Low light sports footage from AG-DVX200?

S

Stillmotion5

New member
Can anyone provide a few clips of night football or indoor sports from the AG-DVX200? I understand this is not the perfect choice for sports (or low light), but I’m looking for the best “Jack of all trades” for run and gun news/sports/events for a daily newspaper/website.

Frankly I don’t need the 4K for this work, but it sure would be nice to have for other projects and future proofing my capabilities.

Looking for any recommendations, comments or critiques from pros using the AG-DVX200 in a “news” environment.
 
I know this won't answer your question exactly but I was watching the local news the other night and the channel that I was watching showed a few other news photographers in their shot. One of the other local news stations was using a DVX200. So at least in this instance there was a main stream news outlet using the DVX200. It was a daylight scene so that doesn't tell us that they would have also used that camera at night but it was good to see someone using one.
 
Not sure why you would think it's not 'the perfect choice' for sports or low light productions. I've done 15 concerts with it in Nov/Dec, and I'm very pleased with the results compared to our AG-AC160s.

Benefits, very clean picture, higher bitrates for more retained detail (for faces etc).

TIP: start with Master Pedestal on 0 or +1 to capture all action in shadows. Then you can drop blacks back in post if needed.

Here is a link to a concert I did with very poor stage lighting, all lights at front with no lighting at rear or wings of stage, and a school principal who has no grasp of lighting.

https://vimeo.com/156511075?utm_source=email&utm_medium=vimeo-cliptranscode-201504&utm_campaign=28749


Cheers,

Vaughan
 
Here is an original camera clip for download (314MB).

You can see that I was struggling with the manual focus—which we know has no FINE ring drive control (and which was the reason I returned the camera). Otherwise I think that the DVX200 is not an ideal low-light sports camera because in order to get the depth of field on the 4/3 sensor reasonably deep I had to stop down to between 5.6 and 6.2, and that effectively challenged the light handling. I don't remember how much gain I applied but you can see that the footage is still a bit dark and I could have gained up even more. Stepping through even the first 4 seconds of the clip will reveal severe noise reduction macroblocking.

I would recommend a smaller sensor 3-chip camera for sports applications to make it easier to hold focus and for more efficiency in low light.

Once the manual focus issue is addressed in an expected firmware update, I would be more inclined to repurchase the DVX200 and even use it in sports settings where there is sufficient light to allow a noise-free image when dramatically stopped down.

(Update: This was shot at 1/100 and I could have done better with light with 1/60.)
 
Last edited:
very low the pedestal setting
the black is black:)
They lose the details in the dark areas

I found that gain 6-12 dB is acceptable
 
mapper65 said:
I know this won't answer your question exactly but I was watching the local news the other night and the channel that I was watching showed a few other news photographers in their shot. One of the other local news stations was using a DVX200. So at least in this instance there was a main stream news outlet using the DVX200. It was a daylight scene so that doesn't tell us that they would have also used that camera at night but it was good to see someone using one.
Click to expand...

Thanks - I agree, good to see them being used in the wild.
 
Vaughan Wood said:
Not sure why you would think it's not 'the perfect choice' for sports or low light productions. I've done 15 concerts with it in Nov/Dec, and I'm very pleased with the results compared to our AG-AC160s.

Benefits, very clean picture, higher bitrates for more retained detail (for faces etc).

TIP: start with Master Pedestal on 0 or +1 to capture all action in shadows. Then you can drop blacks back in post if needed.

Here is a link to a concert I did with very poor stage lighting, all lights at front with no lighting at rear or wings of stage, and a school principal who has no grasp of lighting.

https://vimeo.com/156511075?utm_source=email&utm_medium=vimeo-cliptranscode-201504&utm_campaign=28749


Cheers,

Vaughan
Click to expand...

Thanks for your post Vaughan. I'm a "stills" shooter, so I come into this rodeo with very little "video" experience under my belt. My reference to "not the perfect choice" comes from multiple web for reviews, where a common sentiment for "fast moving sports" is that maintaining focus would be (much?) easier with a 1/3” 3-chip HD-native camcorder. I've also read claims that some Panasonic 3-chip camcorders have a 1-stop advantage over DVX200 in difficult lighting conditions. I'm not sure if that's due to larger f-stop lens or 3-chip design (or both).

Your example is helpful, but it's a static focus scenario on a tripod. Whereas much of my shooting will be hand-held basketball/football with zooming/focusing up and down the field. I'm not overly worried about the low light/noise issues, as that's just part of the deal when shooting in these scenarios. But focus is a big deal to me, and the reported "reaction lag" of the "fly-by-wire" focus on the DVX200 combined with a shallow(er) DOF has me a bit concerned.

My other choices at this point would be the Panasonic AJ-PX270 (which is pricey in comparison), the JVC GY-HM650 (now at about $3200) or the newly announced Panasonic AJ-PX230 (same price as DVX2000). None of these offer the broad specs of the DVX200 or 4K or 120fps (all of which would be useful to me in other scenarios).

Bottom line would seem to come down to... Will I be able to maintain focus with the DVX200 on moving subjects in low light? I was hoping the answer is yes, and someone has the footage to prove it.
 
bluesgeek said:
Here is an original camera clip for download (314MB).

You can see that I was struggling with the manual focus—which we know has no FINE ring drive control (and which was the reason I returned the camera). Otherwise I think that the DVX200 is not an ideal low-light sports camera because in order to get the depth of field on the 4/3 sensor reasonably deep I had to stop down to between 5.6 and 6.2, and that effectively challenged the light handling. I don't remember how much gain I applied but you can see that the footage is still a bit dark and I could have gained up even more. Stepping through even the first 4 seconds of the clip will reveal severe noise reduction macroblocking.

I would recommend a smaller sensor 3-chip camera for sports applications to make it easier to hold focus and for more efficiency in low light.

Once the manual focus issue is addressed in an expected firmware update, I would be more inclined to repurchase the DVX200 and even use it in sports settings where there is sufficient light to allow a noise-free image when dramatically stopped down.

(Update: This was shot at 1/100 and I could have done better with light with 1/60.)
Click to expand...

Thanks Bluesgeek - I appreciate the footage. That's exactly what I'll be facing, along with poorly lit football fields. The lack of true mechanical focus is disheartening for a camera slated for "run & gun". I'm guessing that's a cost reduction decision, but unfortunate. Your recommendation of the 3-chip camera seems to be a very common sentiment with those I talk to in the field although no one around here has tested the DVX200.

Can I ask what you currently shoot sports with, and if you HAD to buy a new camera (today) for sports/all around news - what would it be?
My top 3 choices at this point would likely be the Panasonic AJ-PX270 (which is pricey in comparison), the JVC GY-HM650 (now at about $3200) or the newly announced Panasonic AJ-PX230 (same price as DVX2000). Unfortunately none of these offer the broad specs of the DVX200 or 4K or 120fps (all of which would be useful to me in other scenarios).
 
I am by no means an expert in the video field, but I picked up a DVX200 for some dance competition work that we do each year. I also shoot stills professionally for a university. I dragged the DVX200 along one night and made this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLzKoYOY5BM

For reference, the building that we shoot hockey inside of requires me to shoot stills at 1/500, F2.8 at ISO6400-8000, so it is not a bright building at all
 
photogjs said:
I am by no means an expert in the video field, but I picked up a DVX200 for some dance competition work that we do each year. I also shoot stills professionally for a university. I dragged the DVX200 along one night and made this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLzKoYOY5BM

For reference, the building that we shoot hockey inside of requires me to shoot stills at 1/500, F2.8 at ISO6400-8000, so it is not a bright building at all
Click to expand...

Thanks photogjs - Stills at 1/500, F2.8 at ISO6400-8000 is "spot on" for many of my venues. Can you recall the aperture/shutter speed/fps you used for the action footage? It certainly looks acceptable to me - considering the Plexiglas.

Doesn't look like you had focus issues. Can I assume this is manual focus? I've not seen many comments on the auto-focus capabilities, but I wouldn't think it would fair well shooting through 1" Plexiglas.
 
Stillmotion5 said:
Thanks photogjs - Stills at 1/500, F2.8 at ISO6400-8000 is "spot on" for many of my venues. Can you recall the aperture/shutter speed/fps you used for the action footage? It certainly looks acceptable to me - considering the Plexiglas.

Doesn't look like you had focus issues. Can I assume this is manual focus? I've not seen many comments on the auto-focus capabilities, but I wouldn't think it would fair well shooting through 1" Plexiglas.
Click to expand...

Yes, please share the settings with us, including gain, if you remember. And did you make any adjustments in post? Nice work BTW.

However, I do not find the IQ acceptable. Step through the footage and see for yourself. Bear in mind this is a $4200 camera and IMHO the IQ looks pretty much on a par with what I get out of the AC90 at just over a third the cost.

And to answer your question regarding a good affordable 3-chip camera for sports, I haven't settled on anything. We are currently sending crews out with AC90s, and while they are great to operate, IQ in low light is less than desirable. (But by the time you stop down the DVX200 to 5.6-6.0 you are creating an image similar to the AC90.)

Here's a short camera file from the AC90 in a low-light gym for download for comparison.
 
Do you have the video of this footage? I'm looking for something that can match the football footage I shot with the GH4 and rented the DVX200 but wasn't overly impressed with the results compared to the GH4.. I found the DVX footage to be too noisy in low light sport situations. That's why I'm wondering if you have the footage because the still you've shown look nice

Footage shot with GH4 - https://vimeo.com/188321903
 
benne13 said:
Do you have the video of this footage? I'm looking for something that can match the football footage I shot with the GH4 and rented the DVX200 but wasn't overly impressed with the results compared to the GH4.. I found the DVX footage to be too noisy in low light sport situations. That's why I'm wondering if you have the footage because the still you've shown look nice

Footage shot with GH4 - https://vimeo.com/188321903
Click to expand...


I upload the UHD file.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ezaf2pxbw5yj3p1/dvx.mov?dl=0
 
Wow thanks this is exactly the kind of clarity footage I've been looking for from the DVX200. What were your settings and FPS? This looks amazing. Wish there was more footage..lol
 
benne13 said:
Wow thanks this is exactly the kind of clarity footage I've been looking for from the DVX200. What were your settings and FPS? This looks amazing. Wish there was more footage..lol
Click to expand...

the DVX200 is quite capable as long as you know the camera. I was shooting at UHD 60P, 1/120, wide-open, and I think i was using Barry Green scene 4. On your GH4 clip what lens were you using?
 
Thanks for the details. Yeah I had rented the DVX and only had it for a few days so maybe I was doing something wrong with my testing. On my GH4 I shoot a 60fps 1/120 and use the Tamron 70-200 for football recording. BTW what is wide -open?
 
benne13 said:
Thanks for the details. Yeah I had rented the DVX and only had it for a few days so maybe I was doing something wrong with my testing. On my GH4 I shoot a 60fps 1/120 and use the Tamron 70-200 for football recording. BTW what is wide -open?
Click to expand...

Aperture wide open in this case f2.8
 
photogjs said:
I am by no means an expert in the video field, but I picked up a DVX200 for some dance competition work that we do each year. I also shoot stills professionally for a university. I dragged the DVX200 along one night and made this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLzKoYOY5BM

For reference, the building that we shoot hockey inside of requires me to shoot stills at 1/500, F2.8 at ISO6400-8000, so it is not a bright building at all
Click to expand...

Nice job - the content came out really well. The DVX worked and was able to capture good quality under the conditions.
 
Vaughan Wood said:
Not sure why you would think it's not 'the perfect choice' for sports or low light productions. I've done 15 concerts with it in Nov/Dec, and I'm very pleased with the results compared to our AG-AC160s.

Benefits, very clean picture, higher bitrates for more retained detail (for faces etc).

TIP: start with Master Pedestal on 0 or +1 to capture all action in shadows. Then you can drop blacks back in post if needed.

Here is a link to a concert I did with very poor stage lighting, all lights at front with no lighting at rear or wings of stage, and a school principal who has no grasp of lighting.

https://vimeo.com/156511075?utm_source=email&utm_medium=vimeo-cliptranscode-201504&utm_campaign=28749


Cheers,

Vaughan
Click to expand...

You captured some good stuff considering you were not that close to the stage. Good job. Also like your vid "Son of a Singer" - excellent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top