still will for 420. (At least for 4K and progressive material.)
I'll also defend 8 bit a lot of the time, but where 10 bit undeniably has a serious edge is when you start to use log type curves, where the expectation is for a lot of processing in post. So yes Fotojorno, I'm in full agreement with you here. Yes, there are external recorders, but such add bulk, weight and expense and are far from ideal for some types of work. For a dedicated video camera (as opposed to stills/video hybrid) they simply shouldn't be necessary except at the cheapest end of the market.
The Z100 has a 1/2.3" sensor, but doesn't even use all of that - it crops heavily. So no wonder the low light suffers, and it's likely to have a limited iris range through diffraction limiting as well.
If I was a Panasonic marketing man, what would currently be giving me sleepness nights at the moment would be the worry of such as Sony bringing out a camera with something like the front end and lens of the new RX10, with better zoom speed and manual controls etc, with the back end and codecs of the Z100. If they were to announce something like that at IBC, I'd expect projected DVX200 sales to drop substantially overnight. And conversely, if Panasonic announced better codecs for the DVX200 at IBC, I'd expect it's projected sales to rise!
joe 1008
Veteran
Nice to see you back to post, Danilo : ) I am sure I am not alone here, Joe up there is with me! Greetings to everyone there, Emanuel
Oh yes, Danilo who in those days explained the HVX200 to Barry!
It seems like technological advance brought us back one decade, when all you needed was a camera and not camera + lenses + cages + gears...
So I hope very much they give us a killer 4:2:2 codec and artefact free image in HD so we can run & gun with V-log and 5-axis-stabilization. I would love to be freed from all those minor quirks that other cameras offer and to be able to just concentrate on the shot. That's what this camera should be all about.
Last edited:
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
Well Joe, I don't wanna pee at the parade but to me, there are two major bets IMHO: GH4 and a7RII. I love hybrid concept and I never forget the fact one of my instructors for cinematography department in my first year in film school was used to call it motion photography, instead. I confess, I love still cameras : DOh yes, Danilo who in those days explained the HVX200 to Barry!
It seems like technological advance brought us back one decade, when all you needed was a camera and not camera + lenses + cages + gears...
So I hope very much they give us a killer 4:2:2 codec and artefact free image in HD so we can run & gun with V-log and 5-axis-stabilization. I would love to be freed from all those minor quirks that other cameras offer and to be able to just concentrate on the shot. That's what this camera should be all about.
Are you in Barcelona? Don't you want to take one hour of flight and visit Lisbon these days?
E
Camera Expert
Well-known member
This video should have been pulled a long time ago but it's still up. It's an early advertising video of the Panasonic X1000.
You can clearly see interlacing lines.
People need to be careful and make sure their timeline is set properly.
You can clearly see interlacing lines.
People need to be careful and make sure their timeline is set properly.
FS7. (sounds crazy? ... the Japanese conglomerates play by own rules ... Sony protected GH4 for a full year ... that's how it goes)
This has to be the next step in the DSLR-for-video use, some sort of an external control panel that resembles a TV or gaming remote with a cheesy LCD screen and the Near Field or Blue Tooth communication to an fro. That would bring an end to the "I must hold this on my shoulder" era.
PS. As to cars - the 1978 Ferrari 308 that Tom Selleck drove in "Magnum, PI" had a 240 HP engine and did 0-60 MPH in 8.4 seconds. Today, Ford Focus RT has a 252 HP engine and can go 0-60 in 6-6.5s. Ferrari was about $60,000 then or four times the US GDP/capita (today, it'd be what an "entry level" Ferrari might run or around quarter mil). Focus RT runs about $25,000 new. It's not Ferrari, when you're cruising down the Rodeo Drive, however.
Barry_Green
Moderator
How can they possibly get feedback before they've even built the first hand-built prototype? The Engineering Sample that Noel had a couple of weeks ago is the very first one made. What these people used is the second iteration, only a couple of weeks later.
Depends on what you mean by a "major" change. But -- well, let me put it this way -- they've been making cameras for decades. I'm sure they have a pretty good handle on how to do it, and what their timelines need to be. Keep in mind that unlike Blackmagic, or AJA's CION, or even the Reds, you never hear of Panasonics being two, three, four, six, or 10 months late to market. Back in April they said it'd ship in October, and it'll ship in October. They know what they're doing.
And that is my question as well. But for whatever reason, apparently they're fine with this. I think it's not the best course of action, but I'm just one guy and they're part of a multibillion dollar conglomerate who's been doing this for decades. It would seem prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt that they do know their process and they do know what they're doing, whether it makes sense to us or not.