AGDVX 200 vs AJPX 270 thoughts?

[Paul Towne]

Right now those two cameras have very similar price points. Outside of the obvious differences how do the cameras compare in real life. I'm looking for a good all around performer for a variety of situations ie Theatre, events, sports, landscapes, etc. FCP X is our primary editing software.

I also posted this question in the AJPX thread.

[Greg Smith]

I have both cameras.

The obvious differences are that the zoom range on the PX270 is significantly longer, while the DVX200 offers 4K/UHD resolution. The PX270 requires expensive microP2 media, while the DVX200 uses generic SDXC cards.

The PX270 is significantly smaller and lighter. I prefer it for handheld shooting, or subjects like sports where the long lens is an advantage.

At 0 dB gain, the PX270 has a slight advantage in low light performance. However, the DVX200 is less noisy and can handle more added gain before noise becomes an issue. All in all, they're about equal in this respect.

The PX270 meets just about every broadcast spec and would be preferred if your work is intended for traditional broadcast outlets. It also gives the impression of being a little more solidly built than the DVX200, which has plastic external body panels for the most part.

The native 1080p from the DVX200 suffers from moire that I find annoying. Shooting at UHD and downscaling looks much sharper, but loses you the excellent hybrid image stabilizer that only works at HD resolutions.

The DVX200 has tons of adjustments for image quality and matching. The PX270 outdoes it with yet another, even deeper layer of color controls. It's hard to imagine any scenario or look that couldn't be adjusted into either camera, but it takes a lot of time to get either one tweaked precisely. I far prefer the factory scene files and settings of the PX270 to those on the DVX200, but the firmware upgrades and Barry Green's scene files have gone a long way toward making the DVX picture more attractive.

The PX270 is well equipped for live ENG and streaming use. The DVX, not so much, yet.

Both have excellent OLED viewfinders (may be the same hardware). The DVX has a bigger, nicer LCD display -- and it's a touch screen as well, which makes menu setting changes much easier, and enables the excellent touch-to-focus feature.

In short, there's a lot of overlap between these cameras and many jobs could be done effectively with either one. In a general sense, I think the PX270 is best when working in less-controlled situations (ENG, live event coverage, sports), or when you need to interface with an existing broadcast infrastructure. The DVX200 is the better choice if you need UHD or you have just a little more control over your working conditions and can benefit from selective focus.

I hope this helps, and I'd be happy to try and answer any specific questions.

- Greg

[Paul Towne]

Thanks for the great info!

[David Heath]

Further to Greg's post, have you read Adam Wilt's extremely thorough review on this site - Review: Panasonic AG-DVX200 4/3? SD-to-4K fixed-lens camcorder ?

As far as your specific question (AGDVX 200 vs AJPX 270) it's worth noting his test results at the end. That whilst the 4K performance is good, at FHD it's a bit disappointing in terms of resolution and aliasing performance. He says:

If FHD quality is paramount, you’ll do better with one of Panasonic’s 1/3” 3-chip HD-native camcorders (or with shooting UHD on the DVX200 and downscaling in post).

So are you looking for something to shoot 4K or 1080? If the former, then the 270 simply won't do it! If the latter, the 270 will likely give a better result and a better codec as well. I think that theory is echoing what Greg has found in real life situations?