I purchased this camcorder primarily for on the water filming of sailing events and races. It works brilliantly for this purpose. I can go from interviewing someone to instantly zooming out for racing action a 1/2 mile away one handed while holding on to a railing or driving a boat with my other hand. Small, light, great servo zoom range, excellent auto focus, xlr mic input, one handed operation, stabilized 4K 60 with ND, built in lens cover, a light, and tucks neatly into my dry bag. The cx10 works for my purpose because speed, adaptability, and size matter most of me.
You make simple the BEST VIDEOS about camcorders I see in my live. Technical specs, features, drawbacks, video examples, opinions... just the top of the line information. Congratulations.
I did write this in many channels, from my perspective and experience, the size of the sensor doesn't matter, just the final result, if you and your client are happy, then the camera do a great job, videography with DSLR is all about cost, now any person can be a videographer, doesn't matter if went to a cinema school or not. People demanding better size sensors, IBIS and Autofocus are everywhere. And yes, you can have a nice blurry background using lens compression with any camcorder. Sheers.
I am a camcorder guy. My kink is solo 4 camera shoots of live singer/song writer shows. So I need to be able to record for up to an hour straight. Many slightly older mid-level DSLR cameras have problems with overheating after 10-15 minutes. Camcorders are designed for continuous filming. The other reality is that personally, I am unlikely to fiddle with different lenses. So a quality camcorder meets most of my needs. Don't laugh, but I started with a matched set of 4 Sanyo HD1010 pistol grip camcorders. At $75 each, they were a lot of bang for the buck and allowed me to get started learning my craft. Camera work, framing, panning and zooming. Recording quality sound with an external recorder. Basic lighting techniques. After two years, my skills were limited by my cameras so I upgraded them to slightly older Canon G30 camcorders. I am really enjoying learning to use them. The G30 is like many prosumer camcorders. It uses the same sensor, lens assembly and electronics as the fully professional XA20 camcorder without the XLR audio handle. For me, camcorders work better because they let me focus on getting good shots rather than fiddling with lenses, depth of field and a cinematic look. My main issue is as you noted, automatic settings are reset when going to manual mode. Thank you for your positive review of camcorders.
Thanks for the comment... I'm always amazed at the amount of camera 'snobbery' you see, even from so called professionals! Usually, it's about picking the right camera for the right sort of work... and it sounds like the camcorder is perfect for what you want to achieve. I spent years doing news, and there were many great influential shots that would have been missed if we didn't have an easy to use, super sharp, fixed lens camera with a great range. The best camera in the world is pointless if you've missed the shot! Take care and keep shooting !!!
Superb camera. This is really the new dvx100, not that other thing Panasonic put out a few years back. If we had this back in the day we’d be absolutely besides ourselves, but then again if we had anything from today back then... we’d still be listening to kajagoogoo
Loved the music video!😂😂😂 Back in the day I owned a Sony PD 150 DVCAM handycam, I really enjoyed using it for my own projects when not filming broadcast. These modern versions look like great value for money and in the hands of a good videographer there is absolutely no excuse for not being able to pull some lovely images from these little all in one tools!🙏🏾
Ahh yes, the good old days. I had PD 150 and two VX2000s. Still have that VX2000 (my very first camera I made money with). I agree, this could get some nice footage, BUT I'm thinking the noise would ruin it with that tiny sensor. Be limited to no gain and bright scenes.
Very true, it would not be a great available low light shooter. However, just like good smart phones and action cameras have the same problem, they still can produce a decent image in good light. As you know it is a question of knowing the limitations of each piece of gear and choosing the right available tool for the job at hand or making the best of what you have. That is where our skills and experience comes into play!🙏🏾
Deep depth of field is very valuable for what I want to do in filming hunts and getting scenery shots. Its actually quite annoying trying to eliminate the "blurry background" effect and trying to have as much in focus as possible. When an elk is moving through the thick brush, having a deep depth of field is actually preferable.
Truly a well done video. I agree with many of your comments, a generation of young people totally skipped the camcorder because of the DSLR movement. Its still a very versatile tool, especially for the investment.
Thank you Stop And Think About It... it's true that many people are ignoring camcorders now... which is a shame. They might not be trendy but they're good for a lot of jobs! 👍
Such a lovely charming video review. Really enjoyed watching this. Like a breath of fresh air to see a review that captures my attention, entertaining and has something to say that isn't just technical specs and waffle. Most importantly, it has a light :)
I recently went from an A7R3 to AX-700. Life became so much easier at the cost of looking a bit old fashion. Full frame with proper set-up can really look great, but never liked my on the fly shots. It seems to me camcorders are making a come back even with all the competition. I really did appreciate your review of the CX-10. This is definitely on my radar because of its 10 bit capabilities. Again thanks for your informative review.
started using a Panasonic HC-VX980 camcorder for b roll it works a treat saves having to cary so many lenses. auto is good for quickies and manual good for creativity. great vid!
I use a Sony Z90 Camcorder in collaboration with our other cameras, I love it, when you know how it excels it becomes really useful. Check out some of the videos on our channel to see it mixed in with the GH5 and FS7.
I have to say, the review of this camera was so pleasant and well presented. I subscribed just to hear you speak more since it was so enjoyable. Thank you!
I like you gave such a camera a fair shot and didn’t write it off immediately because it’s a camcorder. I think you are correct though... Everyone wants their footage to be cinematic regardless of content. Appears to have good features but price point will play a factor when you compare to cameras such as the new Fujifilm XT4 and I’m waiting for news on a GH6???
Great review. Everybody should remember that every camera has its pluses and minuses. If it fits your needs get it. Also, I've never read so many responses to a review before. It was like going to film School. Very informative.
Here's a little story that has made me start looking at camcorders, specifically the CX10 or its cheaper sisters, the X1500 or X2000: I was shooting video for a client, at sea, bright sunlight, using the Lumix G9. What did I forget to bring? The ND filters. So I increased the shutter speed a bit and stopped down to f/16 to survive. What I didn't think about was that the small dust particles on the sensor that are invisible at f/4 become very visible at f/16. And I didn't check. Not that I would have seen them anyway, on the LCD in bright sunlight with camera on a gimbal. I did see them when I edited the footage though. Clear and sharp. When I look at all the stuff that is needed to make a mirrorless camera functional as a video camera, not to speak about umpteen lenses, even the big brother of the CX10, the X2, becomes a bargain. And the grab-and-go functionality is to die for, particularly for a one-man-band like myself. For me, this is the way to go, and I see many people thinking along the same lines these days. Thank you for a very nice video.
Thank you for the comment... and you're right. I could tell you about my job with a famous watch making company that was ruined by dust... but it still hurts too much! 😂
This looks like an almost perfect camera for me. The inbuilt zoom and incredible stabilisation will be perfect for wildlife work. Mine is ordered and should arrive soon. Thanks for a great review.
I think that in this video you show how important are light, composition and so on to get nice results, much more than a shallow depth of field. I have been working for Italian TV for almost 18 years shooting on DV, Betacam SP, Xdcam before getting to large sensor format like everybody else. I usually shoot now with a Canon C100 (which I prefer over mirrorless cameras because of the audio inputs and the ND filter) but sometimes I miss the sense of freedom that the old camcorders gave to you, especially because of the versatile and bright zoom lenses that let you shoot from wide angle to super tele, with even a duplicator. Sometimes they also forced you to think more about the images, for example if you had to shoot an interview in a bad looking place, while now all you do is getting the background out of focus wherever you are, we all become a little bit lazy with this large format camcorders. In this days of lockdown I am having fun shooting in my house with an old Sony VX1000 :)
How true.... my background is similar, and although I do love the look of large sensor cameras, they certainly can make you lazy!... and who knows how long the fad for blurry backgrounds will last? 👍
Sometimes I really think we over complicate things and forget why we are trying to capture things... really great discussion and thoughts on this camera.
Thank you for the review. I really like your style Sir and quality of this video. As these cameras are still not available in sale it is always good to see other professional users point of view on the hardware. I am amateur content creator and I am thinking about buying HC-X1500 with external handle. Seems like SDI can be compensated by HDMI output with proper adapter and other pro features are not need to me. Although the quality of shots even at night are rather good enough for my eye (according to other video tests on RU-vid) I am still a bit concerned about sensor size. I did not find anything better in this price point though. Hopefully this will be great advance to my old HC-X920.
Thanks for the comment.... I certainly wasn't saying it's 'bad' at night... just that if you start to pixel peep then there's no way it can compete with a large sensor for collecting light!
I'm with you buddy. I believe in purpose built equipment. As a professional and multi major award nominated, music engineer. But I am also a Broadcast Engineer. With 20 years spent at the first and greatest television network in the world, NBC-TV. So like yourself. I fully believe in actual, cameras and camcorders. As I also believe in purpose built, hard disk based, multi track, audio recorders, today. As I have bypassed the analog audio recorders. That I was in charge of building for Scully. Kind of like the Studer of North America. Only better. But I don't need those anymore. I advanced into the, 21st century in my 60s! So, it appears that only you and I are the last of the actual professionals. We don't believe in childish gobbledygook using snap cameras for video. We both need the real things! With all of those features you pointed out. If one is to be considered a professional. So bravo on this really fine video. You're calling it like it really is. Intelligently. Not childishly. And pointing out the obvious. That everyone now misses. Because they are not photographers, not cinematographers, not even videographers. As its Jethro, Clem and Billy Bob. And they are very good at playing computer games, playing with the dog and playing with themselves. So thank you for this truly professional fine video. You give me a little bit of hope. That other stupid people might follow your lead. As right they should. Yes. I would like to get one of those, Panasonic, AG-CX10's. And maybe 4 of them? And a nice digital switcher. And a Jib/Crane with a robotic pan and tilt head. And then you get to see and have and produce a real production. In real time. Streaming live. Broadcast live. And no computer trickery. So talent has to be in front of the lens as well as behind the lens. And where one cannot manufacture talent from RU-vid videos. And they likely don't understand why? It looks so easy. But it's really not easy. Even though it is. For those of us who are professional at this. And requires very little thought. As we have been doing it for so many years now. We can do it in our sleep. So, we both know what our, Focht is. Others just think they know. Because they watched a RU-vid video. And just like Jethro Bo Dean from the Beverly Hillbillies. Everybody now thinks they are brain surgeons. Because they watched a 10 minute RU-vid video. And so word to the wise. Don't let Billy Bob operate on your brain. As he got his diploma from a box of cracker jacks. Or a certificate from Twitter University. I on the other hand went to a really fine school. I attended the University of Marijuana. And I graduated with flying colors. But that was likely from the LSD? So I just graduated, flying. Through the ether of electrons moving through copper. Good job my friend.
Wow, that's a comprehensive comment... thank you! I think I generally agree with you... except I think there's a lot we "old time TV pro's" can learn from some of the new raw talent on RU-vid etc. There are some really creative content producers who aren't restricted by the old 'rules' of TV production. Not loads, but certainly some, who are worth watching for all the new ideas they bring... in an ideal world we'd all learn off each other and raise the collective game !!! Take care...
Since the making of this video, the ability to go LIVE with ease has become almost a necessity. I work in the music business, and every musician I know, plus the venues, have had to look to Facebook LIVE. Panasonic just released an upgrade so that the GH5 could use tethering software to go live. However, only for Windows! I personally love camcorder shooting. I do a lot of concerts, and although I use my GH5, the ease of zooming and panning during solos is a breeze with a camcorder on a monopod. With my GH5 I use the Olympus 40-150/2.8 on a tripod. A camcorder is so much more mobile. So, I completely see your point. The problem is we have to buy and own everything, and yet the field of photography has sadly had it's fees downgraded over the years. Thanks you for the video, since I am considering purchasing this camcorder.
You're so right about the live streaming... they just need to make it real simple for everyone. Hopefully NDI will make a difference. I didn't know about the GH5 live tethering but maybe we'll see it included on a GH6 at some point? The advantages and easy of use of the camcorder have been forgotten by many in this rush for mirrorless!
I'd love to see a side by side comparison between this and Panasonic's own fz2000 with its 1" sensor. The fz2000 can be picked up for around £600 which is a bargain.
That would be a very interesting comparison... you'd obviously lose all the streaming stuff and proper audio capabilities, but that 1-inch sensor would be nice. Certainly a bargain price, but I'm wondering if it's going to give us the DSLR issues of say a GH5?
Aaahhhh Mudeford/Hengisbury beach huts on a grey cold February day... classic pop video territory. Nice review, shooting fly on the wall with no depth and a large camera maybe a thing of the past, as people want the instant iPhone hose pipe technique. So I recon you are right with this camera, it’ll have a renaissance.
... and it was very cold....the guys did well hanging around while I was learning to use my thumbs again !!! You're right about the iPhone generation... they are certainly having an effect on stills camera design... maybe the same with video now?
thnx for the clear review and especially the nice way with humor. And yes there is a light on this cam..... Looks a bit like my Sony X70 with updated outputs....and no light
At first, i kinda not so interested because sony has already released Z90 and NX80 series...until you said it has SDI out, 4:2:2 10-bit, and 4k60p and independent rings on the lens!
Those are some of the things that have stopped me from buying the newer Sony series, everything you just said. I have a basic Sony 4K right now and wanted to upgrade but was hesitant from going away from Sony because I’m used to the user interface and that took me a while to learn. Now I’d have to learn the Panasonic interface but all these points are making me want to buy it lol.
Another thing with the Sony series is they are about 3 years old already and I feel they will be putting out new cameras in that line soon. But we will see.
@@ardentcarpenter2798 Very true... sometimes, the best camera is the one you're totally used to. Makes it quicker and easier to get the shots you want without having to think each time!
Great review, guys!!! It makes my decision much more easier to move from AX100 60P to that CX10... and great explanation and demonstration. Kind regards! Carsten from RCCARHOBBY
I started with the Panasonic AG-AC30 a few years back and it really did a nice job for a while (I'd use a DSLR for those arty shallow depth pieces). There are some jobs I don't want to lug my URSA G2 around on (especially if my back is playing up) and I like the look of this - especially as it has ND filters which the original didn't have. Edit - Just seen the AG-CX350, I think that'll be more my bag. PS - Love your reviews as always
Thanks for the kind comment Steve, and I do agree, there's definitely a place for this type of camcorder. It's not just saving our backs... there's many situations when it's simply a better tool for the job. CX350 looks cool too.
But it will be a hard sell to those who are new to the whole concept of standalone video recorders, considering at a first glance the quality isn't any better than a top of the range smartphone of which you could have 2-3 for the price of this CX10. It's because these cameras shine in reliability, when you need to do long shoots, and with their professional inputs and outputs. Not when you are taking a short video.
Great review! I can’t trust Panasonic’s Autofocus though, Although it doesn’t have 4K 60p I think the Sony Z90 is one of the best camcorders you can get..
I got both, the Z90 and this one. I use the Panasonic for things where I need that superwide tele an brilliant OIS. Its fantastic for wildlife stuff, where the zoom range of the Z90 is just too short.
Thanks for this video, I found it very enlightening 🤣 so much so I bought one. Now of only the temperatures outside would return back to more seasonal so I can do some outdoor video.
I did buy the Panasonic HC-X1500, which is the same body, and then bought the optional Light/Handle. I have gone full circle from my mid 1980's Panasonic VHS camcorder, to a compact Hitachi S-VHS camcorder, to a JVC Mini DV, to a Sony HD Digital, to a hybrid mirrorless Panasonic FZ-200 (HD), then a 1" Panasonic FZ-2500 (4K) , and now back to a camcorder...there is a place for camcorders. And they are SO much better now.
In many ways the x1500 is the much better buy... and wow, that's quite a camera journey! There's definitely still a place for camcorders, much better option for many jobs even if not as 'cool' as an overweight frank'n'rig !!!
@@ekoconnect2382 I really like and still use the FZ2500. I am not a professional. It makes a great second 4K camera. In my opinion, 1. It is better at video than stills. 2. Is easier to use the buttons/controls than the X1500. 3. The video quality may be better in some cases (lower light) than the X1500. 4. I think to autofocus is better (faster) on the X1500. I like them both now!
You can get a light at the dollar store, for a dollar. Like you say, the small sensor suffers from a six stop quality penalty, but that is a fast lens, so let's call it 5 stops. So, here we have an excellent B-roll camera with pro sound capability. I have four of the Panasonic HS-700 camcorders for that. People will not pay you to shoot surfers and skateboarders, so the camera should also be tested for event video, where except for stage theater, people hate lights. This camcorder costs as much as a Nikon Z6 with the 24-70mm f/4. If it could perform at all at lower light levels, the camcorder convenience factor could come into play.
I liked the wig and the cam. I'm gonna get me one. A wig, not a cam, I already have one -an XT3 which serves me well. A bit pricey this one to my taste but it seems very handy. I also like very much your videos Señor, the camera loves you.
Ordered...& it’s on it’s way, they’ve just arrived in the UK 🇬🇧 I’ve always liked camcorders for the simplicity and if I’m honest the decent results and have a Panny VXF1 for when I’m out and about but have wanted the improvements that have been included in the HC-X2000. Thanks for the review 👍 Plus...there’s a light 💡😂
extrashot ...I’ve had my eyes on it since January and got a stock notification yesterday, so Iwent for it...life’s short, it will do what I want it to do and then some more 👍
Great video. Please tell me what the difference is between Normal / Stable / Pan Tilt IBIS . Nothing in the manual addressing these options for image stabilization. Which option offers the best results. Thanks
Hi Ed, The way I read the stabilisation settings is: Normal = standard IBIS that tries to iron out those shakes you get from normal hand held work. Stable = almost like it's pretending to be a tripod, by being in the highest setting (similar to IS Boost in the Lumix stills cameras... where it tries to correct any movement at all). This is best for static shots. And finally Pan/Tilt IBIS = the stabilisation will attempt to smooth out those micro jitters and shake, but not fight or correct the intentional pan/tilt movement you want, when say taking moving shots from a tripod on a windy day! Without this mode, it's difficult to use IBIS on a tripod because it will try to fight something like panning around with a car etc. Hope I've got that the right way around! Take care.
Is there a tutorial out there on how to adjust the lighting options.. were trying to brighten it up for our church service in Sunday.. can’t figure out how to lighten it. Help!
Well, once you've checked there's no ND filter in, opened the aperture on the lens as wide as it'll go, reduced the shutter speed to the slowest you can get away with (without smearing motion) and pushed the gain to no more than about 9db... even then you might need to use some noise reduction in post... that'll be as bright as it'll go, especially on a wide lens. After that you start having to look at lighting. As an experiment, what happens when you put the camera into full auto? It might push the gain too much, but the camera is often good at making the right choices in full auto?
For a livestream or a community video, I think they can safely push the gain substantially higher, i.e. 20db or more, before the audience really notices. The assumption is this is not a "Hollywood" production. Content is king, so to speak, and will most often override technology. Many people stream mobile phone or tablet video, and the audience is just fine with that video.
Thank you.... as a camcorder, it's a very good one. There's always a compromise somewhere though. I can see why Panasonic chose a smaller sensor... for physical size, huge lens range and great power usage, but then you'll pay a price in low light capability. I think the compromises work well with this camera?
Good video. This reminds me of when the canon xc10/15 were released. In manual its a pain to work with on the go. In Tv mode, set your shutter and away you go....and it can match a c300 mkii as a C cam.
@@extrashot I agree. Iv started to let the cameras do their magic. Have a look at what I shot with it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-18eAsEG91bw.html
It would... but don't think it'll be easy to match them in low light or with a shallow depth of field. In many ways it depends on what you're using them for? Thanks for the kind comment. It's appreciated.
Pretty niche in 2020. Maybe corporates or long form educational videos that could be well lit, or something like transport footage that required longer focal lengths? Camcorders like this are stuck between smartphones, an S1H and bayonet mount semi pro movie cameras.
In many ways you're right... but I wouldn't call camcorders like this 'stuck'... they are filling in a gap in the market that the other things don't do so well ?
Well done, the camera is excellent, but in RU-vid the main thing is not a video camera but a plot. In it, 90% look at a smartphone, and there quality is not important 👍🎥🍮
Yes, it's my main workhorse at the moment. Like any camera it has it annoying quirks, check out some of my reviews for it on my channel, just about to release a 1 year update shortly. :-). I think I'd like the CX10 or HX2000 just to keep in my bag and for travelling :-)
@@apntv I'm seriously considering buying the CX350, and I've watched your reviews, (which are great), However I have two main questions about it: 1) Is it able to shoot with a shallow depth of field? I don't need it to be super shallow but I don't like having the background in focus if I can help it. 2) Live streaming through the Ethernet cable, how hard is it to set up? I have no experience with live streaming and can't find enough information about it. Thanks!!
gidonzd OK, the 1” chip will get you some shallow depth of field at f2.8, not as much as micro four thirds, APS-C or full frame but you can get some. You will certainly get more than the CX10. You just have to work harder to get it, maybe light it better, move further back and zoom in more but you can get it. If it is enough will depend on your own taste. I’m not sure I have any great examples I can point you to. For the streaming setup, I have a whole video on that in my Camera and Tech playlist on how to configure and set it up on both Ethernet and Wi-Fi. I hope it’s useful. I’m also just about to release a 1 year on update video soon, just finishing the edit :-)
How do you get your computer to find the files on the memory card? What setting should recording files be? I have no problem with the sony camcorder. What's with 50hz compared to 59hz? when and why would you use that? INstruction book tells you nothing
50Hz is the normal setting for anywhere with 50Hz mains electricity because it helps stop the lights flickering... same in 60Hz areas. Finding the files largely depends on what editing software you're using. On FCPX it does it automatically but if looking manually I usually start with the DCIM folder?
Engineers at sensor manufacturers have been trying to get away from the old naming convention since the 1990’s, and they have introduced many sensors that are named by their metric size. Unfortunately, their customers, the camera manufacturers keep ordering the old sizes. The base reason is that during the 1990’s there was a long transition period from tubes to digital sensors. Because television cameras and associated equipment were so horrendously expensive, studios preferred to upgrade only the elements they had to rather than buying all new gear. This meant that sensors need to fit and work with equipment originally designed for 1 inch tubes, requiring sensors to follow the old sizes developed in the 1950’s. In addition the old sizes are not exact, 1/2.33 for example can be one of several mm sizes as in the tube days the light sensitive area was dependent on the manufacturing technique which varied from factory to factory and thus 1/2.33 sort of becomes a placeholder for sensors ranging from 6.08mm to 6.17mm height and 4.56 to 4.62mm width. Camera manufacturers like this flexibility when designing a camera so even though there are more sensor sizes available in newer metric standards, they keep ordering older sizes that fit their factory tooling. The metric sizes tend to get used in industrial and scientific applications where there is less tradition of older standards, and video cameras use the old sizing. There may also be an element of thinking that end users might get confused by the introduction of new sensor sizes. Users tend to like the predictability of the familiar. Personally I would rather move everything metric, but there is a certain country where there is a lot of resistance to such ideas.
I suspect there's quite a few manufacturers that are quite happy to see this historical confusion continue! Maybe we need a campaign to get a straight forward system going? There's obviously a slight issue with different aspect ratios, so what about a system that's related to the active area of the sensor (mm2) ? Alternatively, it might be more useful to just link everything to the crop factor, so we could work out the field of view or effective speed with any lens? So a Full Frame camera would be factor 1, a Sony APC factor 1.53, a GH5 would be factor 2 or an Arri Alexa 65 would be 0.72.... obviously, this camcorder would be factor 6.02. The situation where people are selling a one inch sensor that isn't one inch is madness !!!
extrashot Except that it is correctly a 1 inch sensor. The one inch refers to the size of the tube and it is the maximum size sensor that will fit in the 1 inch tube, which before digital sensors was the determinative factor, so it is not just a number plucked out of the air. I agree with you that now that there are no more tubes we should move on but it is not as simple as that. Although it is easy to repeat stories of manufacturers conspiring to confuse consumers it is more true that manufacturers are reluctant to make changes that might cost money on the factory floor. Factory tooling is expected to last many years. An example is the new semi-automated factory that Canon has built in Miyazaki recently. It was the first new production facility built by Canon since 2010 and involved years of planning. It will be expected to operate for at least a couple of decades and probably longer. As another example, Australia went metric in 1966. But manufacturers made things like drill bits using existing imperial tooling. It took 20 years before metric drill bit sales overtook imperial sizes in sales numbers because it took that long for factories to wear out existing equipment, and replace them with metric equivalents. In fact it is interesting to compare metrication in Australia, the US, and UK to show what a difference leadership makes in these kinds of things. All three countries committed to metrication around the same time in the 1960’s. Australia passed laws requiring the use of metric within measurable time periods. The US merely said that it wanted to go metric but passed no laws requiring time based change. And the UK was half way between the two with some legal requirements and laws, but there were many loopholes. Now 60 years later, Australia is fully metric, the UK metric in many things but they still drive in miles per hour. And the US famously failed at metrication, although American industries wanting to export products have slowly become more metric in some areas. In the absence of leadership, whether that be industry bodies, or governmental leadership it is hard to make these kinds of changes. Camera sensors are no different.
@@artistjoh Not for a minute am I suggesting anyone needs to change the size of sensors or tooling or anything like that... just that we need to describe them correctly for what they are. We know the history of the 1 inch vacuum tube (... and even that only referred to the outside diameter of the glass... not the inside light sensitive area), but to continue to refer to a 8.8 x 13.2 mm sensor as 1 inch is simply misselling. Don't get me started on 2/3" sensors or M4/3 or 1/2.5" 😂
extrashot Agreed. I think the old vacuum tube names have long passed their use-by date. Unfortunately we live in a world where people seem happiest when they call stills film 24x36 mm 35mm and at the same time call half frame 18x24 shot as movie footage also 35mm :)
Awesome review. Well done. This seems like a real handy run and gun camera that will suit many of us. The size reminds me of my first semi pro camera, the Sony TRV900(circa1998). I learnt filming weddings and sport on that little beauty. Smaller cameras allow you to sometimes get content much easier than even a camera the size of the cx-350. For instance I was doing some handheld on the run filming in a car recently on a Canon XF705 and it was just too cumbersome. Coming from the Canon xf range I do hope the improved Auto Focus really is an improvement over the CX-350 which from reading many reviews is a major letdown on that model. It does though look like Panasonic have put their heads to this model, the lcd screen looks high res and a good size. I hope its low light handeling is OK but appreciate it can't possibly perform like a one inch sensor. Led light on the camera is a winner move as well. Can't wait to get my hands on one. I'm going with the cx10. Well done Panasonic and to people on here saying you get better images out of your smart phone complaining about the fact it doesn't have a larger sensor well obviously you don't do professional video and understand the powerful features this little gem has to offer.
Hi Duff TV... you're so right about the flexibility of a camera this size. Once I got over the problem with my sausage fingers, I realised there's lots of ways to use this camera you wouldn't even consider with something larger. In many ways, I enjoyed the fact that I could concentrate on the content rather than the camera! Thanks for your comments. 👍
hi there...I'm still hopeful this pandemic will end before Summer is over and I can go back to making wedding videos...I own a Canon XF300 and a XF100 which I use for the ceremony part of weddings (easier for focus/xlr connections etc) and also for live events. I have a Canon 90D for the artistic parts of live events. Now I'm considering getting a new camcorder with 4k capabilities even if most (for now) of my videos are delivered in 1080p...this AG-CX10 looks good. Is it much better than my current XF300/Xf100 in 1080p? how about low light? I hope to see some footage at weddings etc but I know for now we have to wait a few months...
Hi Erick, I still use my faithful Canon 305s. I upgraded to the 705 recently and had it for 3 months but sent it back as the Advanced Zoom feature was a complete let down (I film sport and wanted a better zoom). What you will find is that cameras of more recent times have a sharper picture and their low light is better. I would imagine a pair of Panasonic 1500s would work great for your wedding filming. I imagine you may go for locked off shots on auto focus? The Canon 300/305s are wonderful but like everything finally have their day.
@@DuffTV hi there..thanks so much for the reply...at one point I thought I would buy 2 Canon XF405 but after looking at it I didn't like the physical controls (or lack of!)- and the truth is I need good 1080p (better than what I get with my XF300/XF100) more than I need 4k (for now at least). I was curious about the XF705 ( I like Canon! what can I say!) but I can't afford that and it's too big...the XF100 has the right form for a camcorder for me. I do the artistic portions of live events with a Canon 90D and/or a Sony a6400...so the new Panasonic cameras sound good. The 1/2" sensor is not encouraging but I will wait for more samples sometime this Summer I hope...what's the main difference between the AG-Cx10 and the HC-X2000s? They sound affordable...I need 18x zoom or so for sure. I know the footage looks like video (no shallow focus) but that's ok. Thanks
It actually looks like it might fit a on a gimbal as well. (maybe the ronin s?) Neat camera. I had it's bigger brother the UX-180 and got rid of it, which I kind of regret.
In common with a few Panasonic models, the AG-CX10 has a mode where you can turn off the IR cut filter, in effect turning it into an infrared camera. How 'night mode' this is, might depend on whether you have any IR bulbs! 👍
Good luck to find power zoom from 25 to 600 on GH :) In general it is nice addition to something else. Recording 4h continuous suppose to be great, one big flaw is no USB power delivery, and no battery charger. If add USB power, that powerbank is much cheaper, it could be awesome.... SDI and M2 card etc is no need to most regular people, so X2000 or X1500 would be better for amateur users.
True... USB power would be nice, but you obviously get the AC power unit which charges the battery while in use. I was also amazed at the battery life... I got over 4 hours from the first charge! You're right about the amateur users... I also think this camera is positioned more for Pro use..
@@extrashot Do you still have the camera? *Can you try infrared mode?* Is it remove only IR filter or IR/UV (like full spectrum camera)? As well is it do "green" nighvision colorization or do not change colors? Regarding battery and no USB in some situations its not work with AC, for example if I wanna go to record street event like 4+ hours show (or might be wanna make video on the way) it would be super useful, as well as backup for battery (that cost about $200!). And they have it in S1 series, and its one of the very good advantages of S1 - you can run it from USB, you can run and charge at the same time (without any proproetary external power bricks and other non-sense in 2020)
@@rendermanpro Ahh yes, I see what you mean... working from a USB power bank would be useful in those situations... I don't have the camera now, but I did look quickly at the IR mode and it appears to be full spectrum... as in it looks like a normal image with all the contrast wound out! (grey and white)
@@extrashot Another question came up, it can do streaming, but is it streaming + recording or just streaming? (while streaming bit rate is low, would be great to have 4k recording at the same time)
@@rendermanpro I've just gone through all the published specs, and there's no indication which would suggest you can't record internally while streaming. I've never heard of a camcorder which stops recording while streaming over Wi0Fi or Ethernet... is that an issue you've seen before? It might be worth testing before making a purchase. Unfortunately, I've now returned the camera to Panasonic so I can't stream something to you right now!
Great, honest review! I’m quite interested in this camcorder as a big upgrade from my Sony FDR AX33. Would you know where I could download some UHD 4:2:0 10bit 60p test footage from this camera? Just so I can test what it’s like in my edit setup?
I'm afraid I had to return the camera some time ago... otherwise I'd have shot some 60P for you! I believe the CX-10 records a maximum of 200Mbps in any mode... (H.264 or HEVC) so that'll be the key figure for your edit suite setup. The HEVC needs a slightly higher overhead as it's roughly 50% higher compression (more efficient) which then needs to be read out in the same time... if that makes any sense... (I know what I meant to say !!! )
Excellent thoughts. I'll probably be picking up the new baby brother when it launches along side, the HC-X1500. Btw, what's the video tripod you're using at the beach? Thanks!
The specs on the baby brother are basically identical. The tripod is an old metal Vinten set of legs with a cheap Manfrotto head (502)... it was the only thing I had that I didn't worry about getting sandy! (sounds a bit crunchy now though)
I was born in 2000, I remember my Grandma and me taking pictures and going to the shop to let the film develop. My dad used to have a video camera when I was younger that recorded on videotape cassettes. Now a couple of years ago I would have said that all things digitalized were allways better than the old junk technology of the past... But my interest in technology and how things work has increased the last couple of years and after doing my own research in technology I understand that actualy, the technology I used to think was old useless junk, is actually really just bloody amazing and way better than digital technology when talking about quality... But as allways, comfort wins over quality... On a side note: I hate the new smart-phones with 3 or 4 cameras... If you need or want to take high-quality photo's, go buy an actual camera, it will do better and you could spend less on a phone and get a camera as well. I bought a camera for my 19th birthday, even though I don't take pictures every day, I felt like it was something you need... I grew up with my dad(don't worry he is still alive and well) taking pictures and filming all kinds of things and he grew up with his dad(my grandad, sadly passed away last year) taking pictures and film. So yeah I needed to buy a camera for myself, it wasn't an expensive one, just 250 quid(that's with bag and 64gig storage), but it takes good pictures when I try my best haha. I need to get used to how to focus a camera, I know it has an auto-focus, but hey that takes all the fun out of it :D I love your video's, they are always high quality, I don't understand how you aren't a bigger channel with the high amount of quality you put into this! It's 2 am here(I'm from The Netherlands) so I am heading to bed after watching this. Have a nice day Extrashot!
Trouble is... there's now a whole generation that have only taken photos with their phones... they know no other way! To be fair, some of the camera tech in phones is getting amazing. Thanks for the lovely comment. You have a great day too!
@@extrashot I'd love to see actual film return, at least for big movie productions. Cause just look at that Wham Christmass 4k remaster and it looks like it was filmed yesterday. And who knows, if we improve our scanning techniques we might even be able to get an 8k image from film taken decades ago. Compare that to modern movies, which are moving away from film at a rapid speed and are using digital camera's won't be able to be remastered above the resolution they decided to shoot in. Yes you could upscale with AI, but you can't add detail that isn't there, it's the law of the universe, simple physics, you could guess, but weird things happen when you upscale. Which is sad, as film technically doesn't have an upper limit to the resolution we could scan, depending on the quality and fineness of the grains it can get amazing resolutions. If we would put time and money in developing even better film, with smaller grains scanning in 8k or higher would be possible. And you preserve the actual image, the actual physical light that hit the film, instead of an approximation made by digital camera's, a digital shot stays what it is, it's not a copy of the actual snapshot in time, but a computer-generated image based on the light that hit the sensor. But maybe I'm too much of a purist, but I think quality should outweigh the ease of use(to a degree) And I prefer the use of hardware over software in a lot of things, it gets you closer to reality. And I have to agree, modern phones can do a good job for every day: "Take a quick picture and send it to a friend". Even my 5-year-old Huawei phone(At the time 700$) does a good enough job for me. But it does again do a lot of computer / AI guessing and estimating to get those pictures, you don't get decent lenses, cause well your phone has to be thin. And once you start zooming around the quality gets worse very quickly, as you don't focus the camera to "look" further away, you take the same picture, but you "Software zoom" and the pixels become bigger, which I hate :). I think schools(primary and Secondary, Elementary and Highschool) should spend more time looking at the technology of the past, present and the future. Explain how things work, which will not only inspire people to get interested in technology, but it will show people how things work(ed) in the past and present. Maybe people will have more respect for technology for days long gone by!
@@teaser6089 Thanks for the great comment... that really got me thinking. I have a bit of a love / hate relationship with film... when it's good it's really good, but when it's not handled so well it can look rubbish very easily. I love the character and texture that can be achieved, particularly with larger formats, but hate the film 'weave' and some of the other artefacts you often notice. Obviously, the way to reduce the downsides is to digitise everything before the edit... but then you've also lost the possible advantages of scanning at a higher resolution in the future. What I definitely love about digital, is the way it's democratised the whole business and made it more about the content rather than the technology. When you look at the quality that's now available to almost anyone, it's nothing short of revolutionary, if only from a cost point of view! Totally agree about teaching the history of tech... an appreciation of knowing how we got here is really important when looking for new ways of doing things.
It’s a camcorder with a 1/2.5 “ sensor and one of the most obvious problems will be low light shooting. We saw nothing on that in this review, unfortunately, apart from pointing out it’s got a light on the front. I’d suggest it’s actually not ideal for news because news happens at night as well. It’s also not a constant aperture lens, so on the long end it’s stopped down to F4 - which means less light and more noise for the same exposure. My take - this is a sensor nearly one third the size of the Sony Z90, so they can make a longer lens, but it will not have the light gathering capability. It would have to be significantly cheaper than the Z90 to make sense to me, anyway. YMMV.
@StringerNews1 Spot on !!! (and yes, I'm old enough to remember those old battery belts connected to a trusty 'Sun Gun' that slowly went orange after 15 minuets... happy days trying to run with your trousers dropping around your ankles !!! 😂). We would have given anything for a camera that could shoot at night like this...
@StringerNews1 ahh... the image intensifiers? I used those a few times around Gulf War 1... did strange things to the eye you had buried in the viewfinder. When you looked away you had one pupil open and one closed. Made it difficult to walk at night! Another coincidence.... we were all talking about that Sony 'night-shot' when filming this review. Steve thought we were winding him up about the "see through clothes" thing !!! 😂
StringerNews1 That simply isn’t true. Of course aperture size has a bearing on light gathering capability, but given the same aperture size and the same technology sensor, a bigger physical sensor with the same number of pixels has larger photosites that can gather more light and hence exhibit a much better signal to noise ratio. I’ve shot plenty of small sensor camcorders over the years in theatres and they get super noisy if the lights too low. You might think thats “acceptable” I don’t. And you might have shot with 3 chip 2/3 CCD cameras that did a great job in low light. But they had $15000 F1.2 zooms on them and had 3cchips which means they tackled S/N in a totally different way than a modern CMOS Bayer sensor. I guarantee that you put 18dB of gain into the CX10 and its going to look like your shooting in a snowstorm, or aggresive noise reduction is going to make your image look like mush. And I’ve seen plenty of stringer stories of car accidents etc where the images are full of noise because the only light is a top light on the camera. It only goes to air because it’s “newsworthy” . Personally I think the Z90 makes a lot more sense if your in the market for a camcorder. But hey I’m just an “amateur”.
Extrashot, thanks for the good laughs. I started checking out this camera as a replacement for a Canon XF-305, which only shoots up to 1080. I did a shoot recently with two GH5's and the Canon XF-305. Matching the look of the GH5 with the Canon footage took a ridiculous amount of time in post to get to an acceptable match. Question: In your testing, did you find that it was fairly easy to get the AG-CX10 to match the GH5 footage in post?
Thanks Fred... and yes, the GH5 and the CX10 appeared to match for colour really well, particularly the 709 and Cine D/V profiles. I had to be a little cautious in testing because this was a pre-production camera, and I know the colours were still being sorted as the firmware went through several versions before launch.
Why is it that even now with this for example, camcorders, which are fairly large as seen here, don’t have large sensors? Regardless, very pleasant and fun and informative review! 👍👍
Thanks for the comment 👍. Large sensors are great, and bring a lot of advantages, but they also introduce many problems! From a physics point of view, you need larger lenses, which get much more difficult to make with a useful zoom range. Also larger, more expensive filters. Then there's the additional heat generated which needs to be dissipated with fans etc. Reliable auto-focus is harder to achieve with larger sensors, not just because of the shallow depth, but also because of the number of focus points an a larger surface. And of course... cost.
@@jj.4167 They both have a different 'look', but it's quite subtle and very dependant on the lighting. All the Leica lenses I've tried have been super sharp and quite saturated, while the few times I've used Zeiss they've looked almost too 'clinical' to me. The trouble is, this is a very personal judgement and can be greatly effected by the camera setup, lighting and even which model of lens you're looking at. All you can do is have a personal opinion.... everyone I speak to hates my favourite lens at the moment !!!
Great review thank you. I'm not sure why this camera exist, at the start i said "oh a GH5 with all the benefits of a handycam with dual SD it's almost perfect for a wedding videographer !" but the sensor is way too small...
If you're looking at all the pros and cons... that is the biggest issue. But then, if it had say a M4/3rd would the auto-focus work as well or the zoom have such range?
@@my-max-media7621 Good point... unfortunately, it's not constant. f/1.8 to F/4.... the good news is that it feels like most of the ramping happens in about the final 25% of zoom range.
Great review...thanks! But why on earth does Panasonic not include a battery charger with this camera? The Panasonic AG-BRD50P Dual Battery Charger adds another 219.00USD to the price.
Hi Bill, I presume it's just a cost thing. It's strange, because with most GH5 type cameras you get a charger but no mains unit... with this it's the other way around. I suppose a mains unit is more useful for indoor work with a video camera? The perfect solution would be one unit to do both jobs (I think the S1H charger provides USB power for the camera?). You can of course charge the batteries in camera, and in defence of the setup, the batteries do last for literally ages. You do make a good point though... hopefully Panasonic are listening.
@@billrabkin8209 I believe the battery inside the camera was recharging while I was recording with mains... but you've now got me worried that I may have mis-remembered that !!! Unfortunately, the camera has now gone back to Panasonic, so I've no way to check today. As soon as I can, I'll ask someone to confirm.
