DVX300 with fixed / interchangeable lens and new sensor ?

Has anybody out there a side by side photo of the current DVX200 and the EVA1 body ?
I am trying to get an idea of the difference in size.
Thanks.
 
I managed to get my hands on the Canon XF405 for a day
and I was seriously impressed with the size and weight of the camera.

This would be the perfect size for a new DVX300. I also managed to get my hands on the
EVA1 and it's a great design and a lot lighter than the DVX200 however it is still bigger than the XF405.

IMO if Panasonic can shrink the DVX200 even more and include a new MFT sensor
I think it may be the perfect run and gun camera.
Not sure if Panasonic can make any new DVX300 as small as the XF405, but a similar size would be great.

With 10bit 4K 4:2:2 internal recording and V-Log, the new DVX300 should have better image quality and low light ability
than the Canon with it's 1" sensor. I really hope Panasonic can shrink any new DVX300 even more and
improve the current LCD (a 4-5" daylight viewable LCD would be amazing)
Looking forward to seeing what Panasonic has in store for 2018.
 
Last edited:
I was at an event last weekend shooting with my DVX200, when one of the band members walked up to me and commented "Now THAT'S a SERIOUS camera!". It's funny how things change, because I used to get similar comments when shooting with full size Sony DSR cameras back in the day, then when I switched to a Sony EX1R (about the same size as the DVX), the comments stopped. It's all about perception. I am no spring chicken, and my muscles get sore after a day and night of handheld shooting. But I can live with the size of the DVX. Better low-light and image quality, improved LCD and TC/Genlock would be more important. Also, I love the Panasonic colors, but even shooting 24p, the image, while pleasing, still looks like video - not as filmic as my LS300. The LS300 is a Super 35 sensor, so maybe not a fair comparison. But it is also a $2,500 camera (without lens) compared to the more expensive DVX.
 
I'm not sure about better LCD. I think it's useless. I can't shoot without Atomos Inferno. I think for a serious... well, when you want the best possible quality you'll go with a way bigger screen anyway. So I'd drop the LCD as they did in EVA1. I'm not a pro though... But I'm working on it - shot 2 concerts in December in V-Log, got myself DaVinci Resolve and learning. I'll show "something" in a week or so :)
 
jmnpro said:
I was at an event last weekend shooting with my DVX200, when one of the band members walked up to me and commented "Now THAT'S a SERIOUS camera!". It's funny how things change, because I used to get similar comments when shooting with full size Sony DSR cameras back in the day, then when I switched to a Sony EX1R (about the same size as the DVX), the comments stopped. It's all about perception. I am no spring chicken, and my muscles get sore after a day and night of handheld shooting. But I can live with the size of the DVX. Better low-light and image quality, improved LCD and TC/Genlock would be more important. Also, I love the Panasonic colors, but even shooting 24p, the image, while pleasing, still looks like video - not as filmic as my LS300. The LS300 is a Super 35 sensor, so maybe not a fair comparison. But it is also a $2,500 camera (without lens) compared to the more expensive DVX.
Click to expand...

I think the EVA1 body design will probablly be used for any new DVX. IMO it will look the part with either a fixed or interchangeable lens.
If they can manage to make the camera a little smaller then all the better (IMO)

I love the idea of being able to fit any new DVX into my Think Tank Retrospective 50 Bag along with
my audio gear. The more events I shoot these days the less I want to drag around heavy and bulky
equipment. It also makes for quicker set up and more discrete shooting.
I agree that after shooting handheld with a DVX200 for a few hours you do feel it.
For my shooting style a smaller and lighter DVX and GH5 combination would work best.

If Panasonic gets the size and weight and specs right they could have a killer run and gun camera.

My wishlist;

Similar body design to the EVA1 (a bit smaller would work even better for me)
Internal 4K 10bit 4:2:2 with V-Log
Wider Angle and faster Lens
Improved Low Light Shooting
Improved DR
Better AF and Focus Tracking
One push AF like the DVX200
5 Axis IBIS
Same Connections as DVX200 plus TC and Genlock.
SDI, HDMI, USB3, Dual XLR, Inbuild ND's etc...
Remote Wireless tablet/iphone control plus live preview
Improved daylight viewable 4-5" Touchscreen
Raw output would be an added bonus for Indi Shooters, and
would also distinguish it from the GH5s and make it a great EVA1
B camera.
 
Last edited:
I would never buy a video camera without a viewfinder like the EV-1 design. This would seem like a huge step backward imho. Does not reflect how video cameras and pros interact. LCDs can not be trusted and external monitors are not always practical.
 
The more I think about any new DVX the more certain I am it needs to be a lot smaller and lighter than anything that’s gone before, even the EVA1.

These are just my thoughts, others may disagree,
but I doubt many would disagree that given a choice they would prefer a much smaller and lighter DVX.

My reasoning;
The GH5/s is successfully for a number of reasons, one of these is it's size and portability.
You can bring it almost anywhere at a minutes notice. IMO you can’t always do this with a DVX200.

Imagine having a much smaller (EVA1 shaped) DVX with a fixed wider and faster zoom that could fit into a small shoulder bag
with the same inputs as the current DVX plus improved features such as 4K 10bit 4:2:2, V-Log, improved low light and DR, 5 axis IBIS, improved AF and one push AF, wireless tablet control etc....

I doubt there would be any fixed lens run and gun / broadcast camera that could compete with it. You could hand this camera to any journalist, documentary film maker, or event
coverage person and they could shoot all day in the most difficult situations without drawing attention to
themselves (unless they wished to) Add a small shotgun or wireless mic and your good to go. I’ve decided to sell my DVX200 because it’s no longer the camera I want to shoot with.
I am always weighing up whether I want or need it over my GH5, and more often the answer is I don’t.
If I can get away with not dragging it around for a shoot I will. The DVX200 is way more practical in terms of inbuilt and easy to access features,
but more often I find myself wishing for the Canon XF405 for its size and weight.

So my question is do Panasonic seriously want to reimagine a new and improved DVX that could
potentially outsell all other fixed lens broadcast/ documentary cameras?

Why not produce a prototype and ask users what they think?
I would bet my DVX that if Panasonic redesigned a much smaller and lighter DVX
about the same size as the XF405 but keeping the EVA1 form factor, most users would jump at it.
One final thought, I think an electronic viewfinder is need on a fixed lens camera, plus an improved daylight viewable touchscreen LCD
that could be positioned anywhere on the body would be welcomed.

Come on Panasonic, produce a prototype (like they do with new car designs), announce the specs, and see what customers have to say!
If they dont like it, you dont have to produce it.


This is just my opinion, others may disagree. Thanks
 
Last edited:
A good guide for lens size is olympus’ 40-150 2.8 lens

What would also be great if this new camera has thhe same lcd backend as the eva1 but brighter and more daylight viewable. Perhaps panasonic could sell that part separately 😆
 
tillhavis said:
These are just my thoughts, others may disagree,
[...]
If I can get away with not dragging it around for a shoot I will. The DVX200 is way more practical in terms of inbuilt and easy to access features,
but more often I find myself wishing for the Canon XF405 for its size and weight.
Click to expand...

I could see the DVX200 follow-on form factor look more like the UX180, the UX180 shrink to the XF405 size, and the UX90 further to something like the PXW-X70, but putting the m43 DVX300 into the same package as an XF405 seems like crossing a line of physics (or cheating on the lens). That said, I do welcome a smaller package, but then, I was originally hoping for a smaller package to start with.

Also, as dcloud says, there's no reason not to put an honest daylight lcd on the camera. Please. For the love of god....
 
DVX300 will surely come some day. but for now I'm thinking if I need a smaller package I'd go with GH5s. Especially, I need it for recording concerts as it's always in low light. Actually, I'm really interested in GH5s now...
 
tillhavis said:
about the same size as the XF405
Click to expand...

I've been asking for this for years (Back then, I had to say, "like the Canon XA20"). Others have photoshopped mock-ups. You might find some if you search for "AF100 successor." But they and I want one with a lens that's interchangeable, not fixed.

There are those who prefer shoulder mount. And I understand that. There are those who like SLRs. And I understand that. But if you're going to go handicam style, I think it should be as small as possible while still fitting all the controls. I think the XF405 (and the like) are about as small as can be, before becoming SLRs.

The advantage of the handicam body style over SLRs is how you hold them. Your palm is horizontal, instead of vertical, which I think is more comfortable, especially for shooting long term. Their other main advantage is the battery clips to the back, instead of going into a slot. So it can be bigger and last longer. But then again you can buy a grip for SLRs that lets your palm be horizontal. And if someday you can get a battery that lasts three or four hours, then maybe the SLR is ideal after all --- but only if it's like the GH5, with its XLR adapter and flip-out screen.

I think we need to let go of the old bias that bigger equals more professional. I would be fine with a pro camera the size and shape of a XF405 or GH5, as long as the body is rugged (make it metal!), the manual controls are all there, and the video quality is there (4K RAW at 180 fps is already possible with the new CFexpress cards). In fact, the GH5 is pretty much there for me. It just lacks global shutter.
 
dnavas said:
...the UX180 shrink to the XF405 size...
Click to expand...

Actually, thinking about it some more, and reviewing the Canon in more detail, the XF405 might be a little small for the UX180, though it might hit the HC-X1 crowd, and I say this as someone who bought the latter over the former, but feel the XF405 falls a little on the light side.

Electronic +- controls for the ND filters seems ok (and may be even an improvement), while the lack of physical buttons is off-putting. Certainly the UX180 could lose an inch, maybe two, by re-arrangement of some of the elements, but three might be a stretch. Two rings would be fine -- if you need to simultaneously refocus and zoom, seems like you'd be using the rocker and the focus ring anyway? One ring feels over-compressed. Rather than stuff the iris where gain and shutter are hidden (on a smaller, 3rd wheel), I'd prefer to have a 3-way toggle and put all three on a ring (preferably with a 2-D 3-way toggle with iris in the corner [say] and gain and shutter speed forward and up respectively, just so I can tell where that toggle tri-state is by feel). Anyway -- focus ring, lighting ring :shrug: (and yes, I know what a terrible simplification that is)

That said (to be balanced) I do like how the Canon has four audio channels. Bonus to the company that adds a dedicated monitor for them -- I'd love to get dr-701d or Zoom-F4 functionality integrated into a video camera.... [Multi-channel monitoring, low frequency cutoff settings, the ability to split an input into two channels at different gains, etc.] While I've got a nice setup to deal with the outboard audio recorder, not having to lug around the extra arm and attachments would be welcome!
 
I think in most cases it's better to have an audio recorder close to a microphone. And to me, I think it's always the case especially when you need to record 4 channels. And those microphones are not close to the camera for sure.
 
I am quite hopeful Panasonic can make a 2nd generation of the DVX200 and knock it out of the park if they don't go too cheap.

Better lens, smaller body, same capabilities as the GH5s (but with 10bit 4k60p and full IBIS). If they get it right it will about be the perfect camera. It has to have a viewfinder though!
 
Last edited:
Technology is moving fast and deveopment times are usally about two years.
So unless Panasonic have been working on the DVX for a year or two then it's unlikley we will see it
this NAB.

That is why I suggest they produce a prototype camera quickly. Containing the best possible design (based on users feedback)
and the current specs they are willing to include into the camera. Tell customers these are the minimum spec, and they may improve with feedback.
Promise nothing and just say this is a prototype, would you like to see it made?
Ask an assortment of broadcast companies, documentary film makers, event coverage people and shooters
what they think?

SET A DATE by which the prototype design will either be greenliighted or shelved. This should be within two months of
the prototype appearing. Contact all rumor and other sites such as DVXUser and get the prototype design out there.
If the demand is there finalise the specs and greenlight the product quickly.
Doing this they will have stolen a march on their compeditors who (unless they are developing a similar product)
won't have the product to market in time.

The secret to the sucess of this approach would be the ability to produce the prototype in a very short
space of time, and the ability to green light the product if demand is there for it.

The current DVX200, EVA1 and GH5/s should all contain the necessary technology to allow a new DVX prototype to be produced quickly.
Again unless Panasonic acts fast and develops a prototype, and greenlight times are speeded up
large companies will find it hard to stay head of the curve and produce products customers want.

JMO, feel free to disagree.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a good approach. The fact that the sensor in the GH5s is very capable and soon to be out in the wild makes the possibility of a DVX300 seem somewhat easy. The lens design and smaller body size would be the main sticking points. I think the wishlist is pretty short - make it smaller and 10bit! :)
 
AlexLF said:
I think in most cases it's better to have an audio recorder close to a microphone. And to me, I think it's always the case especially when you need to record 4 channels. And those microphones are not close to the camera for sure.
Click to expand...

4 channels is really just a stereo pair with a backup at lower gain to avoid clipping. HDR for audio, if you will, because AGC makes my ears cry. Audio equipment on video cameras is pretty universally meh imho, so any attention at all is worth noting. The number of XLR connections is about as detailed as camera reviews get, alas. Pre-amp noise floors, built-in mic noise levels, frequency response, etc. are minimally of interest (or should be), just like they are for video. I don't blame anyone -- they are sold as *video* cameras, after all, and not A/V media recording centers. Still, though....

As for proximity of recording, consider wireless lavalier mics. If you're doing real multi-channel work, you are going to want a dedicated box, but in that case, four channels is ridiculously small, and rarely is the audio recording equipment anywhere near the mics in, say, stage work. A mic tree over a quartet, or one stuffed under the lid of a grand, etc. If you're a one-person recording team, you co-locate the recording equipment, or you are giving short shrift to one or the other. Now, the location of the *mics* -- yes, those don't really belong on the camera. Sometimes you don't have a choice, but it's funny that somehow video camera reviews point out the mic mount :>

In multi-cam situations, though, with a multi-person team -- yeah, replicating good audio on each of the cameras is a bit of a waste, and maybe none of it is used, as the audio engineers are sitting somewhere off to the side where we don't have to think about them :> with their own gear.

My point, though, was that if you need to differentiate an offering, here's one axis that no one has paid attention to. Consider what has to be lugged around. I need an audio recorder of some kind, XLR cables, wireless receivers (or booms/stands of some kind), TC sync (or an HDMI cable in the case of the Tascom) between the two (or I'm doing repair in post and/or lining up clips by hand on a really long audio recording). Now consider what would happen if I had a really nice pre-amp with 120db of s/n and more than 16 bits to play with, built-in wireless receivers, a headphone jack with a clean and well-boosted output, etc. I don't need a headphone amp, an outboard audio recorder, the wireless receivers, the batteries for all of these things, and I don't need to use TC unless I'm actually doing multi-camera work. The audio is automatically synced to the video and starts and stops with it, so I've got less work in post. Can't do anything about the mic tree/stands, but for situations where I'm not using those, my camera is suddenly a LOT more self-contained and mobile. Add in a pair of LED strips on the side of the LCD display (say) for audio monitoring so I don't have to look at an overlay -- I mean, that would be amazing, and probably not all that expensive. (You could have the overlay track the other (backup) pair if you wanted.....)

Or, if you prefer, I'm asking for the audio-equivalent of on-board 4:2:2 10bit recording with a bright LCD screen, because lugging around an external video recorder on your video camera seems a bit ludicrous. Either way :) Not everyone needs one of those either, but bonus if suddenly no one does. More than willing to concede that the reason no one has paid attention to it is because there's no reasonable way to market it as a differentiator. Just because I would find it useful doesn't make it so universally :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top