AG-DVX200 4K Large-Sensor Handheld Camcorder

"The smooth pull out/creep in servo mode on the DVX200 is a real blessing, and one of the things I really like about the camera. The zoom is also very well damped in manual mode as well."

That's good news...and a significant distinguishing characteristic for this cam for event use.
 
Has anyone yet commented on the iso performance? if the gx8 is to be any indicator, iso may (somewhat) offset the relatively slow apertures
 
tflak said:
After having read every single post in this entire thread and having viewed all the videos, there's one thing I can say with absolute certainty. There's no way in hell I'm buying a pre-production version of this camera. No way. Sorry.

And as long as I'm being brutally honest...I have a confession to make...have a guilty pleasure...I own an HC-X1000. And am actually very pleased with it. It's a great little camera once you learn how to properly use it. There - I've said it. It takes an investment of some time to get the best results from a new camera. And whether one is satisfied or not depends a lot upon how realistic one's expectations were when the camera was purchased.

Am going to make a bold prediction - even after production versions of the DVX-200 are into consumer hands, there will initially be lots of sub-par footage posted from those anxious to be among the first with "real" DVX-200 footage - which will be endlessly criticized and dissected on forums as examples of what the camera is not capable of. Haha...bold prediction? No, entirely predictable. And the current nay-sayers will have plenty of fodder to say, "I told you so."

And one last thing I can say with very high confidence; Barry Green will tell it like it is.
Click to expand...

Can I get an alleluia :beer:
 
I'm keen to read Matt's reports on the DVX200, and Barry seems to have a deep confidence in it delivering great bang for buck... But to read that this camera comes with essentially an f4 13x zoom, really makes me hesitate. I'm committed to m43, and have two GH4's and a bunch of lenses and speedboosters etc... and like many others, when I use my GH4 and any f2.8 lens in moderate to low light the limitations are inescapable. Imagine if Panasonic launched a pro-quality m43 12-150mm zoom with max aperture of f4... I for one would be scratching my head.

If they simultaneously launched a significantly more sensitive sensor, I'd probably be excited.

I'd much prefer to pay $1000 more than the DVX200 current price to be getting hold of a genuine f2.8 lens... Or have a camera that gives you the option of using your own fast glass.
 
I played with the DVX200 at EVS this week. All I can say is, if people use it for Run and Gun, it's quickly going to turn into Run and Groan. This is one big, honkin' heavy camera. If you have visions of hand holding it longer than five minutes, I hope you have insurance on your arm. Just a heads up...
 
Matthew Allard ACS said:
….
If there is anything specific that anyone wants me to test I will do my best to get it done.
…
Click to expand...



  1. Ungraded skin tones, please.
  2. Highlights managing.
  3. DR (Dynamic Range).
  4. Noise - amount and nature of (is it more luma or more chroma noise).
  5. AF (Auto Focus) behavior.

For me, skin tones are the make or break for any camera - far above and beyond any technical aspects, like sharpness, or resolution.
Second come highlights managing.
Third is DR.
Fourth is noise.

To my view, or to the way I look at footage, those first four aspects, in that order, are what make the footage more film-like, or more video-like.

Of course there is the issue of DOF (Depth Of Field), but this is being determined by the size of the sensor and the aperture of the lens. Both are unchangeable in this case.

AF behavior is important in itself, though it has nothing to do with film-like vs. video-like.
 
Matthew Allard ACS said:
Here you go:
f2.8 at 12.8mm
f3 at 13.9mm
f3.2 at 15.9mm
f3.4 at 19.9mm
f3.5 at 23.2mm
f3.6 at 24.9mm
f3.8 at 26.8mm
f4 at 29.9mm
f4.2 at 33.6mm
f4.5 84.6mm-167mm

The lens ramps almost instantly and doesn't really settle down until 33.6mm and above. The above figures are measurements straight off the camera.
Click to expand...

That's a disappointment (: Many thanks for testing so quickly, and for your work on newshooter.com - it's one of the best camera sites out there!
 
kplo said:
@Tom Lenham: "how long does it hold fast aperture through the zoom range?"
I checked that on the EVS demo camera last week. The iris drops to 3.4 after zooming in only about 10% of the lens range, and drops rather quickly from there.
If needed relatively constant aperture throughout the zoom range, I'd be using f/4.0 all the way. I was hoping for the 2.8 at least 1/2 way through the range, but it just isn't there.
Hope this helps.
Ken
Click to expand...

Thanks Ken
 
Ralph B said:
I played with the DVX200 at EVS this week. All I can say is, if people use it for Run and Gun, it's quickly going to turn into Run and Groan. This is one big, honkin' heavy camera. If you have visions of hand holding it longer than five minutes, I hope you have insurance on your arm. Just a heads up...
Click to expand...

Would you say it's heavier than an EX1 or HPX170? I have done handheld with those, the EX especially. I find it livable.
 
Josh Bass said:
Would you say it's heavier than an EX1 or HPX170? I have done handheld with those, the EX especially. I find it livable.
Click to expand...

I was just looking into the weight comparisons for an ex1, which is body only at 2.4kg. The dvx200 is 2.7kg body only. So a little heavier but I think perfectly workable for people moving from ex1 type cameras.
 
Ah ok. So calling it "heavy" is. . .uh, relative. I used to walk around with an XL2 for hours. THAT sucked. Yes I know comparable cams typically used to weigh 40+ lbs. I got to bypass that era.
 
Barry_Green said:
Cameras have digital signal processors in them that take the raw sensor data and translate it into color and brightness data. How that translation happens, how the colors are rendered, and all the other image processing, is what I'm lumping under the label "color science."
Click to expand...
So, with caveats, some of this should be firmware upgradeable and/or changeable during the production run? (the caveats being that there's a wide preference for this change from the customer base and that altering one variable doesn't effect others)

Barry_Green said:
But if you're asking why does 1080p get 200 megabits whereas 4K gets only 150, I can't give you a definitive reason but I can say that my guess is that there's only so much processing power to go around. These cameras don't have infinite processing power, there's only so much power that can be derived from a 7.2v battery, and so they try to make the most of what they can. If all the power is being absorbed in processing UHD video at 60 fps, then there may not be a ton of power left over for encoding a massive bitrate into a long-GoP codec. But that's speculation; I don't know the intimate details of what the limitations of the processors are, I only know what the results are, so I can tell you the results but I can only speculate as to how they get to those results.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. My line of thought would be that a camcorder style shouldn't have the space limitation/heat buildup of the DSLR size products and thus ought to be able to offer better specs per given price point. This is more or less how it plays out with JVC LS300 offering 150 Mbps and Sony Z100 220. Furthermore, a DSLR size NX-1 has had 80 Mbps in H265, which roughly is equal to ~ 150-160 Mbps in an H264 container.

Anyway, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, consumers buy cameras they can buy rather than cameras they wished they could buy. My opinion is that DVX200 will be a very good product but could have been an even better one. Panasonic had little choice in the sensor inside it. The lens performance likewise has its innate constraints ... but they could have packed in more features to offset some of the expected and unavoidable shortcomings.

PS. Thanks for the explanations.
 
Ralph B said:
I played with the DVX200 at EVS this week. All I can say is, if people use it for Run and Gun, it's quickly going to turn into Run and Groan. This is one big, honkin' heavy camera. If you have visions of hand holding it longer than five minutes, I hope you have insurance on your arm. Just a heads up...
Click to expand...

Anyone know if the weight is comparable to the HMC150?

Edit: Nevermind I see the weight posted
 
Last edited:
I agree with Barry that the DVX200's sensor performance is better than the GH4. It just has to be. The only realistic drawback is the lens versus the vast many top of the line interchangeable and cine lenses. That's a given of course, but Panasonic's general CAC delivers the goods.

However, I'm really optimistic for the many fun profiles we can create for talking head / corporate videos. These are things you simply can't do with a GH4. Different pieces of equipment. I would love to have some free time playing with the color matrix protocols, lighting ratios and getting that baked in cam looks saved. Also, for those that do serious audio work for quick turnaround, it's guaranteed the signal chain from a DVX performs better than the analog line-in eight inch jack in DSLRs ala the noise. Some guys swear by slate, but I have seen far too many XLR rig setups with DSLRs so they're all suspect. =P
 
It will be interesting to see how the DVX200 really performs against the effective 1/3" HC-X100 or Sony FDR-AX1/PXW-Z100. With just a little zoom at UHD 60P the DVX200 is really going to be shooting at f4 where the 1/3" models may be at f2. They will have a much wider zoom too so with both at full wide the smaller sensors have a big operational advantage and still close to 2 stops faster. Will be interesting to see how this plays out with sensor size difference. I know when I got my FDR-AX100 I was expecting it to be better than the NX30U with a sensor almost 5 times bigger in area but it isn't and I think the NX30U is more sensitive in real world conditions. Sensor pixel sizes and lens make a big difference. The AX100 image is lovely and records in XAVC-S so outcome is better than the AVCHD NX30U but not in simplistic low light performance. In 60P UHD, my only interest in the DVX200, the image will be cropped down to a bit bigger than the FDR-AX100 1" sensor . Will be interested to have a side by side with a HC-X1000 or one of the Sony's. To add to the processing argument the FDR-AX1/PXW-Z100 have a lot of processing on board and a fan to keep them cool !!!! The PXW-Z100 can record up to 600Mbps to XQD cards. Even the N-series XQD cards I use in my FDR-AX1 get very hot. My NX5U will run for up to 4 hours on a NP-F970 battery but my FDR-AX1 will run for just about 1 hour on the same battery !!!
 
Josh Bass said:
Ah ok. So calling it "heavy" is. . .uh, relative. I used to walk around with an XL2 for hours. THAT sucked. Yes I know comparable cams typically used to weigh 40+ lbs. I got to bypass that era.
Click to expand...

Consider youself fortunate for being able to bypass that era. I remember working an all-day gig with the old ENG camera and having to lug extra batteries as well. Now THAT sucks. Everything is so much easier now.
 
For run and gun, corporate or religious media this cam is perfect for me. Large sensoe, 4k , great servo zoom and I bet auto mode isn't useless unlike ALL sub $8000 Sony cameras. I've shot with most all Sony cams at some point and auto mode is "too auto" for me, making decisions about settings that alter video image and getting decent auto exposure is impossible sometimes. Flip to manual and still issues. You won't understand what I'm talking about unless you've used a Sony cam on real client-driven professional shoots and then picked up a $5000 Panasonic hvx, dvx, hpx etc. Different ball game. Gimme a Panasonic anyday and I won't ***** about the things it doesn't do because I know I'll use a different camera for that. So: I'll buy the dvx200 for most video applications and get a bmc mini-ursa for cinematic work
 
Josh Bass said:
Ah ok. So calling it "heavy" is. . .uh, relative. I used to walk around with an XL2 for hours. THAT sucked. Yes I know comparable cams typically used to weigh 40+ lbs. I got to bypass that era.
Click to expand...


the DVX200 is less than a kilo more weight than the XL2 and is not designed for shoulder mounting like the XL2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top