Varicam versus HPX500?

[Jmtasu]

I was wondering what people think about a Varicam versus HPX comparison?

I am planning on shooting a feature this summer - I'm not DPing - and planned on using the Varicam, but now I am wondering if the HPX is the better choice, we love the p2 workflow, and I'm wondering if the amount time and money we'd save in post and on set using this workflow makes up for the quality difference... Truth be told the varicams picture is almost too sharp at times.

The movie has a gritty look, think Fight Club or Oldboy.

[Jason Ramsey]

Well, the HPX is cheaper, it's tapeless, shoots 720 and 1080, etc, etc, etc, etc.

I'm thinking the Varicam has pretty much become obsolete in terms of new purchasers with Panny's latest batch of shoulder mount cameras. But, there is probably something I am missing.

Jason

[Steve-O]

I believe the Varicam has more resolution. It is a true HD 720p camera. Where as the HPX is basically a 620p camera. Correct me if im wrong.

[Barry_Green]

You're wrong. :)

The VariCam does have more pixels on its sensor, it's 1280x720 vs. 960x540, but so what? They both make equally sharp pictures.

The VariCam has extensive image control that the 500 doesn't offer, it has the FILM REC mode, it has more dynamic range, it's got a lot of digital cinema features that the HPX500 doesn't have.

Then again, the HPX500 has lots of things the VariCam doesn't have, such as 1080 mode and standard-def.

And the VariCam has a tape deck, the 500 doesn't. But the 500 has P2 slots, and the VariCam doesn't.

The HPX500 is the bottom entry in Panasonic's 2/3" digital cinema lineup. The VariCam is at the top.

[TimurCivan]

Whats the "Film Rec" mode?

[Barry_Green]

It's a special "gamma", essentially, that delivers far and away the most linear response curve and flattest highlight slope, so it holds on to highlights the longest. It's a very flat-contrast look designed to hold the details longer and to be printed to film the best. Specially formulated to make for the best film transfer, it doesn't even look right on a monitor; you have to use a monitor that has a specific film-rec-compensation mode in order to properly view it.

[Antoine_Fabi]

Barry,

I wonder how much highlight info the Varicam can record compared to the HPX...

...by eye...not that much more...

[TimurCivan]

It's a special "gamma", essentially, that delivers far and away the most linear response curve and flattest highlight slope, so it holds on to highlights the longest. It's a very flat-contrast look designed to hold the details longer and to be printed to film the best. Specially formulated to make for the best film transfer, it doesn't even look right on a monitor; you have to use a monitor that has a specific film-rec-compensation mode in order to properly view it.


Wow Cool!

Its like CineGammaD on steroids.

[Barry_Green]

By my guess, the 500's gonna come pretty close, but it's not the same shape curve.

[Noel Evans]

By my guess, the 500's gonna come pretty close, but it's not the same shape curve.

Im sure if needed Barry you will come up with some emulation settings on the HPX ? :beer: :beer:

[Nik Manning]

HPX easy. Shot in 1080p mode and you should get around the same sharpness as Varicam. Panasonic has made some really great advances since the Varicam was released. Did you read the article HPX Jmtasu? I don't know where you are shooting but a firestore might work for you and really speed up your workflow. Plus you could take the money from the HPX purchase and move it toward a better lens.

[mcgeedigital]

The HPX looks like a screaming deal in the HD shoulder-size camera market.

[Jmtasu]

yeah I read the article, shooting in Los Angeles.

1080? don't you lose some of the film look from shooting in 1080? I didn't think it could shoot true 24p in 1080.

[mcgeedigital]

yeah I read the article, shooting in Los Angeles.

1080? don't you lose some of the film look from shooting in 1080? I didn't think it could shoot true 24p in 1080.

You can shoot 24p in 1080.

[Barry_Green]

Im sure if needed Barry you will come up with some emulation settings on the HPX ? :beer: :beer:
No, because the image controls don't exist. Film Rec is a totally different shape... the closest you can come is cine-D, and it's still not like Film Rec mode... :)

[Antoine_Fabi]

I am personnally not convinced the Varicam would hold a true advantage, even for transfer to film or to vdeo output. There are now video to film transfer programs that copy almost exactly to film what you actually see on a calibrated monitor. I used it for a 30 sec. commercial, and it came out exactly like it looked on my monitor.

A 8 bit codec has limitations when we try to push too far the gamma/color manipulation anyway. We should see problems with gradients.

So i think(have to see the image) but based on your review the HPX500 should be great for transfer to film.

[Jmtasu]

Hmm, does this shoot the same 1080 as the HVX? Doesn't the HVX's mode of 1080 24p still shoot interlaced?

I'm way over my head now, but I always shoot 720 24p on my HVX because it looks more like film... Am I missing something? or does the HPX have a different mode of 1080?

Or am I just completely wrong?

[mikkowilson]

The 1080 mode SHOOTS true 24p. It's recorded in a 60i stream, but that's simply because there is not providion for 24p recording in DVCPRO-HD. But yes, it is true 24p that you edit, etc.. in true 24p as well.

- Mikko

[Jmtasu]

Well afte reading up on the advantages of 1080, I am leaning more and more the the hpx...

Especially seeing we will probably be uglying up the picture a bit in post anyway, I'm not sure if the added sharpness of the varicam will really add anything..

If anyone else has anything to add, I'd love to hear it.

[Cees Mutsaers]

what is the resolution of the HPX500 chips to stir up that discussion again LOL.