View Full Version : Panasonic Camera Query


DammitJanet
10-06-2005, 10:06 PM
Thanks for the input on my HD question everybody. I almost had my heart set on the PV-GS400 when I read a review of the DVX100(A). Now I'm torn again. I mean, obviously, there's the price difference. I was pretty comfortable with spending around $1000, but for the added quality/features in the DVX100, I think it's worth the extra dough. I have a few questions first though.

Are there any significant differences/upgrades between the DVX100 and the DVX100A?

Is there any reason (other than the price) why going for the GS400 would be better than the DVX100?

I guess that's all for now. Thanks again!

ahab
10-06-2005, 10:41 PM
I've never used the PV-GS400, and have only shot with a DVX100 a few times. I believe technical wise the DVX is head and shoulders above teh PV-GS400 with it's 24P, better lens, features, audio inputs, etc.

For differences between the 100 and the 100a, check out: http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/

As an aside, if you're looking to spend about a grand, you might want to consider hunting around for a used camera. You can probably pickup a used Sony PD-150 for around 2K (which shoots DVCAM, and for me, better aquisition format almost always wins out over features), you could also probably pickup a VX1000, VX2000, or GL1 in the $1,000 range.

So many cameras, so hard to choose.

CootDog
10-06-2005, 11:21 PM
If I had the money to get a cam, it would def be the DVX100A.. I've seen too many great things from it!

Shaw
10-07-2005, 01:45 PM
I love my DVX. Great camera. The images the thing produces never fail to stun me when I review them for editing.

WideShot
10-07-2005, 01:49 PM
There is quite a difference in price, so Im not sure its fair to compare. You get what you pay for. But is the DVX100a true 16:9? Just curious. :)

Shaw
10-07-2005, 01:56 PM
Unfortunately not :(

The only SD progressive true 16:9 camera on the market is the XL2 at the moment. That's probably my biggest complaint about the camera. It's not perfect but it's very nice. It's definitely in an entirely different league from the GS400 (hence three times the price).

DammitJanet
10-07-2005, 03:44 PM
Well, ultimately, I've got to side with the one that has the better picture quality. That's kind of a big deal for me. I don't plan on upgrading for a long time, so if I have to shell out the extra cash, I want to make sure it's worth it. No, the DVX-100 doesn't do true 16:9, and that is disheartening.

But I guess the question I have to ask is, how badly would I need it? I mean, is there any way (through manual cam adjustments or editing) to get around that?

Thanks for the replies so far. This helps a lot.

Shaw
10-07-2005, 05:31 PM
Depends really. Native 16:9 is nice for going to film but pretty much unnecessary given most other circumstances. The only time you might also want it is if you were going to high definition for some reason. In cam there are two options 1) squeeze mode (electronically stretches the central portion of the CCD vertically so you get anamorphic widescreen footage) or 2) Letterbox (simply places black lines over the top and bottom of the image. There's also the possibility of using an anamorphic lens if you are willing to shell out nearly another 100 USD which will give you full resolution "native" 16:9 footage.

If I remember correctly though the GS400 isn't a progressive camera. In which case the DVX will probably end up with MORE resolution, even with the image cropped to 16:9 (interlaced video has a blur applied to it. The footage then has to be interpolated to create fake 30/24fps footage).

In the end, if you can afford it, the DVX is a great camera. Not everyone needs it though so honestly evaluate what level you are at. It sounds like this might be your last camera purchase for quite some time so the extra cost may be worth it.

Something to keep in mind is that consumer HD in the 1K range isn't far away. Granted, this won't have the picture quality the GS400 (and certainly not of the DVX) but it will have more resolution (good for going to film).

DammitJanet
10-07-2005, 06:00 PM
Thanks a lot Shaw. I have in fact, no plans at all for going to film...yet. I'm not to the point where I'll be submitting to film festival, if that's what you're hinting at. I don't really know if that's a requirement for festivals and such because I haven't looked into it. It wouldn't surprise me though. Anyway, thanks for the info.