Does the DVX200 have a future?

LOL I think most of you guys are just spoiled!

While I agree there is video cameras and DSLR’s - and each best suited for a particular job, in a studio or field situation, at least for myself, I can put my GH5 on a tripod or hand held with my Atomos and keep up with the best of them. My little 2 channel Saramonic for audio and a clip on multi-color LED Duralight with its own batteries, make the GH5 a working machine!

For myself, I wanted the best of both worlds, so I use a GH5 and the DVX200 side by side, either in a solo or A/B situation. When I get to a job, I look at my needs and select either piece to give me the best product and make it as easy and dependable for that gig.

I guess what I’m trying to say is; I would not change my options of owning the GH5/DVX combo for two GH5’s, or two DVX200’s. If your serious about this stuff, you need both since they can complement your needs. As an example, if I’m going need some moving shots, I’ll use the GH5 exclusively because I can take it off the pod and right on a light weight gimbal with the all up weight of 4-5 lbs, and all the shots match fine. Try mounting a DVX on a gimbal and run around with it for hours. Also, on most jobs stills are a requirement, the GH5 smokes the DVX,s tiny still images.

For the same token, if I’m covering a racing event or show, the DVX gives the ease of using a regular corder, the buttons are big and assessable the zoom is priceless. Another advantage is using one lens for everything (no baggage) and one big DVX battery to last a day.

To sum it up, the GH5 is not going to replace the DVX200 - nor is the DVX200 going to replace the GH5, armed with both gives you a major edge on the other guy!

So does a DVX200 have a future, heck yeah it does. Just because she has a few years under her belt, surely does not make it obsolete - the camera is still state of the art and now even a better package since there has been a price drop. The DVX/GH5 combo is as strong as ever and when the day is over, if you have your act together, even a Red is not going to make a enough difference in the end product.

Regards - Mike
 
I do not know what you mean but I would actually like Panasonic to continue down this design path and improve the image quality of the handheld/camcorder approach. Telling them I would be a buyer at a higher price point. I think the format does have a future because it is not a DSLR.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I do not know what you mean but I would actually like Panasonic to continue down this design path and improve the image quality of the handheld/camcorder approach. Telling them I would be a buyer at a higher price point. I think the format does have a future because it is not a DSLR.
Click to expand...

Bassman I agree, while the DVX200 is still a very versatile platform considering it has a few years under its belt - I would not hesitate to consider purchasing an improved model. All they need to do is up the resolution a bit and offer a built in drive like the Atomos to record 60 at 10 bits and they will come!

Regards - Mike
 
One thing that will affect the future of the DVX200 are all the negative comments posted on this site. Every time I come here, I see a post about something that is not working correctly or a problem. And in 99% of the cases it is operator error and not the fault of the camera. So few people are posting anything reflecting the quality of the camera or showing it in action. I believe this impacts the future. It would be good if people read the manual and Barry's book, and tried to resolve the small issues on their own. Learn to use the camera. Stop posting problems that are not an issue. This camera may have a future, but could be phased out, just like the DVX100 was. Nothing lasts forever. Use the camera and stop speculating on its future. Spec wise the GH5 has already exceeded the capabilities and the EVA is off the charts. Will the DVX survive? Who knows, but the negative comments do not help.
 
bjewett said:
isn't the EVA1 more expensive than the UM rather than the other way around? And what about Sony color (showing my ignorance here) do you dislike?
Click to expand...

Well, when I mention Ursa Mini Pro, keep in mind that EVA1’s batteries and SDXC media is less expensive than Ursa Mini’s brick batteries and CFast2 media (you need cf2 to take advantage of all the UMP’s codecs, settings, etc), plus I consider UMP incomplete without the EVF and SMK. So an UMP system complete with batteries and media, for me, comes out to about USD $9600. An EVA1 system, is pretty much sticker price since I already have batteries and media that will work on it. Maybe add another $1000-$1500 for a third-party EVF. UMP is still more expensive.

As for my dislike for the Sony image: I think it’s too sharp, too neutral, maybe even a little cold, and the cadence is too video-y. I think Sony color tends to favor blue and green, so skintones always seem lifeless. It just seems like digital video to me. I prefer the sensor to favor skintones.

I hate watching test videos with no people portraits. I need to see what the sensor is doing eith those skintones. I think Varicam color is pretty good, but the cadence looks like video. I think Canon color is just as good or better, but the cadence looks like video. Blackmagic’s BMCC 2.5K and UMP 4.6K sensors seem to really really want to emulate what Arri is doing with color, gamut, and cadence. Except for a few things, the Alexa family and the Blackmagic cameras I mentioned, are extremely close in how they feel. They look very much like film. Only thing is you can stretch the boundaries of the Alexa’s footage a great deal more than what the Blackmagic sensors are capable of...but those are in severe conditions. Under regular shooting conditions, the Blackmagic cameras do a helluva good job emulating the Alexa look for a fraction of the cost. And UMP is finally the right body and the right sensor.
 
Design Media Consultants said:
One thing that will affect the future of the DVX200 are all the negative comments posted on this site. Every time I come here, I see a post about something that is not working correctly or a problem. And in 99% of the cases it is operator error and not the fault of the camera. So few people are posting anything reflecting the quality of the camera or showing it in action. I believe this impacts the future. It would be good if people read the manual and Barry's book, and tried to resolve the small issues on their own. Learn to use the camera. Stop posting problems that are not an issue. This camera may have a future, but could be phased out, just like the DVX100 was. Nothing lasts forever. Use the camera and stop speculating on its future. Spec wise the GH5 has already exceeded the capabilities and the EVA is off the charts. Will the DVX survive? Who knows, but the negative comments do not help.
Click to expand...

Design Media Consultants, you are fully right!

But you can look to any forum as you like (automotive, motorbikes, handys etc) always the same about issues etc. Some user posted "issues" where you can see, they never had a look to the manual or to Barry's book! This "New Generation" wants a cam which tells them what to do or they are merely lazy.
This kind of user are posting in another forum also for example a defective coffee machine because they forget to fill water in, this is now so, so we must live with, we can not change it. In no forum they tell something about the good sides unless it was directly asked for.

The DVX 200 is a great machine with many possibilities to change the settings as I need it. Therefore I bought it and that's why I like it but you have to study it!

Klaus
 
Klaus, I used to have RTFM in my signature for a while, but I thought it was a little rude so I removed it. But, man...sometimes you just want to yell “RTFM!” at people. :D
 
Mike Mas said:
LOL I think most of you guys are just spoiled!

While I agree there is video cameras and DSLR’s - and each best suited for a particular job, in a studio or field situation, at least for myself, I can put my GH5 on a tripod or hand held with my Atomos and keep up with the best of them. My little 2 channel Saramonic for audio and a clip on multi-color LED Duralight with its own batteries, make the GH5 a working machine!

For myself, I wanted the best of both worlds, so I use a GH5 and the DVX200 side by side, either in a solo or A/B situation. When I get to a job, I look at my needs and select either piece to give me the best product and make it as easy and dependable for that gig.

I guess what I’m trying to say is; I would not change my options of owning the GH5/DVX combo for two GH5’s, or two DVX200’s. If your serious about this stuff, you need both since they can complement your needs. As an example, if I’m going need some moving shots, I’ll use the GH5 exclusively because I can take it off the pod and right on a light weight gimbal with the all up weight of 4-5 lbs, and all the shots match fine. Try mounting a DVX on a gimbal and run around with it for hours. Also, on most jobs stills are a requirement, the GH5 smokes the DVX,s tiny still images.

For the same token, if I’m covering a racing event or show, the DVX gives the ease of using a regular corder, the buttons are big and assessable the zoom is priceless. Another advantage is using one lens for everything (no baggage) and one big DVX battery to last a day.

To sum it up, the GH5 is not going to replace the DVX200 - nor is the DVX200 going to replace the GH5, armed with both gives you a major edge on the other guy!

So does a DVX200 have a future, heck yeah it does. Just because she has a few years under her belt, surely does not make it obsolete - the camera is still state of the art and now even a better package since there has been a price drop. The DVX/GH5 combo is as strong as ever and when the day is over, if you have your act together, even a Red is not going to make a enough difference in the end product.

Regards - Mike
Click to expand...

I think its a great combo of using the DVX and the GH5. You are right, they have different purposes and strengths.
 
bpap said:
Design Media Consultants, you are fully right!

But you can look to any forum as you like (automotive, motorbikes, handys etc) always the same about issues etc. Some user posted "issues" where you can see, they never had a look to the manual or to Barry's book! This "New Generation" wants a cam which tells them what to do or they are merely lazy.
This kind of user are posting in another forum also for example a defective coffee machine because they forget to fill water in, this is now so, so we must live with, we can not change it. In no forum they tell something about the good sides unless it was directly asked for.

The DVX 200 is a great machine with many possibilities to change the settings as I need it. Therefore I bought it and that's why I like it but you have to study it!

Klaus
Click to expand...

Hey Klaus, excellent analogies. LOL in fact, yesterday I forgot to put water in my coffee machine but I fortunately realized it before it ran too long. But there were a couple of times where I forgot the water and it ran for a good 20 minutes. Guess what? No coffee. But I did not go on a forum and blame the "Mr. Coffee" machine. I also think the DVX is a great camera in its price range. It also gives people the opportunity to learn how to operate a sophisticated camera if they would dig in and start studying it.
 
JRJphoto said:
Klaus, I used to have RTFM in my signature for a while, but I thought it was a little rude so I removed it. But, man...sometimes you just want to yell “RTFM!” at people. :D
Click to expand...

LOL yep, want to yell, "RTFM"
Not sure if some of the people posting realize who could be reading their posts. I come on here to find people in my area to connect with possibly on a project, etc. But if I see someone posting about green spots or they can't get something to work on their camera and its an operator error. I sure the hell would never hire or work with that person. They are spoiling their own reputation by not reading the FM.
 
It’s a shame more clients are unable to recognize when the guy with the camera doesn’t know what he’s doing/talking about. There’s some pretty good snake oil salesmen out there, but the proof is in the product. And that’s not about equipment, either. Just because a guy is shooting on a 2010 T2i in 2017 doesn’t mean he’s bad at what he does. Danny Boyle shot on ugly SD miniDV cameras for the “zombie” portions of 28 Days Later as an aesthetic decision. The hopeful ending of the same movie is shot on lush Kodak Super 35 film. Has nothing to do with expensive camera equals professional filmmaker. But, it does have everything to do with professional filmmaker equals less chance of being hoodwinked by typical guy-with-camera shenanigans. I’ve had way too many new clients who come to me with some horror story regarding some guy-with-camera and I’ve got to fix the problems with the footage, or worse, completely reshoot because the footage is so bad or there is no footage because operator error, or guy disappeared.
 
JRJphoto said:
It’s a shame more clients are unable to recognize when the guy with the camera doesn’t know what he’s doing/talking about. There’s some pretty good snake oil salesmen out there, but the proof is in the product. And that’s not about equipment, either. Just because a guy is shooting on a 2010 T2i in 2017 doesn’t mean he’s bad at what he does. Danny Boyle shot on ugly SD miniDV cameras for the “zombie” portions of 28 Days Later as an aesthetic decision. The hopeful ending of the same movie is shot on lush Kodak Super 35 film. Has nothing to do with expensive camera equals professional filmmaker. But, it does have everything to do with professional filmmaker equals less chance of being hoodwinked by typical guy-with-camera shenanigans. I’ve had way too many new clients who come to me with some horror story regarding some guy-with-camera and I’ve got to fix the problems with the footage, or worse, completely reshoot because the footage is so bad or there is no footage because operator error, or guy disappeared.
Click to expand...

Truth.
 
Warning...

Scotch induced philosophical rant inspired by topic header follows..... :beer:

I got a set of Snap On tools 30 years ago. Still have them. Still work great.
Just like my grandads 1911. Pushing 100 years old. Much preferred over "modern" plastic Glocks.
The siren song of new and improved is unrelenting. And Alluring.
But a "new" camera, no matter how expensive, isn't going to produce anything better than the guy operating it. Right?
I mean, I got a $3,000 4K television. Spent a lot on it. But the programming isn't any better than my garage black and white! WTF??? :Drogar-KnockedOut(D

The cameras I currently have I expect will serve me well. They are far better than my current ability (though I'd like to think of my self as not half bad). When I get to a point that I truly "outgrow" them, I may replace them. But then again, I may not... Stop and think, the DVX uses inexpensive memory cards; a simple, almost universal codec, logical controls, really tremendous abilities, built well, and a damn nice image. For me, it's a tool to hone what I love doing. And when I can honestly say I am damn good, I'd like to think I'll still be using my favorite tried and true tools. Like my DVX. The camera is only as good as the operator; I am likely not as good as the camera right now. When I am, it (the camera) likely won't be a factor for what I am creating at that point!

My bigger concern, rather than the camera, is the industry itself... are we going to go the route of "desktop publishers" from the 80's? Once everybody had a Galaxy 15,000 (or whatever) smartphone that records 8K in total darkness with flawless exposure and perfect image stabilization and swipe-rite apps to edit from the phone, are we going to go extinct with our antiquated 4K rig mounted tripod supported artifacts? Will crafted images and bespoke visual stories be replaced by an endless stream of 30 second cat videos and selfie stick marathons? Will anyone care??? I will. I'll continue to beat out my stories however humble on the equipment I love to work with, if for no other reason than to be an anachronistic pain in the butt of the selfie stick future!
 
JRJphoto said:
It’s a shame more clients are unable to recognize when the guy with the camera doesn’t know what he’s doing/talking about. There’s some pretty good snake oil salesmen out there, but the proof is in the product. And that’s not about equipment, either. Just because a guy is shooting on a 2010 T2i in 2017 doesn’t mean he’s bad at what he does. Danny Boyle shot on ugly SD miniDV cameras for the “zombie” portions of 28 Days Later as an aesthetic decision. The hopeful ending of the same movie is shot on lush Kodak Super 35 film. Has nothing to do with expensive camera equals professional filmmaker. But, it does have everything to do with professional filmmaker equals less chance of being hoodwinked by typical guy-with-camera shenanigans. I’ve had way too many new clients who come to me with some horror story regarding some guy-with-camera and I’ve got to fix the problems with the footage, or worse, completely reshoot because the footage is so bad or there is no footage because operator error, or guy disappeared.
Click to expand...

Agree! It's difficult enough to get a great image, especially under the restraints of a budget. But when someone is clueless as to how to operate the camera, it is a hopeless situation.
 
I assume that most of you may have tried this scene file in your DVX200’s, http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/products/ag-dvx200/custom_scene.html if you did it was probably to match your DVX200 to the GH4 Natural Profile and thanks to someone at Panasonic the cameras did match perfectly.

Curiosity got the best of me today and I made a test to see if it would also match my new GH5 Natural profile………………Wow they match once again perfectly.

Great news for those who need multi-cam capability. Does this camera have a future, you bet it does.
 
I found matching the DVX with the GH4 in an A/B situation “Indoors” or “Night shots” the Panasonic Lut seemed to work good, however working outdoors in sunlight, I found there was little to no advantage since both cameras look very similar once adjusted.

Using this same Panasonic Lut to match the DVX to the GH5 is another matter because the GH5 is a departure from the GH4 since it has an improved image and a bit different look than the GH4. While the Lut works somewhat, its a bit dated and not really capable of matching the DVX200 to the GH5 without some help in color grading.

As you guys already know, the GH5 is a whole new animal especially in low light where the DVX has to work harder. If you fire up both cameras in the same low light setting where the DVX struggling, the GH5 offers the appearance you were using lights.

I’m not finding fault with the DVX200, I love the camera, its a real work horse for me, we don’t go to a job without it. We were considering a new (expensive) EVA-1, but have since made the decision to just add another DVX200, its a fraction of the cost and if you shoot and light stuff right, there is very little difference (if any) in the final product.

Regards - Mike
 
Last edited:
DVX200 is just a great piece of equipment! I am worried that the AF and OS is not as good on the EVA1, I have compare it with GH5, AF is comparable but OS is not as good on the GH5/GH4.
 
cookinghusband said:
DVX200 is just a great piece of equipment! I am worried that the AF and OS is not as good on the EVA1, I have compare it with GH5, AF is comparable but OS is not as good on the GH5/GH4.
Click to expand...

There is little doubt the EVA is going to be a better piece than the DVX200. Camera technology changes by the month now rather than by the year. However, let's not lose site of the fact this camera with a lens will be 3-4 times the cost of the "ready to go" DVX200.

We considered an EVA but after researching it and looking at the cost to get it up and running with a few lens and batteries, there was not enough advantage over a GH5, so we're just going to add another DVX200 to our fleet, the price is super now!

While I can't say for sure, since I have not had the opportunity to use the EVA, I feel strongly that anything I can shoot on the EVA, I'll be able to match quality wise and resolution wise with our GH5's. There is already documented proof that even a Red has no advantage over a GH5 in quality and end product.

If you've been at this for a while, you’ll know that something crazy happens "Price-wise" when you move from professional to broadcast. The results of comparing the Red to the GH5 with the same quality sure does not justify one camera costing $3k to the Red at $60-80K, so somebody getting screwed. There just can’t be that kind of cost to build a RED to justify the cost.

The real clincher is the fact that on some jobs, the pencil head that pulls the strings, has only got a three word vocabulary "R.E.D." so if you show up with a smile on your face carrying a GH5, there’s a real good chance he'll send you packing! Oh Well . . . .

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