Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

I'm guessing the K2 has the 16x zoom lens, instead of the standard 14x zoom.

I am looking for a good deal on a slightly used 300, but I wouldn't complain about having a 200 by any means.
But I agree on the 300 being the better choice. It just looks more "professional," and my clients expect bigger cameras. I know, it's all perception, as the 200 and 300 have the same lens and imagers, but the clients call the shots. I also like XAVC, as I believe it will be the standard within a few years.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

The K2 lens may be 16x and not 14x zoom, but it doesn't have optical image stabilisation. That is a deal breaker unless you do tripod only work requiring the additional zoom capability.

FWIW, I'm about to order myself a PMW-300 K1.

Andrew

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

I went for the PMW320 - but that was a couple of years ago, when the equivalent competition was the EX1 and EX3. The big difference between then and now is the 50Mbs codec (to say nothing of XAVC). I haven't had any concerns at all with the 35Mbs codec - but it would be nice to know I had a camera that was "fully compliant", I won't pretend otherwise. It depends who your customers are.
The ergonomics were exactly why I DID go for it! I am also surprised that you don't like the viewfinder. To the latter point, (zoom operation on tripod) then I know what you mean - but it was completely sorted for me quite cheaply with Libec | ZC-9Pro .
Again, I'm surprised. The slot-in receiver system I would give as a point in favour of the PMW320. No attaching receivers to brackets, no loose wiring, no powering issues. Just turn on the camera, select the radio receiver and that's it.
I thought it's fundamentally the same as on such as the EX3, and very similar in build etc to the PMW200? Again, it may not be up to the standard of a "normal" broadcast lens (no doubler, for one thing) but for the price I find it amazing. Better than I'd realistically hoped for.

I suppose the question would be that if I was buying now, would I still get the PMW320?

It's when you start to add accessories like camera lights, radio mic receivers etc, that I think the 320 shines, and using V-lock batteries then is a distinct advantage - everything is easily powered from the one battery, and they last a long time. It's heavier than such as a PMW200 - but I find I can handhold one for longer as all the weight is straight over the shoulder. It balances nicely, it's not front heavy.

That said, then I wish Sony would bring out a PMW320 with the codec options of the 300. Nowadays I'd look closely at the PMW300 as an alternative for that very reason. It's balance is still front heavy, but I believe it's possible to rear mount a V-lock battery to improve that, and solve powering issues for such as on camera lights?

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Hi everyone,
Let me take the opportunity of this interesting thread to ask your opinion about this: I was offered €6500 for my PMW350L that have about 910hrs of operation and i'm tempted to accept the offer and get the pmw300k1 with same amount!!! what do guys think!? i don't really know how much does a used 350 sell for! i only know it's less than half the price i paid for a pmw350K version!!
I really like the idea of having the 300 even if i keep using the 350 but not as primary camera as now i have a PDW700
Thanks in advance
Sam

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Used PMW-350s are going for about $13,000 - 15,000 USD, from what I've seen, assuming the camera includes the stock lens and viewfinder. I think you can get a lot more for it. If you're in no hurry, shop it around.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Optical image stabilization is a nice feature to have, but by no means is it a deal breaker for me. I spent the first 20 years of my professional career shoulder mounting 2/3" cameras, with me being the only support the camera had. I almost always use tripods anyway, but when you gotta shoulder mount, you work with what you have. Personally, I would gladly sacrifice image stabilization for better zoom range.

I don't know how comfortable the PMW-300 is for shoulder mounting, but it's doubtless not the best. But I'd still prefer the 16x zoom lens.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

With the stock lens of PMW-300 with its steady shot feature, it's OK to hold it onto shoulder, but for a 3rd party lens like Fujinon the picture would be trembling due to its imbalanced weight. That however, if you want to shoot using a low angle by holding it into your hand then any lens would be OK. Dynamic style like shooting over shoulder while running would also be fine. If you always have good tripods or cranes, then well... anything is good.
The only bummers I currently have would be that it doesn't have a colour temperature knob, and the chromatic aberration of the Fujinon lens. the former may be solvable using the iPad remote control and for the latter... I have to use the stock lens or get a new lens with silly money... if I have it. Most of latest *new* fujinon lenses do support it, but yeah, it must be new, nothing like that can be found in the used market.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

the price offered is for body and viewfinder only,no lens included in the price but indeed as you said it is too low even if i'm tempted by the pmw300 :))
good luck with your choice..

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

David,
Just getting around to responding to your experience. I prefer the 350 and I guess if I were going to buy a 320 now I would buy a used 350. I love the viewfinder in the 300 and agree that it is not as ergonomic as it should be but it weighs next to nothing compared to the 22 pounds of the 320. As for the audio hits issue, guess it depends where you are located but that is my experience. The lens is the lens.....in many ENG situations it just lacks. But it is certainly a robust camera and when you set it up nicely and get used to it you can get good images. I totally agree if they had built a 320 with the 300 features and viewfinder it would be a natural choice for many TV outlets who are concerned about cameras that go from one op to another.
Cheers
Brian

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Brian,

I don't have any experience with the big ENG cameras. Will be upgrading to the PMW-300 from a Sony V1 HDV camera.

How is the lens not up to scratch compared to bigger and more expensive models? I'm keen to have your thoughts if they are able to be explained in writing.

Andrew

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

The PMW-350 will command a higher price.
To be honest, I think the asking price for that PDW-350 is way more than what the camera is worth. It's still a 35mbps, 4:2:0 XDCAM. It's been replaced by the far more capable PDW-700/F800.
You can find cheaper PDW-350s on Ebay, if you really want one.

To be clear, that's my opinion on the asking price. The seller and a potential buyer may disagree.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

If you don't include the lens, that changes the value. I don't know what the value is without the lens. Several thousands less, for sure.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Just curious where you saw a used PMW-350 for about $13,000 - $15,000? What's a good place to buy / sell cameras like that nowadays? Thanks.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Ebay has a few, or did. Keep looking, they occasionally come up.
Omega Broadcast, a site sponsor, has some deals. B&H does as well, but you have to keep checking their site until one shows up.

Re: PMW-200 or PMW-320
 

Thanks Glen. What are some good sites / locations to sell cameras (other than Ebay)?