the AG-HVX200 looks!
 

There is alot of talk about how the AG-HVX200 looks!

I agree. Who really cares what it look like. I actually think it looks nice and solid built. That thing looks like it is built like a brick sh#@ house! You could drop it and it would bounce right back into your arms. I heard a lot of the same things when the XL1 first came out but look how that camera did.

Hey! I often take my camera along to romantic dinners in Paris. You never know whan you might need it! :)

What's the problem if someone doesn't like the way it looks? Who cares? It's their opinion not yours.

That being said, I imagine production models will be better-looking than the clumsy mock-up.

AG-HVX200 looks!
 

Panasonics AG-HVX200

Weeeel... Unfortunately sometimes clients care. If your cam looks too "Consumer", it doesn't matter what you tell them about it's capabiities - they don't even hear you and you may not get the gig. I've concluded that the uglier and lumpier, the better. It would be great if you could buy some self-adhesive bolt heads to stick on. It says, "high quality, industrial-strength tool."

Face it, the XL1s is ugly as sin. But it sure looks professional doesn't it?

Panasonics AG-HVX200

I agree.. about the looks thing that is.. who cares?? teh DVX itself was a sexy beast and this is just as sexy... IMO

as for the bigger and uglier it is.. well if a client rejects u for the tools u use they mustnt have seen ur work..

i usually show them fotage taken BEFORE i explain what gear i use... this way, they already set the minds to it before even caring how its acquired..

on top of that, ive seen footage taken from a shoulder mount which is realy nothin all that special.... like any tool.. its not what u use its how u use.. (penis' included.. lol)

So ... if we want to say it is ugly...we can say it is ugly. Nobody can tell anyone how to feel. So what..you dont care how it looks..umm...congratulations ?

Panasonics AG-HVX200

I hope
 

Panasonic has enough time to fix the chassis.
It is sort of important to look good as a totally succesful product.
It could be Panasonic's strategy to fool Sony to make Sony feel like VHX200 is nothing to worry about at this point. We'll see how it is going to be at the time of release.

I like the way it looks
 

It looks bigger and heavier than the DVX and it has a nice layout of the controls and viewfinder. The handle attatchment in front is out of the way so you can see what you are shooting with your other eye and still attatch a profesional shotugn mic. The P2 slots are hidden in the back. It looks profesional yet compact and sturdy to me.

Bob Cetti
Audio Video Services

Get ready for a lot more insults about the Panny then it's looks... the same thing happened with the DVX and the DVXa model... everybody with a different camera had little good to say about it... and since they couldn't bash it on 95% of it's performance they'd look for areas to claim either equality or inferiority.

Let's face it. Panny is shoving their big guns right in the front door of Sony and Canon... again and again. As long as Canon limits what it wants to give us... and Sony maintains a fear of cannibalizing their own higher-end camera sales... Panny is going to spank 'em. And just the same... everybody who bought something else is going to shout "HYPE".

Well my DVX is 2 years old now and I'm still getting unbelievable audio out of it every week... and the video 'aint no slouch either.

Call it what you want but Panasonic's new cam is yet another category killer... in the 90's Sony ruled the cam market... what happened? The king is dead, long live the king... besides... I'd rather buy the new Sony Sour Grapes Cam.

It depends on what picture you look at,,,,the one that is not that light gray looks pretty good.

I personally think the Xl1s is one of the most sexy cams out there actually...

Yeah, I think it's pretty good looking, too. I'm not so sure about the white, though. Black or gray might look even better. I'm pretty bored with the "compact" brick shape of the current offerings of low end pro cams and I don't think they are actually all that "ergonomic", as we're constantly being told by the OEM's.

IN paris? Or WITH Paris? Paris likes video cameras.

hhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm! Yummy!

... WITH Paris or IN Paris... sheesh... why not with Paris in Paris... in Paris.

Was that too far? Yeah I always thought the XL1s were sexy too... people notice 'em that's for sure. Also I like the white 'cause it harkens to the "L" line of Canon lenses... which gives me similar feelings to the Paris commentary...

Sure, I'll start.
The thing looks like a fat DVX100, which looked like a platicky toy camera for highschool kids. I wouldn't be caught dead shooting ENG or event video with either Panny camera, and if anyone asked me, I'd deny owning it.....
But I'm still buying one as long as it puts out a fantastic picture. :)

What's "platicky" mean?

I hope the final production model is so ugly, that people can't even stand to look at it.........that way there's a chance of me snagging one early in Q4!

With the original DVX... even before I bought my own... I read so many threads about the cheap plastic construction of it... so I went around posting links to the pics of it's CAST MAGNESIUM construction... just like shooting birds on a wire...

Like most higher-end stuff... it 'aint light 'cause it was cheaper to make it light... the whole damn thing is metal. Nobody calls a $600 boom pole... cheap and platicky.

LOLOL!

Okay,

DVCProHD . . . 1080p . . . 720p . . . 480p . . . with overcrank . . . straight to a firewire Hard Drive or USB 2.0 so storage for cheap. Cinema gamma and all the goodies . . . . for a price of $6600 without taxes due to mail order . . . all in a solid, well built camera instead of this unreliable home-built bull . . . . only weighing in at a wonderfully manipulable 5 lbs. so it's easier to get cool shots . . . with 2 xlr cd quality inputs and all the fixings . . .

AND ANYONE HAS THE NERVE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW IT LOOKS????

Even if the client throws a hissy at first, his inmature self won't care and will eat all his thoughts and comments when he gets his product. Do yourselves a favor guys. Consider the important things in life. Remember, the millenium falcom looked like a piece of junk, but baby, it makes point 5 past light speed.

So long as it's ergonomic both in terms of holding it and function - I couldn't care less about how a camera looks.

I wasn't particularly impressed by the ergonomics of the DVX when I held one, but I didn't experiment with it for very long - only long enough to note that the LCD placement on the FX1 and the Z1U is much better, the zoom ring had a lot of backlash, and the whole camera felt "loose" - it was probably a well used rental model though.

If you look at the pictures Panasonic is putting out it doesn't look as cheap. maybe the lighting is not showing the cheap gray look. The worse pictures came from camcorderinfo.com. The rest have looked ok.

What I would like to see is more pictures of people holding the camera so we can get a better idea how big the camera is, how it is to shoot holding the camera. Maybe some pictures of Paris holding the camera!

Platicky: (plah-tikee) A form of plastic used by Panasonic on their prosummer level cameras. Slightly stronger than regular plastic, but just butt friggen ugly.

Honestly though, I am concerned about it's "consummer" looks for dealing with clients, but once I add my matte box, external hard drive, and 7" monitor on it, it'll look OK.