Blade Borge
Well-known member
How are the two cameras different?
Differences: HVX/Varicam?
- Thread starter Blade Borge
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
One's a $6,000 handheld camera, the other's a $44,000 top-of-the-line cinema camera.
Both do 720p in variable frame rates; the Varicam does frame ramping, every individual frame rate from 4 to 60, and records to tape. The HVX200 can't do ramping, "officially" supports only about a dozen frame rates (but unofficially supports about 3 dozen) and records to P2.
VariCam has a built-in DVCPRO-HD tape deck, 2/3" chips, interchangeable lenses, and HD-SDI. HVX200 has none of that. But HVX200 does 1080@24p/30p/60i; VariCam can't do that -- but the VariCam's 720 is probably sharper than the HVX's 1080.
VariCam has extraordinary control over its image, HVX is significantly less capable in that respect. It has lots of paintability, but nothing like what the VariCam can do.
When it comes to DVCPRO-HD camcorders, the VariCam sits at the top of the lineup, the HVX200 at the bottom of the lineup. Which is also reflected in their pricetags. But the image difference isn't all that much, especially in bright light. In exterior daylight conditions it can be difficult to tell the two apart; they can intercut very easily. Differences become more exaggerated in less-optimal lighting circumstances, where the VariCam's 2/3" chips will give it better sensitivity and noise performance.
Both do 720p in variable frame rates; the Varicam does frame ramping, every individual frame rate from 4 to 60, and records to tape. The HVX200 can't do ramping, "officially" supports only about a dozen frame rates (but unofficially supports about 3 dozen) and records to P2.
VariCam has a built-in DVCPRO-HD tape deck, 2/3" chips, interchangeable lenses, and HD-SDI. HVX200 has none of that. But HVX200 does 1080@24p/30p/60i; VariCam can't do that -- but the VariCam's 720 is probably sharper than the HVX's 1080.
VariCam has extraordinary control over its image, HVX is significantly less capable in that respect. It has lots of paintability, but nothing like what the VariCam can do.
When it comes to DVCPRO-HD camcorders, the VariCam sits at the top of the lineup, the HVX200 at the bottom of the lineup. Which is also reflected in their pricetags. But the image difference isn't all that much, especially in bright light. In exterior daylight conditions it can be difficult to tell the two apart; they can intercut very easily. Differences become more exaggerated in less-optimal lighting circumstances, where the VariCam's 2/3" chips will give it better sensitivity and noise performance.
gunleik
Well-known member
HPX-500 is hardly the nail in Varicams Coffin.
It's basically a (very nice) HVX-200 on steroids
I think of it much as HVX II with interchangeable optics and 2/3" sensor, but still share more charecterastica with the HVX than the Varicam.
(Same pixelshifting as the HVX to make the 1080 image, if I haven't misunderstood)
2000/3000 may well be the Varicam Killers, though
AVC-Intra full raster 1080/720
Same bit-shifting towards darker areas as the Varicam uses to suppress noise in lower lit areas.
And so on.
As much as I (sorta) consider to add a HPX-500 to my HVX (and Red when it arrives), I don't think the HPX would replace a Varicam in all circumstances by far.
It's I lovely piece of kit, though - for its price.
Gunleik
It's basically a (very nice) HVX-200 on steroids
I think of it much as HVX II with interchangeable optics and 2/3" sensor, but still share more charecterastica with the HVX than the Varicam.
(Same pixelshifting as the HVX to make the 1080 image, if I haven't misunderstood)
2000/3000 may well be the Varicam Killers, though
AVC-Intra full raster 1080/720
Same bit-shifting towards darker areas as the Varicam uses to suppress noise in lower lit areas.
And so on.
As much as I (sorta) consider to add a HPX-500 to my HVX (and Red when it arrives), I don't think the HPX would replace a Varicam in all circumstances by far.
It's I lovely piece of kit, though - for its price.
Gunleik
as far as i'm aware, the HPX and HVX both use SD chips offset from each other to give the pixel depth necessary to hit HD amounts of details, while the varicam uses actual HD chips. So, AFAIK, if you want the true detail and abilities of HD, you have to go Varicam. If you want an image that's pretty dang good, you can do it on the HVX or HPX, but the Varicam will still be the undisputed king of quality.
But then, if you have the money to go varicam, you will... and if you don't, you'll go another panasonic solution. That's the whole point, anyways.
But then, if you have the money to go varicam, you will... and if you don't, you'll go another panasonic solution. That's the whole point, anyways.
Barry_Green
Moderator
You get the "true detail and abilities" of HD with the HPX500 and HVX200 as well.
The VariCam is an enormously more powerful camera processing unit. Among the people who have the money, there's very little doubt about which unit they'd choose.
HPX3000 won't be a VariCam killer for one main reason: no variable frame rates (HPX3000 is 1080-only).
The VariCam is an enormously more powerful camera processing unit. Among the people who have the money, there's very little doubt about which unit they'd choose.
HPX3000 won't be a VariCam killer for one main reason: no variable frame rates (HPX3000 is 1080-only).
i see.. i just thought the 2/3 chip of the hpx would come very very close.. if not.. identical to a varicam image, especially if someone where to invest in a really good lens for it.. considering also the hvx can mix nicely with the varicam in certain situations. but im sure the difference would be seen in a cinema with the image blown up..
Last week I had a chance to compare head to head my HVX200 to the HPX500 and the HPX2000. I have Varicam exprience and there is just no comparison to the feel of the 500 to the Varicam. The 2000 however feels and shoots very much like the Varicam and I would put it up against it any day. The 500 was more like the HVX200, with a more prosumer feel to it. I did not care at all for the eyepiece and poor SD flip out monitor and the 500 has the same pixel shift as the HVX (although the 2/3 chip is a great improvement. The 500 menu is almost exactly the same as the HVX200. The 500 is definately superior to the HVX200 (the low light sensitivity comparison was almost laughable - the 500 actually performed great, followed closely by the 2000. The HVX was - well - BLACK as we all know that thorn.
I loved the 2000, and it will be a Varicam killer - well at least the old Varicam. As far as the HVX vs Varicam. I shot for a documentary (which aspires to theatrical release) with both the Varicam and the HVX. There really is no comparison. I LOVE my HVX but it is what it is. On a bright day in medium contrast the HVX actually cut pretty well with the Varicam. But vary the conditions, add a bit of contrast and some low light and forget about it. You get what you pay for.
I loved the 2000, and it will be a Varicam killer - well at least the old Varicam. As far as the HVX vs Varicam. I shot for a documentary (which aspires to theatrical release) with both the Varicam and the HVX. There really is no comparison. I LOVE my HVX but it is what it is. On a bright day in medium contrast the HVX actually cut pretty well with the Varicam. But vary the conditions, add a bit of contrast and some low light and forget about it. You get what you pay for.
Last edited: