meddesigner
Active member
A new perspective on the results
All this talk about resolution charts and technical performance is interesting from a purely technical end of the spectrum. I have to admit I was a bit surprised at the results but what I find most interesting is that the majority of the folks involved with the test wanted to take the Varicam home.
This is interesting because in almost every case where I have seen comparisons of the VariCam to the F900 in blind tests I personally was able to keep choosing the Varicam. In fact a film out test to some sort of Kodak stock from Varicam sourced material looked very organic and fluid. Also, I believe a number of shows on Discovery HD and INHD are shot with the Varicam and then mastered to 1080i HDCAM as a delivery medium.
The sample material from Jarred and Kaku was very nice and had pleasing color and resolution when viewed on my Mac’s display. So I think the pure tech specs might not show the entire picture. Here at my home I use a pre-amp that has tubes and loudspeakers that are more or less ribbon mics in reverse. They do not “messure” all that great but the system sure does sound amazing. Same basic principal applies here.
I plan to attend NAB so I can personally pick up each camera, look at images from them, and try to make a sound decision. I am over the P2 thing for the most part and took the advise of some other posters and figured out a workflow that would not present problems.
So since we are all here because we want to know all we can about the HVX maybe it is in our best interest to get some hands on time with the camera and figure out what may have happened in the tests rather than running to buy the Canon or Sony or whatever. Even if they turn out to be accurate I feel that if I can really buy what may be a baby Varicam for around $8,6000 with 5 4GB cards then I should probably be happy with that and not complain that it does not look exactly like the $65,000 camera with a $20,000 dollar lens and a $5,000 back lit calibration chart to set the thing up.
The camera will probably suit most of our needs just fine because I can almost guarantee you that at the end of the day that most folks will not be able to say “Where’s the extra 42 lines of resolution that camera A has that camera B does not”.
Comments?
All this talk about resolution charts and technical performance is interesting from a purely technical end of the spectrum. I have to admit I was a bit surprised at the results but what I find most interesting is that the majority of the folks involved with the test wanted to take the Varicam home.
This is interesting because in almost every case where I have seen comparisons of the VariCam to the F900 in blind tests I personally was able to keep choosing the Varicam. In fact a film out test to some sort of Kodak stock from Varicam sourced material looked very organic and fluid. Also, I believe a number of shows on Discovery HD and INHD are shot with the Varicam and then mastered to 1080i HDCAM as a delivery medium.
The sample material from Jarred and Kaku was very nice and had pleasing color and resolution when viewed on my Mac’s display. So I think the pure tech specs might not show the entire picture. Here at my home I use a pre-amp that has tubes and loudspeakers that are more or less ribbon mics in reverse. They do not “messure” all that great but the system sure does sound amazing. Same basic principal applies here.
I plan to attend NAB so I can personally pick up each camera, look at images from them, and try to make a sound decision. I am over the P2 thing for the most part and took the advise of some other posters and figured out a workflow that would not present problems.
So since we are all here because we want to know all we can about the HVX maybe it is in our best interest to get some hands on time with the camera and figure out what may have happened in the tests rather than running to buy the Canon or Sony or whatever. Even if they turn out to be accurate I feel that if I can really buy what may be a baby Varicam for around $8,6000 with 5 4GB cards then I should probably be happy with that and not complain that it does not look exactly like the $65,000 camera with a $20,000 dollar lens and a $5,000 back lit calibration chart to set the thing up.
The camera will probably suit most of our needs just fine because I can almost guarantee you that at the end of the day that most folks will not be able to say “Where’s the extra 42 lines of resolution that camera A has that camera B does not”.
Comments?