Re: is the DVX200 still worth buying?
 

I fixed the audio when recording with the internal mic on a later stage event. It was not paid job.

I was looking for a lcd screen loupe for the DVX200. I have a loupe on my older FS100 and I love it.

I wear glasses and also wear other glasses for watching computer. Even the big 4.3" LCD is difficult to see for my normal glasses.

So looking for a similar loupe from sony to attach on my panasonic...

Re: is the DVX200 still worth buying?
 

did low light test with my DVX200 filmed in 4K 50p and my old(er) sony FS100 with the 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 lens.

ISO 6400 and shutter 1/50 on both.4K from dvx200 was downscaled tot 1080p.

Image quality wise I see no difference between the downscaled 4K vs the 1080p from the FS100 on my 55inch 4k tv.

Re: is the DVX200 still worth buying?
 

Tom,
Upon examination by saving the large version of the thumbnails, it appears that the downscaled 4k to 1080 DVX200 pic is much sharper than the FS100 one, at least in this low light scenario.

Of course, this may have to do with the quality of the lenses on both cameras, but the FS100 is definitely softer in the examples you provided.

Ken

Re: is the DVX200 still worth buying?
 

I agree the dvx200 is a little sharper. I don't shoot 4k so I can down sample because it's not noticeably sharper, it still has its use to crop in post. In live performances you rarely know how they will move or how much of the stage they'll use. Filming in 4k allows you the safety of shooting wider so the subject doesn't get out of frame while leaving you choice to digitally zooming in post without losing quality.

Generally when people get a 4k camera their expectation are a little too high and once they see the extra size, processing power, time to encode, they aren't as eager to film in 4k unless really necessary