HVX200 Pricing Speculation at DVinfo.net

Bob Costa · February 12th, 2005, 11:04 PM

Where can I find some info on these tape formats ?

Chris Hurd · February 13th, 2005, 12:28 AM

John, click the "p2" link at this Panasonic page:

http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/home.asp#

Toke Lahti · February 13th, 2005, 05:02 AM

Why these camera manufacturers have forgotten the need for better color depth?
Digibeta was 10bits, but after that; hdcam-sr only?
Surely you would think that in 100Mbps or 80Mbps one could fit in addition to four channels of audio, at least 10bit picture, but no...
Why?
Sony being afraid that xdcam-hd would be better than hdcam?
Pana needs to use some decade old dsp's that can handle only 8bits?

Who would buy these days a digital still camera with 8bit colors?

Greg Boston · February 13th, 2005, 07:00 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Brandon Greenlee : The camcorder info article stated that it can record on both MiniDV and P2.

Anyone have a guess to how close to $10k it will be?

-->>>

Hmm...let's see, I predict $9999.99 MSRP. Everyone does that. The XL-2 for under 5k was $4999. And all those tv offers come in at just $19.95 so they can say 'under $20'. Happens in the car business too.

This is a long used psycology in retail. When you place the cost just under a 'magic boundary', it suddenly seems like a better deal to the average consumer.

If this thing produces the beautiful color we've come to expect from Panny, they are going to have a lot of folks lined up for this one. I can envision may DVX users ready to precariously take the next step up without having to break the bank to get into something like the Sony 390 or 570.

Wow, I'm liking 2005 already!

-gb-

Christopher C. Murphy · February 13th, 2005, 07:23 AM

Just my 2 cents, but $10,000 for a video camera seems to be a way for us to all go bankrupt. I thought that my $5000 purchase for the Z1 was seriously pushing the boundaries.

I'd really like to know the budgets of everyone here. That seems like a great topic! My budget barely called for the $5000 Z1 - I had to sell some gear to get it. I'm seriously trying to think who can justify a $10,000 video camera....no indie filmmaker can afford that! If you are a *working* videographer...maybe.

I have no doubt the camera will be superb and probably worth the dough, but still...$10,000? It just seems they're taking advantage of the buyers (DVX users and maybe even HDV users looking to make a jump to soon after buying their brand new gear)...most of whom won't recoup that investment unless they're making money and very smart about how that $10,000 will triple itself and be worth it. I admit that I've pushed my limits with the Z1 already!

No one I know personally (in person) can afford the $10,000....just for the camera and with no add-ons or for any "cards". It just seems out of reach for most.

Bob Costa · February 13th, 2005, 09:29 AM

At $10k, it is not a prosumer camera for anyone but the Hummer set. But it looks to be real HD, with real solutions to real problems with the HDV format. I think the price will help crystalize whether we need HD capability or not. If you just want super-quality downconverted SD, maybe the HDV cams is the way to go. If you are shooting for a high-def documentary or sports channel, you need a real HD camera. Time will tell if the rumors are true. Just more babel for the masses as videographers offer HD video in several flavors.

Chris Hurd · February 13th, 2005, 09:33 AM

<< Just my 2 cents, but $10,000 for a video camera seems to be a way for us to all go bankrupt. >>

At that price range, it is a business tool. You would expect it to pay for itself within a few months at the most. It is targeted at professional shooters who generate that sort of revenue. To these guys, $10K is a bargain. Remember, everything is relative.

Bob Zimmerman · February 13th, 2005, 09:53 AM

I won't even think about spending $10,000. My budget is under $5,000. I might have to pick up a cheap Sony Z1 on Ebay!

Charles Papert · February 13th, 2005, 10:14 AM

<<< I'm seriously trying to think who can justify a $10,000 video camera....no indie filmmaker can afford that! -->>>

In addition to Chris' points, I would also like to point out that it is only since the advent of DV that indie filmmakers have had access to inexpensive filmmaking tools at all (outside of Super 8). Ten years ago, if you had offered a $10,000 camera to the indie world that could shoot a theatrically presentable feature, they would have been overjoyed (even if the P2 cards are additional, as a line item they can easily be compared to the cost shooting on negative film, except that they are re-usable...). Few indie filmmakers owned their own cameras; they would raise money for each production and rent, borrow, beg etc. what was needed.

Blah blah blah, nobody wants to hear "when I was your age" stories. But this is such a recent development, it's hard not to bring it up. The advantages presented by this new camera are impressive, and to expect them to come at the same highly affordable price as today's technology is wishful thinking.

Kurth Bousman · February 13th, 2005, 11:17 AM

I agree - If you're a filmmaker , you would be lucky to pay for film costs to shoot one feature on s16 for 10k - and a a-minima cost 15k w/o lens. If this camera does half of what we're hoping , it will be THE camera of the next couple of years for the indie crowd- and we haven't even thought about the doc crowd. The big question is, if this board can wait until nab ! One thing doesn't make sense - why would panasonic shoot themselves in the foot as far as the sdx900 is concerned ?

Michael Struthers · February 13th, 2005, 11:29 AM

the sdx900 has 2/3 ccd's and much better lenses, giving you much better resolution and control over depth of field.

this little panny will still have 1/3 ccd's, it ain' a varicam.

Michael Struthers · February 13th, 2005, 11:36 AM

Plus, I'll bet this this AJ-HDX100 comes in closer to five thousand than ten.

Douglas Habib · February 13th, 2005, 11:50 AM

I'd take that bet, and hope I lose!!
Being the cynic I am, $9k+ is what I expect....

Michael Struthers · February 13th, 2005, 01:15 PM

It seems to me that 5k is the magic top of the "ownership" level. Under 5k, I want to own it, over that...maybe I'll rent it.

<-- hoping Jan is taking notes ;-)

Charles Papert · February 13th, 2005, 01:36 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Kurth Bousman : I agree - If you're a filmmaker , you would be lucky to pay for film costs to shoot one feature on s16 for 10k - and a a-minima cost 15k w/o lens. -->>>

Sure, and let's not forget sound--I'd rather record double system with an outboard recorder, but you can certainly forego that with an HD camera and record onboard, saving the cost of the DAT/MD/whatever recorder plus syncing time.

February 12th, 2005, 11:04 PM	#1
Bob Costa Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Venice, FL Posts: 850	Where can I find some info on these tape formats ? __________________ You are either growing or dying.

February 13th, 2005, 12:28 AM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	John, click the "p2" link at this Panasonic page: http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/home.asp# __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 13th, 2005, 07:23 AM	#5
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Just my 2 cents, but $10,000 for a video camera seems to be a way for us to all go bankrupt. I thought that my $5000 purchase for the Z1 was seriously pushing the boundaries. I'd really like to know the budgets of everyone here. That seems like a great topic! My budget barely called for the $5000 Z1 - I had to sell some gear to get it. I'm seriously trying to think who can justify a $10,000 video camera....no indie filmmaker can afford that! If you are a working videographer...maybe. I have no doubt the camera will be superb and probably worth the dough, but still...$10,000? It just seems they're taking advantage of the buyers (DVX users and maybe even HDV users looking to make a jump to soon after buying their brand new gear)...most of whom won't recoup that investment unless they're making money and very smart about how that $10,000 will triple itself and be worth it. I admit that I've pushed my limits with the Z1 already! No one I know personally (in person) can afford the $10,000....just for the camera and with no add-ons or for any "cards". It just seems out of reach for most. __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

February 13th, 2005, 09:29 AM	#6
Bob Costa Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Venice, FL Posts: 850	At $10k, it is not a prosumer camera for anyone but the Hummer set. But it looks to be real HD, with real solutions to real problems with the HDV format. I think the price will help crystalize whether we need HD capability or not. If you just want super-quality downconverted SD, maybe the HDV cams is the way to go. If you are shooting for a high-def documentary or sports channel, you need a real HD camera. Time will tell if the rumors are true. Just more babel for the masses as videographers offer HD video in several flavors. __________________ You are either growing or dying.

February 13th, 2005, 09:33 AM	#7
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	<< Just my 2 cents, but $10,000 for a video camera seems to be a way for us to all go bankrupt. >> At that price range, it is a business tool. You would expect it to pay for itself within a few months at the most. It is targeted at professional shooters who generate that sort of revenue. To these guys, $10K is a bargain. Remember, everything is relative. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 13th, 2005, 05:02 AM	#3
Toke Lahti Major Player Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 158	Why these camera manufacturers have forgotten the need for better color depth? Digibeta was 10bits, but after that; hdcam-sr only? Surely you would think that in 100Mbps or 80Mbps one could fit in addition to four channels of audio, at least 10bit picture, but no... Why? Sony being afraid that xdcam-hd would be better than hdcam? Pana needs to use some decade old dsp's that can handle only 8bits? Who would buy these days a digital still camera with 8bit colors?

February 13th, 2005, 07:00 AM	#4
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	<<<-- Originally posted by Brandon Greenlee : The camcorder info article stated that it can record on both MiniDV and P2. Anyone have a guess to how close to $10k it will be? -->>> Hmm...let's see, I predict $9999.99 MSRP. Everyone does that. The XL-2 for under 5k was $4999. And all those tv offers come in at just $19.95 so they can say 'under $20'. Happens in the car business too. This is a long used psycology in retail. When you place the cost just under a 'magic boundary', it suddenly seems like a better deal to the average consumer. If this thing produces the beautiful color we've come to expect from Panny, they are going to have a lot of folks lined up for this one. I can envision may DVX users ready to precariously take the next step up without having to break the bank to get into something like the Sony 390 or 570. Wow, I'm liking 2005 already! -gb-

February 13th, 2005, 09:53 AM	#8
Bob Zimmerman Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Illinois Posts: 888	I won't even think about spending $10,000. My budget is under $5,000. I might have to pick up a cheap Sony Z1 on Ebay!

February 13th, 2005, 10:14 AM	#9
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	<<< I'm seriously trying to think who can justify a $10,000 video camera....no indie filmmaker can afford that! -->>> In addition to Chris' points, I would also like to point out that it is only since the advent of DV that indie filmmakers have had access to inexpensive filmmaking tools at all (outside of Super 8). Ten years ago, if you had offered a $10,000 camera to the indie world that could shoot a theatrically presentable feature, they would have been overjoyed (even if the P2 cards are additional, as a line item they can easily be compared to the cost shooting on negative film, except that they are re-usable...). Few indie filmmakers owned their own cameras; they would raise money for each production and rent, borrow, beg etc. what was needed. Blah blah blah, nobody wants to hear "when I was your age" stories. But this is such a recent development, it's hard not to bring it up. The advantages presented by this new camera are impressive, and to expect them to come at the same highly affordable price as today's technology is wishful thinking. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

February 13th, 2005, 11:17 AM	#10
Kurth Bousman Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: san miguel allende , gto , mexico Posts: 644	I agree - If you're a filmmaker , you would be lucky to pay for film costs to shoot one feature on s16 for 10k - and a a-minima cost 15k w/o lens. If this camera does half of what we're hoping , it will be THE camera of the next couple of years for the indie crowd- and we haven't even thought about the doc crowd. The big question is, if this board can wait until nab ! One thing doesn't make sense - why would panasonic shoot themselves in the foot as far as the sdx900 is concerned ?

February 13th, 2005, 11:29 AM	#11
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	the sdx900 has 2/3 ccd's and much better lenses, giving you much better resolution and control over depth of field. this little panny will still have 1/3 ccd's, it ain' a varicam. __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

February 13th, 2005, 11:36 AM	#12
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	Plus, I'll bet this this AJ-HDX100 comes in closer to five thousand than ten. __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

February 13th, 2005, 11:50 AM	#13
Douglas Habib Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: LV, NV Posts: 50	I'd take that bet, and hope I lose!! Being the cynic I am, $9k+ is what I expect.... __________________ Molon Labe! AOC (Ancient Order of Curmudgeons)

February 13th, 2005, 01:15 PM	#14
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	It seems to me that 5k is the magic top of the "ownership" level. Under 5k, I want to own it, over that...maybe I'll rent it. <-- hoping Jan is taking notes ;-) __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

February 13th, 2005, 01:36 PM	#15
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	<<<-- Originally posted by Kurth Bousman : I agree - If you're a filmmaker , you would be lucky to pay for film costs to shoot one feature on s16 for 10k - and a a-minima cost 15k w/o lens. -->>> Sure, and let's not forget sound--I'd rather record double system with an outboard recorder, but you can certainly forego that with an HD camera and record onboard, saving the cost of the DAT/MD/whatever recorder plus syncing time. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com