MX500B v NV-DX100/110 at DVinfo.net

Alex Lake · February 5th, 2004, 05:23 PM

How would the panel rate the MX500B (PV953) against it's grandfather, the NV-DX100 or NV-DV110?

I understand they have 1/4" CCDs, but a relatively pathetic resolution, and only a 2.5" screen.

Frank Granovski · February 5th, 2004, 06:09 PM

The MX500 playsback about 100 more lines, and has OIS.

Tom Hardwick · February 6th, 2004, 08:17 AM

The 110 was a great third attempt by Panasonic to grab the 3 CCD prosumer market, but oh, that useless electronic image stabilisation system. For a start it lost you resolution, then it lost you wide-angle coverage, then it lost you the ability to pan or even zoom. Useless is too good a word for it and owners I know keep it switched off. "relatively pathetic resolution"? No way. The 110 gives sparkling quality pictures in good light.

The MX300 was a great leap forward, for Panasonic had seen the (Sony) light and put the batteries on the rear face, so larger ones could be used. They also employed an OIS - not as good as in Sony's TRV900, but a whole lot better than the 110. It still came with a small 2.5" side screen and at least the auto in-built ND was a single one.

The MX500 has two auto in-built ND filters and tiny 1/6" chips, and this coupled with a zoom that loses 1.5 stops towards telephoto makes it poor in low light. And I mean poor. The 110 had 1/4" chips and was noticeably better. Although the 110 had a 'Panasonic' 12x zoom, the MX500 has replaced this with a Leica branded 10x zoom. Such is progreess.

tom.

Alex Lake · February 6th, 2004, 09:00 AM

Thanks for that Tom.

The reason I was asking is that there's one on ebay at the moment, with the bidding at £800 - almost as much as an MX500. I'm not interested in bidding, but wondered what must be so good about it!

Sounds like the MX300 might be the pick of the range thus far. I presume that the next one won't be even worse.... ;-)

Tom Hardwick · February 6th, 2004, 09:07 AM

I think the £800 starting price must be some sort of joke. 110s are changing hands at £300 now.

Pick of Panasonic's bunch has got to be the MX350 in my book. A lot more handsome than the 500 and a bigger side screen than the 300. Silly bottom loading though. Good stills to card, a built in flash, MPEG4 to card and OIS. Don't like the auto NDs, but you can't have erything - where would you put it?

tom.

February 5th, 2004, 05:23 PM	#1
Alex Lake Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: London, UK Posts: 42	MX500B v NV-DX100/110 How would the panel rate the MX500B (PV953) against it's grandfather, the NV-DX100 or NV-DV110? I understand they have 1/4" CCDs, but a relatively pathetic resolution, and only a 2.5" screen. __________________ Alex

February 6th, 2004, 09:00 AM	#4
Alex Lake Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: London, UK Posts: 42	Thanks for that Tom. The reason I was asking is that there's one on ebay at the moment, with the bidding at £800 - almost as much as an MX500. I'm not interested in bidding, but wondered what must be so good about it! Sounds like the MX300 might be the pick of the range thus far. I presume that the next one won't be even worse.... ;-) __________________ Alex

February 5th, 2004, 06:09 PM	#2
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	The MX500 playsback about 100 more lines, and has OIS.

February 6th, 2004, 08:17 AM	#3
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	The 110 was a great third attempt by Panasonic to grab the 3 CCD prosumer market, but oh, that useless electronic image stabilisation system. For a start it lost you resolution, then it lost you wide-angle coverage, then it lost you the ability to pan or even zoom. Useless is too good a word for it and owners I know keep it switched off. "relatively pathetic resolution"? No way. The 110 gives sparkling quality pictures in good light. The MX300 was a great leap forward, for Panasonic had seen the (Sony) light and put the batteries on the rear face, so larger ones could be used. They also employed an OIS - not as good as in Sony's TRV900, but a whole lot better than the 110. It still came with a small 2.5" side screen and at least the auto in-built ND was a single one. The MX500 has two auto in-built ND filters and tiny 1/6" chips, and this coupled with a zoom that loses 1.5 stops towards telephoto makes it poor in low light. And I mean poor. The 110 had 1/4" chips and was noticeably better. Although the 110 had a 'Panasonic' 12x zoom, the MX500 has replaced this with a Leica branded 10x zoom. Such is progreess. tom.

February 6th, 2004, 09:07 AM	#5
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I think the £800 starting price must be some sort of joke. 110s are changing hands at £300 now. Pick of Panasonic's bunch has got to be the MX350 in my book. A lot more handsome than the 500 and a bigger side screen than the 300. Silly bottom loading though. Good stills to card, a built in flash, MPEG4 to card and OIS. Don't like the auto NDs, but you can't have erything - where would you put it? tom.