AG-DVX200 4K Large-Sensor Handheld Camcorder

I do think there's a reason not to include 10bit 4:2:2 4K internal recording like we want, this is a completely higher end pipe line from the sensor, meaning a much higher bit rate, thus going for another type of expensive media, and higher end processing components, heat managament, just a markedly more expensive camera overall. It's not as easy as people think to get these features, even the camera locks up in its current form when it's just sending a 10bit signal, so it's not a firmware code that adds this efficiently. What they're aiming at is a camera that records 4K to SD cards with a small footprint and small price.

The big mistake, not to go that little extra 4:2:2 mile in HD. The inclusion of a 50mbps 4:2:2 HD mode will sell around 5 to 10 times as much cameras if not more, I am not exaggerating. This is THE camera to give a 50mbps 4:2:2 8bit HD mode, just works on so many levels.

Has the shipped sailed on that request?

Not 10bit, not 4:2:2, not at 4K, no higher bit rates, frame rates, it's all fine, just 4:2:2 8bit in HD.

This camera has potential to be the 2015 era Digibeta/C300 broadcaster. The features the ergonomics, connections, size, weight, NDs, sensor size, lens, audio, lowlight, EVF, media, battery, just what broadcast needs, a successor to the C300+24-105mm for 1/5 the price. Just an advice to Panasonic, do it. 4:2:2 50mbps 8bit HD.
 
DLD said:
There are sort of two current solutions to it - one is the Back Side Illumination (BSI), which Sony has began to use on even their full frame sensors (A7RII) but which seems off-limit to Panasonic at the moment. The other option is the "clear/white" pixel in the so-called RGBC filter, which lets the light through. That technology has been bandied about for several years now and has been deployed by Aptina, OmniVision, Google and Sony. However, this approach has side effects and, to my knowledge, has not been used anywhere beside the smartphones.
Click to expand...

I am definitely aware of BSI sensors, I just haven't seen BSI make enough of a difference in the sensors where it has been implemented. For instance, the two Sony 4K prosumer camcorders (PXW-Z100 and FDR-AX1) that were released both use the same BSI chip and both those cameras, by almost all accounts, are poor low light performers. I am not a sensor expert, but based on what I have seen so far, BSI left to itself will not be enough to compensate for 4K small sensor low light challenges. If you look historically at Sensor development, sensors have become increasingly more adept at managing higher and higher ISO's/Gain. This trending needs to continue in order for smaller 4K sensors to manage low light situations. Perhaps 4K may help accelerate the R&D on creating high gain, low noise small sensors. I actually think that a lot of breakthrough sensor technology is going come through the smartphone industry.

Of course the other problem with smaller sensors is that you lose that shallow depth of field look but I imagine there are a lot of camcorder users who aren't as concerned about that aspect.
 
True North said:
I was going to throw in the 4K 50/60P requirement as well but then, as you have noted, the list gets exceedingly thin.

I own a GH4 and if Barry's tests are correct and the GH4 with a 2.8 lens beats out the DVX200 then virtually all of the "low light performance" crowd are going to be VERY disappointed with the DVX200. People complain about the GH4 with a 2.8 lens as it is. With lens Apertures in the mid 1's or better, the GH4 works quite decently in less than ideally lit situations. It will never be an A7S but that camera is a bit of an anomaly. I am betting the GH5 and the next round of 4K camera from Sony and maybe even Samsung will offer internal 4K 50/60P.

There is no question in my mind that the lens on the DVX200 is what is going to kill it for a lot of people. That being said, we are now approaching 1500 posts so clearly this camera works for a number of people.

I believe we are at a technological road block right now for prosumer priced 4K camcorders that can perform decently in low light. The wider aperture lenses on smaller sensors are not enough to compensate for the extra pixels that need to be crammed into that small sensor surface area.

The larger surface of the bigger sensors allow the potential for larger photosites which in turn can collect more light but the cost of glass to work with the larger sensors that have a decent zoom range and with a wide enough aperture is likely to be very costly and physically unwieldy to make.

There is no getting around the lens challenges but I believe that eventually we will have smaller sensors that can allow for higher ISO's or Gain with minimal or unnoticeable noise. Should be an interesting couple of years for sensor technology.
Click to expand...

But you can't really compare it to a f2.8 zoom lens on the GH4 because the DVX200 is all about having a longer than 3x range to shoot with for live video. You have to compare it to a GH4 with a 14-140 lens. In this case the DVX200 will be better in low light and offer power zoom and built in ND filters. Its really about targeting those people who really hate (or just cannot) change lenses during a shoot or twist on different ND filters. Its about actually being able to zoom smoothly while shooting and being able to shoot the kind of live video productions like sports, concerts, presentations, seminars and events is a style similar to what a video camera can do. If somebody needs that kind of shooting they basically have two choices, use a 1/3" video camera or use the 14-140 lens on the GH4.

The DVX200 takes a step in the right direction by giving us a lens about a stop faster than the 14-140. Sure we would love more but a stop is still a stop and means the difference between ISO1600 and ISO800 compared to shooting with the GH4 and the 14-140 lens. Of course the GH4 can always be brighter if you are able to use a prime or a 3x f2.8 zoom lens but not everybody is in a situation to do that.

There are a lot of people that shoot video that have shot with traditional video cameras for many years but love some of the benefits of using a camera like the GH4. Those same people however have begged for a few things they missed from their video cameras. Things like power zoom, built in ND filters, par focal, long zoom range with decent low light performance, better built in audio controls and better ergonomics and controls. This is something they were likely never going to see on a DSLR with interchangeable lenses.

Thats where the DVX200 comes in. It about taking what people liked about traditional video cameras and what they liked about DSLR cameras and merging them together into a truly hybrid camera. Sure the DVX200 could have used interchangeable lenses but then it would no longer be this hybrid that so many have been begging for. Perhaps that will come later.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
I do think there's a reason not to include 10bit 4:2:2 4K internal recording like we want, this is a completely higher end pipe line from the sensor, meaning a much higher bit rate, thus going for another type of expensive media, and higher end processing components, heat managament, just a markedly more expensive camera overall. It's not as easy as people think to get these features, even the camera locks up in its current form when it's just sending a 10bit signal, so it's not a firmware code that adds this efficiently. What they're aiming at is a camera that records 4K to SD cards with a small footprint and small price.

The big mistake, not to go that little extra 4:2:2 mile in HD. The inclusion of a 50mbps 4:2:2 HD mode will sell around 5 to 10 times as much cameras if not more, I am not exaggerating. This is THE camera to give a 50mbps 4:2:2 8bit HD mode, just works on so many levels.

Has the shipped sailed on that request?

Not 10bit, not 4:2:2, not at 4K, no higher bit rates, frame rates, it's all fine, just 4:2:2 8bit in HD.

This camera has potential to be the 2015 era Digibeta/C300 broadcaster. The features the ergonomics, connections, size, weight, NDs, sensor size, lens, audio, lowlight, EVF, media, battery, just what broadcast needs, a successor to the C300+24-105mm for 1/5 the price. Just an advice to Panasonic, do it. 4:2:2 50mbps 8bit HD.
Click to expand...

The Sony PXW-Z100 does of course do 10 bit 4:2:2 but needs expensive XQD cards recording at up to 600Mbps , a fan like my FDR-AX1 ( 8 bit 4:2:0 Long GOP 150 Mbps just like the HC-X1000 ) to keep things cool and uses large NP-F970 battery in about 60 mins. So it is using a lot of power and gets really hot. However the Sony PXW-X70 does do 10 bit 4:2:2 in HD to SDXC cards at 50 Mbps at about half the price of the DVX200 if you only need HD or up to 30P UHD.
 
At this point, knowing that the lens is basically an F4 lens and the role of the camera seems to be outlined as way more video oriented, I think it would have been a smarter move to go with a little smaller sensor to yield a brighter lens. Lets face it, you are not going to win the lower budget DSLR crowd or the higher budget s35 or FF users. This camera is really the 2015 version of a 2/3" chip camera in disguise. Back before the large sensor revolution, the 2.3" camera represented the only way outside of Hollywood to get shallow DOF. It was the king for a long time with a much smaller sensor.

Given how Panasonic does not want to "go there" with the codecs and keep this more prosumer, then I think they would have been better off making this a 1" sensor with an f1.8-f2.8 lens. Focus on a low noise sensor that (as the DVX-200 does) matches the PX270 in sensitivity or beats it. Just seems like the specs would sell the camera more compared to an f4-AVCHD combination which is a yawn in 2015. Just observing...
 
Bassman2003 said:
At this point, knowing that the lens is basically an F4 lens and the role of the camera seems to be outlined as way more video oriented, I think it would have been a smarter move to go with a little smaller sensor to yield a brighter lens. Lets face it, you are not going to win the lower budget DSLR crowd or the higher budget s35 or FF users. This camera is really the 2015 version of a 2/3" chip camera in disguise. Back before the large sensor revolution, the 2.3" camera represented the only way outside of Hollywood to get shallow DOF. It was the king for a long time with a much smaller sensor.

Given how Panasonic does not want to "go there" with the codecs and keep this more prosumer, then I think they would have been better off making this a 1" sensor with an f1.8-f2.8 lens. Focus on a low noise sensor that (as the DVX-200 does) matches the PX270 in sensitivity or beats it. Just seems like the specs would sell the camera more compared to an f4-AVCHD combination which is a yawn in 2015. Just observing...
Click to expand...

Yes to me it is appearing as 13x zoom F4 lens camera that does normal HD as well as 4k and up to 60P UHD Long GOP. An all in one camera for those that want that. It will not compete against 1/3" HD cameras with 20x zooms and likely better low light or interchangable lens cameras for shallow depth of field. But it is all in one package. It may not compete at 60P UHD with the existing 1/3 camera in full wide angle either on its field of view and maybe even low light as these 1/3" cameras may have a 2 stop lens advantage eating into the sensor size difference. The DVX200 zoom range will give it an advantage over the larger sensor products with interchangeable lenses. That is the compromise. I too think a 1" sensor would be a good compromise managing the sensor size to increased pixel count for 4K much like the Sony's AX100 and X70 that just about match the performance of the 1/3" versions in low light with the advantage of a shallower depth of field for those that want that and larger zoom range with Clear Image Zoom.
 
Bassman2003 said:
At this point, knowing that the lens is basically an F4 lens and the role of the camera seems to be outlined as way more video oriented, I think it would have been a smarter move to go with a little smaller sensor to yield a brighter lens. Lets face it, you are not going to win the lower budget DSLR crowd or the higher budget s35 or FF users. This camera is really the 2015 version of a 2/3" chip camera in disguise. Back before the large sensor revolution, the 2.3" camera represented the only way outside of Hollywood to get shallow DOF. It was the king for a long time with a much smaller sensor.

Given how Panasonic does not want to "go there" with the codecs and keep this more prosumer, then I think they would have been better off making this a 1" sensor with an f1.8-f2.8 lens. Focus on a low noise sensor that (as the DVX-200 does) matches the PX270 in sensitivity or beats it. Just seems like the specs would sell the camera more compared to an f4-AVCHD combination which is a yawn in 2015. Just observing...
Click to expand...

Really how different is a 1" sensor at f2.8 compared to a 4/3" sensor at f4.0? You seem to be more worried about the number itself and not how it will actually perform. We have to be careful not to fall into a trap of f4 is always f4. We also have to be careful to not compare this to a f1.8 or f2.8 lens. Find a good long range zoom lens at f2.8. We have seen Panasonic's 1" f2.8 cameras and they always leave a bit to be desired in terms of low light. I'm pretty sure the DVX200 is already better than what a 1" f2.8 would have been.

I also think a lot of pros would have laughed hysterically at a DVX200 with a 1" sensor. m43 already has a hard time getting any level of respect with the FF fanatics.
 
Last edited:
People have been telling me "just put an external recorder on it" since the AF100. There are many reasons why I don't, HDMI etc, but the main reason is that I always rig these cameras for shoulder use with an EVF. That's how I used my HPX250 and C100 for instance. I need the on-screen info when handholding, especially the "yes you are in fact rolling" LED and moving timecode.

I may be in a minority in this regard, but never-the-less, internal 4.2.2. is a good thing.
 
True North said:
I am definitely aware of BSI sensors, I just haven't seen BSI make enough of a difference in the sensors where it has been implemented. For instance, the two Sony 4K prosumer camcorders (PXW-Z100 and FDR-AX1) that were released both use the same BSI chip and both those cameras, by almost all accounts, are poor low light performers. ...
Click to expand...
One should get a couple of stops with BSI. The cameras you sited have very small 1/2.3" sensors, which are about 1/10th the area of the MFT.

Ron Evans said:
... I too think a 1" sensor would be a good compromise managing the sensor size to increased pixel count for 4K much like the Sony's AX100 and X70 that just about match the performance of the 1/3" versions in low light with the advantage of a shallower depth of field for those that want that and larger zoom range with Clear Image Zoom.
Click to expand...
1" is Sony territory - X70 and RX10II - and you don't compete against Sony on Sony's turf ... even if you didn't have to buy your sensors from them.
 
Osslund said:
I'd said it before and I'd say it again. There's no reason to not include 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording today. It's just a poor excuse to protect higher end products.
Click to expand...

But what are they protecting? The Varicams? Unlikely... including the full range of AVC-Intra up to the 200mb/s flavors wouldn't make it compete. If you're seriously looking at a Varicam, the DVX200 isn't going to woo you away, regardless of codec. Their 2/3" ENG cameras are completely different beasts. The only other thing they could protect is the PX270... and even that is a different animal. I could see it somewhat cutting into PX270 sales, but that long lens is a big selling point.

My guess is slightly less devious... it probably was a price point thing. Their market research probably told them that this was the price they would sell the most, and the additional cost of implementing some sort of 4:2:2 (which would have meant at least some flavors of AVC-Intra and micro-P2), wouldn't translate into comparable sales to justify the additional costs.

Honestly, this looks more like an upgrade path for all the HMC150/AC130/AC160 owners (and the Sony and Canon equivalents) out there who were happy with those cameras, but want a newer camera as those other cameras get long in the tooth. Adjusted for inflation, the DVX200 is cheaper than the AC160 was at release. Bonus points because it's a larger sensor, 4k, and has 50mbs & 100mb/s long-GOP and 200mb/s I-frame bitrates... seriously, the implementations of it on the GH4 are really quite good.
 
TheDingo said:
Possibly the option of selling a higher end version of the DVX200 ( i.e. DVX300 ) that uses Micro P cards and offers higher bit-rates, higher color depths, and other CODECs.
Click to expand...

"HVX300" seems like a much more appropriate name :)

And I really do hope they offer such a camera (plus with the option of a m4/3 mount removable lens) for the folks who really do need it. I don't understand why they didn't... other than maybe they wanted to see how a lower tier version sold before offering a higher tier camera in a more niche market with stiffer competition and less profit.

I really do miss having Jan around to answer these sort of questions. Panasonic needs to have some sort of "Community Manager" the way a lot of game companies do whose sole purpose is to surf the forums like these and provide a face and go between both to give out information to consumers, but also act as a sort of customer advocate to relay feedback back to the engineers in Japan.
 
Mike Harvey said:
But what are they protecting?

My guess is slightly less devious... it probably was a price point thing...
Click to expand...
I wrote earlier that they are "protecting" FS7 (the manufacturers of which have a long-standing business relationship with Panasonic). "Price point" target is basically the same thing. They agreed to a certain niche and that niche they'll fill.

The cartelization is actually less about this particular camera and FS7 or R10II but about the quantity of products out there. The technology that went into DVX 200 can be used to make both the less expensive and more expensive units, with the fixed lens or without, in the large DSLR/small camcorder style like XC10 or handheld/shoulder mounted like DVX200 itself. Likewise, Sony could have also made a dozen of models, from the smartphone size 1/2.3" like FZ300 (they make these sensors after all) to 1" to APS-C to FF to Medium Format ... and the only cams they have now are the fairly obsolete by now Z100 in 1/2.3, new compact 1" and a much higher priced s35 FS7, with plenty of room in between.

Compare this with a car manufacturer/industry. Would a major one make a $20,000, a $50,000 and a $100,000 car and leave the $20-$50,000 and $50,000-$100,000 gaps without own models? Look at Daimler-Benz, Toyota/Lexus, BMW, etc. and you'll find no gaps whatsoever. There's a 1-series, a 2-series, a 3-series, 4-series, a 5-series, a 6-series, a 7-series (and even M) with plenty of buyer options in between. The difference is that the car industry is competitive and the photo/video is almost fully controlled by the companies headquartered in Japan.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top