i came across this thought when dust and crap acumulated under my LCD EVF on my DVX100a...
I had to unscrew the diopter and literally pull the unit apart and lo and behold what do i see..

a super duper high res LCD panel, enlarged only by a cleverly designed magnifier.. about 1.5cm in size but obviously runnign a resolution high enough to view all the text and stats of my shooting, PLUS my filter peak outlining my focal point.. so it IS very high res indeed..

after cleaning this unit. and looking at the specs of the res being somethin over 180k pixels or something i was wondering why (aside from price) Pana didnt use this same panel, only larger, or these panels tiled together.. or whatever.. for the actual 3' LCD Panel...
Consideirng the resolution of this smaller than 1.5cm lcd panel, using this panel (only more of it.. )on the larger monitor would allow in-cam true resolution preview

just a thought..

what noones cracked open their EVF?
noones seen this teeny tiny LCD panel which is an absolute marvel of technology?
someone has to have seen this... its incredible.. you thin kthe DVX/HVX EVF is sharp and big.. im jsut blown away at how sharp it REALLY is when u consider the size of the actual panel youre looking at...

im just imagining what this tiny panel could resolve if it was laid out across 3'

The viewfinder on my Z1 is like that also. But I'm guessing that design doesn't scale well for larger LCD panels, or we would be seeing 300dpi screens on our computers by now :-)

Greater capabilities comes with a greater cost; the majority of wish-list postings for adding to the HVX's capabilities would also raise the price of the unit, and in the market the HVX was designed for it simply wouldn't hold up if the price exceeded $6k US.

The HVX is to HD what the DVX was/is to SD: an entry-level camera with a plethora of pro-like features and as such was given exactly what the market wanted and what the fair-market price could bear.

After getting face-time with the soon-to-be-released HPX500 most of the wish-list items people have been wanting for the HVX are well answered in this new camera. Of course it's at a higher price-point as are the accessories but as I say, greater capabilities come with their costs.

Robert... I'm glad you made that point about
the HVX being an entry level HD cam, and not to
be in the range of the Canon H1 and such.

A lot of folk seem to mis understand that.
By the way do you feel it's crictical to get the
HVX200 before the end of march (due to that free p2 card).

Because I have an investor that's would be willing to pay for it.

"and not to be in the range of the Canon H1 and such"

I have to disagree..
Despite the lack of SDI output, i still beleive this camera is on par with teh Hq.. what this camera lacks with 3rd party HD capture options options, it makes up for it with the available codecs

Dante,

Let me clarify: When you consider that a properly rigged ENG-type HD camera will cost well over $100k US (body, lens, batts, audio etc, etc,) and can easily go into the realm of a quarter of a million - just for one fully setup camera - then ANY of the handheld HD cameras can be considered entry-level.

Let's not start the whole "which is better" nonsense again; every camera on the market today is capable of amazing imagery, it's up to the shooter to know how to use it and, to figure out which system best fits their needs.

As I'm fond of saying: "There's no such thing as a useless camera, just useless camera operators."

Dante,

Let me clarify: When you consider that a properly rigged ENG-type HD camera will cost well over $100k US (body, lens, batts, audio etc, etc,) and can easily go into the realm of a quarter of a million - just for one fully setup camera - then ANY of the handheld HD cameras can be considered entry-level.

Let's not start the whole "which is better" nonsense again; every camera on the market today is capable of amazing imagery, it's up to the shooter to know how to use it and, to figure out which system best fits their needs.

As I'm fond of saying: "There's no such thing as a useless camera, just useless camera operators."

OH no Robert, I've come to realization that the tools I use everyone else doesn't have to use the same. I know why I use the equipment I use etc...

About the purchase before the end of march I guess you have no opinion. I'll speak with the investor and see what happens.

Man the HPX500 sounds formidable can't wait for footage please do the color tweaks as before (if you are allowed).

anywya.. getting back to topic.. id be happy to pay a lil extra for a stupid high res LCD panel...

IMHO The weakest point of this camera is definitely the LCD-Focusing. The colors are accurate but focusing is impossible with this camera without focus assist or an external monitor.

That said, out of all my cameras this is my number one choice when I go out to do a job that I don't have details on what it entails.

LCD - viewfinder ... try putting it into B&W mode. It seems to be sharper than in colour. Who needs colour anyway for framing?

Canon XH etc ... all record HD signals into DV tape. Bandwidth of DV tape is too restrictive - so when you play back on large production monitors, you can see the artifacts of compression. HVX200 uses DVCPRO HD compression - which is much better (compresses less).

Dante,

I missed that part of your post asking about when to purchase - or which one. The main issue I think for you is that if you're more familiar with the handheld-type of camera then stick with the HVX. If you've shot with ENG-type bodies before and are comfortable with fully manual controls then wait for the HPX500.