AG-DVX200 4K Large-Sensor Handheld Camcorder

Ken1212 said:
If Panasonic checks out this thread they will see the interest this camera is generating. But lets face it this is not a $5K camera with it's variable lens and most likely 4:2:0. Just try shooting a conference where you need to be zooming in and out a lot and you will see that the lens is not going to cut it. On the other hand if you look at the Sony RX10II it offers pretty much everything this camera does with a slightly smaller sensor in a small package. It features a fixed 2.8: 24-200mm lens. It has slow motion, great ISO, peaking, zebra, headset input, even a build in ND filter, for aonly $1300. Just add a zoom recorder and you get xlr inputs. I already own the Panasonic HMC80, it's a small sensor camera but great for the price. When you compare the DVX200 to other cameras in the market it is more of a $3500 camera and not a $5K. If it had a fixed aperture and 4:2:2 internally then that would make it a competitive camera worth investing $5K. This camera was on the top of my list, but if it's not 4:2:2 internally then I am definitely skipping as I already have several 4:2:0 cameras and don't need another.
Click to expand...

I am confused. How is that lens NOT going to cut it?
 
Ron unless you need a camera with continuous zoom I would opt for the URSA mini 4.6k and use existing EF lenses. The URSA Mini 4.6k is bounds better the Panasonic.
 
Ken1212 said:
Ron unless you need a camera with continuous zoom I would opt for the URSA mini 4.6k and use existing EF lenses. The URSA Mini 4.6k is bounds better the Panasonic.
Click to expand...

Except you'll need to drop 9-10k to get a Mini 4.6k with EVF, lenses, and enough batteries and cards to film an event, so not really that comparable..
 
Ken1212 said:
I didn't say I would buy the Sony RX10 II to shoot a conference, but I did say that to shoot a conference you are better off with a fixed aperture lens.
Click to expand...

But other than the RX10, there really aren't any on the market (at least, not that I'm aware of). None of the 1/3", 1/2", 2/3" or 1" cameras with any decent sort of zoom on them are constant aperture.

Ken1212 said:
Ron unless you need a camera with continuous zoom I would opt for the URSA mini 4.6k and use existing EF lenses. The URSA Mini 4.6k is bounds better the Panasonic.
Click to expand...

They're two totally different concepts. The DVX is a "Jack-of-all-trades" camera shooting to inexpensive media, the URSA is an interchangeable lens camera shooting onto expensive media that will probably cost twice as much to operate.

[EDIT] I should probably add, the URSA looks like it's going to be a fantastic camera. In terms of pure IQ, it probably will be a better camera. BUT... you're going to have to pay twice as much to get that IQ, and it's not going to be as handy or easy a camera to use. Like everything, it's a trade off.
 
Last edited:
Ken1212 said:
I didn't say I would buy the Sony RX10 II to shoot a conference, but I did say that to shoot a conference you are better off with a fixed aperture lens.
Click to expand...

and in what universe do you find such a lens? I have shot video for well over 20 years and used a lot of broadcast cameras and rarely ever had a fixed aperture lens. At least one with such a wide zoom range. Most of the fixed and interchangeable 1/3", 1/2" and 2/3" lenses I have used would typically lose about a stop through the zoom range. How many DSLR lenses with a 13x zoom range do you know of with a fixed aperture?
 
Phil vG said:
+1

It's actually starting to piss me off!

Why even bother to say it?

The AC130 is only a little under $3000 and the AC160 is over $3600. The HC-X1000 hasn't even been under $3000 for very long, as if the DVX200 is going to be that low!
Click to expand...

Agreed. The people who think this camera should cost $3,000.00 have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. There isn't even a remotely close comparison out there at that price point. It is just pure greed and insanity for some people to think $5,000.00 is too much for this camera. Buying hardware to add on to a DSLR would likely cost just as much if not more and these people aren't even factoring in the value added to have all that gear in one solid package that works perfectly together. The lens alone would likely cost $2,000.00 if it was sold as a m43 lens.
 
demoboy said:
Anybody else thinking of using the LA7200 with this cam?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm gonna say that's not probably the best idea. Remember that adapter was designed for the standard-def DVX100. And even then, it was very difficult to get it to focus properly, because the horizontals and verticals focus at different planes, so you really needed to keep the aperture small to keep both planes in focus at the same time. Which was okay on a standard-def camera, but when you go looking at high-def or even 4K, then the pixels are getting small enough that you don't really want to go stopping down the lens very much or you'll run into diffraction.

All that said -- it would probably fit. But I wouldn't be overly optimistic about the results.
 
Barry_Green said:
Yeah, I'm gonna say that's not probably the best idea. Remember that adapter was designed for the standard-def DVX100. And even then, it was very difficult to get it to focus properly, because the horizontals and verticals focus at different planes, so you really needed to keep the aperture small to keep both planes in focus at the same time. Which was okay on a standard-def camera, but when you go looking at high-def or even 4K, then the pixels are getting small enough that you don't really want to go stopping down the lens very much or you'll run into diffraction.

All that said -- it would probably fit. But I wouldn't be overly optimistic about the results.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. I guess nowadays with many new lens generations coming out proposing real 4K glass captuer then as you said it probably wouldn't be ideal. I actually overlooked the 4/3 sensor part over the earlier DVX and HPX's smaller sensors too.
 
frappe61 said:
Except you'll need to drop 9-10k to get a Mini 4.6k with EVF, lenses, and enough batteries and cards to film an event, so not really that comparable..
Click to expand...

Yes I looked at this too but I shoot theatre so minimum time for an act is about 50 mins and for a dance show could be 2 hours 40 mins . I think the CFast 2.0 cards at UHD 60P rate might almost cost as much as the DVX200 for me to equip for a show without copying and reusing.!! I know that is a little stretch but I think the record times would mean using at least $1000 in CFast2.0 an hour at the lowest data rate so would need about $2000 in cards for a normal show compared to about $200 or less for SDXC U3 cards. I calculated that by the time I got lenses, batteries and CFast 2.0 cards the mini would be over $10000 in line with the Sony FS7.
 
Ron Evans said:
Yes I looked at this too but I shoot theatre so minimum time for an act is about 50 mins and for a dance show could be 2 hours 40 mins . I think the CFast 2.0 cards at UHD 60P rate might almost cost as much as the DVX200 for me to equip for a show without copying and reusing.!! I know that is a little stretch but I think the record times would mean using at least $1000 in CFast2.0 an hour at the lowest data rate so would need about $2000 in cards for a normal show compared to about $200 or less for SDXC U3 cards. I calculated that by the time I got lenses, batteries and CFast 2.0 cards the mini would be over $10000 in line with the Sony FS7.
Click to expand...

If there's anything this DVX200 seems perfectly crafted for - it's shooting theater like you're doing.
I cannot think of any camera at all that would be better suited, with the exception of the Canon C300 which may perform better in low light, but will increase your costs significantly for the needed lenses.
 
Last edited:
Nothing that's said here will influence the price at all. They are going to establish the price where they think it should be, and then put it on the market. If they sell every one they can make, then they may raise the price. If it doesn't sell well at all, they'll drop the price.

Absolutely nothing that anyone SAYS about the price will affect it in any way. The only thing that matters is whether people actually SPEND the price or not.
 
Ken1212 said:
I didn't say I would buy the Sony RX10 II to shoot a conference, but I did say that to shoot a conference you are better off with a fixed aperture lens.
Click to expand...

The DVX200 HAS a fixed aperture lens for the zoom range of the RX10 II - the only question is whether it's f/3,5 or f/4,0. The bigger sensor compensates for the slower lens. So where's the point?
 
Barry_Green said:
Nothing that's said here will influence the price at all. They are going to establish the price where they think it should be, and then put it on the market. If they sell every one they can make, then they may raise the price. If it doesn't sell well at all, they'll drop the price.

Absolutely nothing that anyone SAYS about the price will affect it in any way. The only thing that matters is whether people actually SPEND the price or not.
Click to expand...

The hc-x1000 dropped so guess they are not selling well. $5,000 seems reasonable if the camera performs, just want to see some sports type shooting samples. Hope they hand it off to some soccer mom who shoots full auto.
 
DPStewart said:
If there's anything this DVX200 seems perfectly crafted for - it's shooting theater like you're doing.
I cannot think of any camera at all that would be better suited, with the exception of the Canon C300 which may perform better in low light, but will increase your costs significantly for the needed lenses.
Click to expand...

I am looking for a better camera than the FDR-AX1 that I have now for UHD 60P recording so looking for better low light etc. The only downside so far of the DVX200 is the wide angle at 60P . A lot of the shoots the AX1 is almost full wide which is 31.5 so may not be too different. Feature I like that the AX1 does not have is touch focus ( focusing is a real trial in UHD ) As a replacement for my NX5U it covers most of the features the NX5U has other than zoom range ( which may be better with the clear image zoom feature anyway ) and has most of the the other controls the NX5U has that I have been used to. Will wait and see what it is actually like in October as it could replace either of my cameras. Since I am currently all Sony with lots of batteries etc it may depend on if Sony comes out with a competitor !!
 
Ive put this down rather quickly. Had the camera again for a day amid a fairly busy schedule. Some of my honest thoughts on the camera after shooting on one for about 8 hours total.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top