Panasonic CX350 4K 10 bit streaming handheld cam for run and gun, vlog, and events

As with all contrast based Panasonic AF systems the performance of the AF system has to be tested.

Positioned exactly against the JVC GY-HC500U at same price, and the JVC GY-HC550U streaming at more. But those have log. Balanced by only 15x optical zoom.

But imagine a DVX200 with the GH5s sensor! Dream run and gun cam, especially if as compact as possible.
 
Last edited:
Thread change but I think 1" is the most practical sensor size for a lot of work. Anything more shallow and a "large" sensor with a fast lens would be used anyway.
 
is it unusual that there is so little footage on the web from this camera since its so close to shipping in 17 days. i know there's less fanfare these days on camcorders vs all the other more filmic offerings but is this typical?

in the panasonic product demo video they show a spattering of footage that IMO looks better than any other camcorders I've been checking out since my EX1. very wide 24.5mm, 20x / 24x, seems very detailed and looks to be better in DR than most of the camcorders I've looked over many years.

im praying that the AF is at least "good" and hoping for "better" than good but "good" will probably "do" if everything else happening.

BUT...is the few pieces of footage I've seen an honest representation?

since i bought my EX1 in about 2009 I've been waiting to be lured to another camcorder and with the little I've seen I'm pretty optimistic.

if anyone has links or a predictive opinion id love to hear it.

thanks!
david
 
The best way to judge is to get a camera in your hands. One of the best attributes of fixed lens camcorders is they often have extensive menu options for image manipulation. Meaning it takes time to conjure up the image you want. So quick reviews just do not do them justice in many ways. If I get some time I will take up Mitch's offer and try to setup a demo to check the camera out at my local shop. I will be comparing it to my PX270 very heavily to see if it is an improvement from a real world point of view. And if I can get a great match between the two.
 
The manipulation definitely helps to get the look one would like, but there is still only so much you can do with a camera that has a mediocre sensor and lens (in general).

IMO, most of these cameras have looked like mush for so many years. You "hide" the lower image quality by painting it in camera, which is what's also done to lower-quality footage in post that is mixed with higher-quality systems.

This camera is actually looking nice, especially for their asking price in the world of asking prices for these kind of systems, which somehow have barely dropped over a decade. Still around $4K-$5K-$6K.
 
It really depends upon what level of quality you are defining. Imho, the level of pay needs to match the cost/quality of the image. Mush is a pretty harsh word when I have been making money with my PX270's for ages and creating images that I think look very good. Painting to me is about reducing post time and getting colors correct. When I shoot with the GH5, the Natural profile is decent but LOG results in more accurate colors. But the GH5 does not really have much internal image controls.

Mediocre sensor compared to what? GH5 or Alexa? I will be interested to see how this camera compares with everything else $10,000 and under. We have so many choices today. I think this camera will hold up well.
 
I think even a GH5 with high-quality glass produces much better results when discussing pure image quality (sure as heck not flexibility) than many of these fixed-lens cameras, so the cost is no factor unless strictly comparing prices between those types of cameras in which I guess you're saying $6K would get you a better system than $3700.

But in the mirrorless world, a $6K camera is not going to be much better (or better at all for some) than a $2K one 99% of the time.
 
We'll see. I am probably buying a CX-350 and will compare it to a GH5. I'm betting there will not be much if any difference and a chance the color could be more accurate on the CX-350 after a profile is created.

What is your difference of much better results?
 
There may be several influences, but I particularly try to exclude my bias for shallow depth-of-field because it truly hides overall image quality - especially in close-ups - and I only focus on detail (but not fake detail) and the overall look of the picture when analyzing.

Trust me, I am not hating...it was my dream for many years to have a camera like this that could look like the DSLRs/mirrorless' of yesteryear, but it just never happened.

The ole interchangeable VG900 was something I wish more companies would have pursued: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...able_Lens.html

I too (like the person in post #7) kept looking/checking every year to see if there was improvement and there truly wasn't, IMO.

In 2014, if I showed you files from my Blackmagic vs. your PX270 you would have fainted. I mean that's how drastic the image quality, texture, feel, look, difference was. It's difficult to explain, but the fixed-lens cameras have always had this very identifiable video look to them.

They can be an absolute necessity for certain types of work like events, docs (whatever anyone chooses to use them for), but I have never seen their quality improve much over the years as much as in the photo bodies that shoot video.

Maybe just like how mirrorless' started to get really good 3-4 years ago, the fixed-lens cameras are now reaping the benefits and starting to catch up as well.

I'm sure Sony's and Canon's (and others) new models look/will look great too.
 
I think this is all subjective. "the fixed-lens cameras have always had this very identifiable video look to them". Well, they are video cameras. :) No doubt they will not look like cinema cameras and should not be judged with the same yardstick. From that perspective, no video camera will ever hold up.

Just to follow through, have you used a PX270? and which Blackmagic camera? From my point of view, mirrorless and DLSRs are still refining their images where back in 2014 they were pretty un-refined in many respects.
 
@ NorBro.

i agree completely with exactly what you wrote and is the way i feel about camcorders over the last 10 years.

why doesn't IQ improve. i could care less about shallow DOF on these type of cameras...aside from the obvious servo zoom i want "detail" and better DR yet they all are very very lacking in both of these.

id love a competent AF with face detection but even with this if detail and DR are not there then i might as keep my EX1 which actually still holds its own @ 1080 but is feeling old as most of my other 3 cameras are 4k leaving on my C100 @ 1080 with still very much satisfies @ 1080.

in the panasonic demo @ 4k the shot of the woman on the beach looks better than usual and the woman playing drums and guitar also looks stunning to me. i don't get that feeling with camcorders over the last 4 - 5 years.

has anyone here ever witnessed a time when panasonic would try to fool us with images that weren't taken with the real camera? id personally doubt it which leads me to believe that "this camcorder" is turning a page. ?

hoping i can find one in my town otherwise looking forward to some real world tests.

david
 
Bassman2003 said:
I think this is all subjective. "the fixed-lens cameras have always had this very identifiable video look to them". Well, they are video cameras. :) No doubt they will not look like cinema cameras and should not be judged with the same yardstick. From that perspective, no video camera will ever hold up.

Just to follow through, have you used a PX270? and which Blackmagic camera? From my point of view, mirrorless and DLSRs are still refining their images where back in 2014 they were pretty un-refined in many respects.
Click to expand...

I never owned the PX270, but I used it (and others) when I would shoot a lot of HS and college sports around the east coast. I would paint the cameras just like you recommended because it's widely-known the out-of-the-box look/options weren't ideal...but they still looked dated, IMO.

Blackmagic = big URSA. I'm assuming that's not a fair comparison for you if you strictly go by the segmentation of said cameras (which I don't agree with as cheaper mirrorless' can look cinematic and technically are photo cameras), but they were both around the same price at the time IIRC, $6K-ish, which is why I mentioned it. I could have also chosen the BMCC or BMPC, which I owned too.

And 2014 (IMO) would probably be the first year things really started to heat up with the original a7S and GH4.

I don't really have anything else to say about them because I've had this conversation so many times with 40-50 year old dudes who have used nothing else but these kind of cameras their entire lives and are simply oblivious to the changing technology around them and have argued with me about them that it just stresses me out to think about it more, haha (absolutely not saying that is you at all, but just saying...this is my little opinion and I'm sure they are absolutely amazing for you).

david_p said:
@ NorBro.

i agree completely with exactly what you wrote and is the way i feel about camcorders over the last 10 years.

why doesn't IQ improve. i could care less about shallow DOF on these type of cameras...aside from the obvious servo zoom i want "detail" and better DR yet they all are very very lacking in both of these.

id love a competent AF with face detection but even with this if detail and DR are not there then i might as keep my EX1 which actually still holds its own @ 1080 but is feeling old as most of my other 3 cameras are 4k leaving on my C100 @ 1080 with still very much satisfies @ 1080.

in the panasonic demo @ 4k the shot of the woman on the beach looks better than usual and the woman playing drums and guitar also looks stunning to me. i don't get that feeling with camcorders over the last 4 - 5 years.

has anyone here ever witnessed a time when panasonic would try to fool us with images that weren't taken with the real camera? id personally doubt it which leads me to believe that "this camcorder" is turning a page. ?

hoping i can find one in my town otherwise looking forward to some real world tests.

david
Click to expand...

Thank you...and I love the shot of the woman/drums!
 
I would not say a 1/3" video camera can compete with a RAW based cinema camera and do not disagree with your preference with the URSA. Great images. I remember considering it but went with more versatility and size. No doubt the camcorder space is a slower mover as the product line is aimed at a different consumer. I just do not think it is a true comparison just like expecting long lenses in the big sensor space. There have been many times when I preferred the solid image of the camcorder to a DSLR or mirrorless and their limitations.

No worries as well get what we need I just thought your mush comments were a bit overdone... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top