Panasonic Varicam or HVX200?

[Jay Rodriguez]

If you had your choice, which camera would you shoot your next short film on?

[Brandon Rice]

Uh... the Varicam

[RicFic]

Uh... the Varicam

Uh....Yeah.

[Nik Manning]

Uhhhh actually HVX. I think the workflow would be simplier than working with the varicam. Just get a mini35 and some good glass. and shoot 1080p.
If the hdx900 was offered I would shoot with that. Word on the web is it is sharper than the Varicam.

[Tlalconetl]

You kidding me? It's like asking, "Which would you rather have? A Ford Mustang? Or a Ferrari Testarosa?" Ferrari (Varicam), bizzle!

[Jay Rodriguez]

Easy fellas, I'm just asking and I have my reasons for the question.

[HowDareMe]

after shooting with both, i would say...varicam hands down

[krestofre]

This question is intriguing, and I'd love to know the reason behind it. There's a lot more to take into consideration than just "Ohh, Varicam, shiny!" Who is paying for the shoot? What type of project is it? The Varicam is super-cool and all, but it can only record 720p, right? Do you need 1080? Do you have the gear to handle large DVCPro tapes? If not, do you have the budget to rent the gear or get those transfered to something you can edit? Do you need variable framerates beyond the presets in the HVX? Are you going to be in an environment where P2 would better serve your workflow? Etc., etc.

Without knowing any more about the project than just "what would you shoot on?" I'd have to say HVX. Without the rest of the information I'm less confident that I could turn out a finished piece with a Varicam.

[Jason Ramsey]

Both :) But, if it was HVX or HPX500, then 500 all the way. It's the HVX on steroids. The varicam (even with it's 2/3" wonder-ness) is starting to look a little long in the tooth, with all that is on the horizon.

I just love tapeless too much.

[MikeCurtis]

If you can afford the Varicam, use it.

[TimurCivan]

You kidding me? It's like asking, "Which would you rather have? A Ford Mustang? Or a Ferrari Testarosa?" Ferrari (Varicam), bizzle!


Well look at it like this, Give a ferrari testerosa to a guy used to driving a Ford taurus, ( not that jay drives a taurus) and see how well he does. A varicam is a BIG jump in work flow. theres a WHOLE new world of neccesary post produciton knowledge that has to be used. Basically, you cant just edit at home, when you have DVCPROHD tapes as your source material. ther will need to be time spent in a Posthouse, doing conversions to HDD, and special editing considerations. (this can cost up to 800$ an hour!!!)

The Kit itself will have ot be overhauled, a Bogen 503 tripod head, a glidecam and Neil Rowe Cinedolley wont cut it anymore. you would need the full assortment of gear to match the camera to get good results. Depending on budgetary requirements, the HVX200 may prove to be a better option. IF jay can afford ot hire a DP/AC/2ndAC thats familiar with the Varicam, and afford to have the footage worked thorugh a Post house to even be able to edit, i 'd say, go with the varicam. The camera is just a dark box with a piece of glass on it. Theres alot more to it than just shooting with a cool camera.

[Kholi]

Both :) But, if it was HVX or HPX500, then 500 all the way. It's the HVX on steroids. The varicam (even with it's 2/3" wonder-ness) is starting to look a little long in the tooth, with all that is on the horizon.

I just love tapeless too much.

There you go. HPX500 would be the cam I'd rent.

[Justin Kuhn]

As long as we're in a hypothetical fantasy world, why not the Viper? But if we're talking real world, then work with what you know. That's the HVX or the HPX (since it's similar to what you know).

[Nik Manning]

This question is intriguing, and I'd love to know the reason behind it. There's a lot more to take into consideration than just "Ohh, Varicam, shiny!" Who is paying for the shoot? What type of project is it? The Varicam is super-cool and all, but it can only record 720p, right? Do you need 1080? Do you have the gear to handle large DVCPro tapes? If not, do you have the budget to rent the gear or get those transfered to something you can edit? Do you need variable framerates beyond the presets in the HVX? Are you going to be in an environment where P2 would better serve your workflow? Etc., etc.

Without knowing any more about the project than just "what would you shoot on?" I'd have to say HVX. Without the rest of the information I'm less confident that I could turn out a finished piece with a Varicam.

Exactly! That is why I sad maybe still the HVX200 in 1080p mode. Probably with a 35mm adapter. The workflow would just be so much easier with a hvx. We have seen Super 16mm film vs HVX200 screen grabs here before and the differences could very minor and could be addressed in post. I just don't see the varicam being that much better than the HVX.

But if the 500 was included I would pick that in a heart beat. That camera is going to be sweet.

[ProLost]

...Basically, you cant just edit at home, when you have DVCPROHD tapes as your source material. ther will need to be time spent in a Posthouse, doing conversions to HDD, and special editing considerations. (this can cost up to 800$ an hour!!!)
It's not quite that dire—you can edit the varicam's DVCPROHD material natively in most NLEs. So yes, to capture you need a deck (which you can rent for a day), or to hold onto the camera long enough to use it as a deck—but either way the best workflow will be to use the native footage, which has been possible in FCP via FW for years now.

The quality advantages of the Varicam over the HVX are too numerous to list. It's a sweet camera, still a totally valid shooting choice today, even in a world of vipers and F950s. The ability to edit its footage natively on a three-year-old laptop is one big reason to consider it.

-Stu

[Cheesesailor77]

Stu, just out of my own curiosity, could you list a few of the advantages of the varicam over the HVX?

[ProLost]

No prob, here's a few off the top of my head: Better, higher-res CCDs, better internal electronics, more control over the image in-camera, and the ability to attach a much better lens. That last one is huge—the lens you're likely to use on a Varicam probably costs more than an entire HVX, and for good reason.

-Stu

[Kholi]

Nthe lens you're likely to use on a Varicam probably costs more than an entire HVX, and for good reason.

-Stu

Which means you'd still be adding to your rental costs.

Where-as, you could rent an M2 with PL mount or a Mini 35 for your HVX shoot and add Zeiss Superspeeds or Arri's and get great image quality.

Assuming since you're already considering any HD camera, you were already considering tons of lighting, which means you're already prepared for an adapter, or should be.

Your HVX shoot ends up being cheaper (theoretically), and will look quite stellar with the right talent behind the camera.

[Elvis]

I would consider a XDCAM with a a 3/4 to 1/2 converter for killer lens'