How does the (old) Varicam Compare?

B

Bassman2003

Veteran
Hello,

I see pretty many Varicams on sale used now and I wanted to ask how these once top of the line cameras compare to the HPX-500 & HPX-300.

I own an HPX-500 and have searched and read a lot of posts about this but wanted to ask this question now that the HPX-300 is out.

If you were adding to the HPX-500 would you:

Get another HPX-500
Get a Varicam because they still look great
Get an HPX-300 because the detail is there

I shoot a lot in 720p60 enjoy larger chips, and use a Flash XDR so everything is full raster.

Please don't let this turn into a codec discussion. I know the HPX-300 has AVC-Intra....

Thanks
 
My experience is with the HDX900 and have done side by side testing next to HPX500's, EX-1's, HVX-200A's, HPX170's. Since the imagers in the HDX900 are the same as found in the Varicam 27H, there is some similarity in look. I would steer clear of the older Varicam's, like the 27F, due to noisier CCD's.

What I like about the HDX900 vs. HPX500 is a "smoother looking image". The 500 seems to look very contrasty, no matter the gamma. It doesn't resolve the fine detail in wide shots as well. I really miss the DRS circuit when using a 500(Varicam does not have DRS either). The 500 should actually be a bit better in low light and have a bit more latitude due to larger pixels. I don't like how the 500 clips highlights vs. the 900, I've seen it introduce a phony looking chroma element into blown out images that I've never seen in the 900. I like the colorimetry of the 900 better, and with matrix and color correction menus, can be made to look like whatever you want.

The Varicam and to a bit lesser extent, the HDX900, have so many more image control handles than a 500. If you know what you're doing, you can really precisely tailor the image to your requirements. Varicam has Film Rec, which many DP's like, even if not doing film out.

If I were considering a camera other than a 500, I would try to find an HPX2000 for $17K or under, many have the AVC Intra card in them, and would be priced similarly to a Varicam 27H, while having P2 recording, Firewire output, two HD SDI outputs, better viewfinder than 500, DRS, decent frame rate flexibility, no maintenance issues that a tape transport would have, especially in an older Varicam. An HPX300 does not interest me--don't like the noise level, deep depth of field or CMOS artifacts. Obviously it's apples and oranges price wise, but a used HPX2000 is a lot of camera for the money, IMO, especially considering the viewfinder is over $3K and if it has an AVC Intra board, that's $3K new.
 
Thanks Jeff.

I am enjoying the HPX-500 and see it as a great value.

I am looking at making the HPX-2000 work finacially, but I don't know.

The broadcast shows shot with the HDX-900 always look great to me.

So as a comparison, you would probably go for a second HPX-500 over a used (old) Varicam if it was down to these two?

Bear in mind that I will be using the Flash XDR so tape issues will not come into play.

The problem I see is that the more you spend, the image quality gains become less drastic.

How much better does the HPX-2000 look compared to the HPX-500? $12,000 better?

Or will that translate into $12,000 more I can charge in rates?

Just thinking out loud...Tough questions
 
Last edited:
Bassman2003,

All good questions, and most only you can answer because you know your clientele and your investment priorities.

You make it sound like a Varicam can be had for a similar price to an HPX500. This may be the case with a 27F, but not likely with a 27H. You also make it sound like a used $17K HPX2000 is $12K more than a used HPX500. I've never seen a 500 that low, $7K, yes. So, if an HPX500 rents for $500/day, and an HPX2000 for $650 a day, it would take 66 rentals to recoup the cost difference of a $10K more expensive camera, assuming interest free money and a clientele that would pay the difference.

Questions to ask are, do you ever use RC10G paint boxes? RC10's will work with 500's and 900's and 2000's, 3000's, 2700's, 3700's, but not original Varicams, although their paint boxes can be bought for less than an RC10G. But my point is that if you have a DIT on some of your shoots using a paint box, there is a whole lot more that can be done with an HPX2000 or Varicam than an HPX500 setup wise.

Do you need matching cameras for two-camera shoots, in which case a 2nd HPX500 makes sense. An HPX500 just doesn't have the flexibility I need from a setup standpoint. It has white shading, but only three user settings for an auto circuit, whereas an HPX2000 will offer more like 8 files, all with extensive manual controls. This is helpful for me because I have lens files for different ENG HD lenses, Pro35's, and Letus B4 relays. If you only use one lens or the camera default lens files are close enough(which CAC helps), then no big deal.

When I first saw an HPX500 next to my HDX900, I was impressed, however, the more I've been around them, the more I appreciate the look and features of an HDX900/HPX2000. The HPX3000's, 2700's and 3700's have even more features and flexibility. The problem with the 2000's and higher is that many higher end clients looking to rent cameras still aren't totally comfortable with tapeless workflows such as P2. In the San Francisco Bay Area rental market, there are 30+ HDX900's, several Varicams, a few HPX500's and one HPX2000 and one HPX3700, that I'm aware of. There's a reason why HDX900's seem to hold their resale value a bit better than a 2000.

I had a client that I recently did a shoot in London with. He told me that he would only shoot on tape, but he wanted full raster recording. That left HDCAM SR, and this was a doc style shoot. I talked him into using HPX3000's with AVC Intra on P2 cards. It's up to us to inform and educate our clients.
 
Thanks for your wealth of information.

I am a user only, not a rental house.

I purchased my HPX-500 with the $2,000 rebate, sold some of the accesories so it cost me $7,250 new without a lens.

Used 500's seem to be around that number right now. The HPX-2000s I have seen on Ebay are going for $17,000 to $22,000, so it does seem to be around a $12,000 difference give or take $1,000 or two.

I see these Varicams used in a lot of listings around and the prices are all over the place, some under $10,000.

No use in buying a beat up camera but I wonder if the image quality surpases the HPX-500 (in 720p) due to the higher pixel count chips or does the new processing of the HPX-500 make up the difference?

What I don't like about the HPX-500 is the lack of gamma control, color matrix and pushing anything leads to noise.

But ~$18,000 for the HPX-2000 is pretty substantial so I am left frozen!

Sounds like I need to wait, save my pennies and re-approach this as the market evolves.
 
Bassman2003 said:
No use in buying a beat up camera but I wonder if the image quality surpases the HPX-500 (in 720p) due to the higher pixel count chips or does the new processing of the HPX-500 make up the difference?

What I don't like about the HPX-500 is the lack of gamma control, color matrix and pushing anything leads to noise.
Click to expand...

I much prefer the image from a Varicam 27H or HPX2000/HDX900 to an HPX500. So, if you could buy a Varicam for around $10K, but this would probably not be a 27H, and use an outboard HDSDI input recorder, you would gain a lot in setup flexibility and a more refined, detailed image. Resale of the Varicam will be harder than for an HPX500, however. There are a whole lot of Varicams for sale currently that are not selling, but a 27H for $10K would be a lot of camera for the money--not convinced you'll find one at that price, however.

The fact that 2/3" cameras aren't "sexy" anymore in the world of RED and Canon 5D's, the HPX3700 being available on trade-in for $29,950(plus viewfinder, mic, mic. holder, bridge plate, P2 cards), better and better palmcorders and a terrible economy, puts big pressure on the sale of high end 2/3" cameras. Plus, I think Panasonic has too many models out and P2 cards still haven't got good traction in the higher-end rental environment.

RED ONE and Canon 5D's are the wrong cameras for my clients and most of my
HDX900 clients opt for double recording on a FireStore, keeping the tapes for archive and backup purposes only. I would rather own an HPX2000 or higher than a tape based 2/3" HD camera, but many clients, especially from out of town, prefer tape still.

I think you will be able to buy an HPX2000 for $15K or less very soon, once the HPX3700 trade-in program is known by more people.
 
Good Points.

Things are changing rapidly and the 1/2 price 3700's probably gives everybody pause when investing in an expensive camera.

Once the video camera version of the 5d (whatever that may be) gets produced who knows where everything will go.

As usual, waiting in regards to technology always seems like the best course of action.

Thanks for your input.
 
As a Varicam owner for the last five years... I can say my opinion... in two cases very recently... The first was a short that I needed to mix Varicam filmRec with a HPX500 Cinelike-D as a closer match... all for filmout... 500 can't reach Varicam's filmrec not even with goggles... and we talking about Varicam F not H... the tonal responce and the shadows were so rich in Varicam that 500 couldnt be fixed in grading... so we degrade Varicam to match 500...

The second occasion was one month ago that a very good DoP friend of mine that was going to shoot a doc in the militarized Turkish Cypriot occupied part of Cyprus, wanted to see what are the differences... since we have shoot together spec ads against S16 and sometimes S35 with my Varicam...

So we measure 500 for latitude and resolution... Varicam was better by more than 2 stops, that is four times less noise in the transimitive step chart... and on ISO chart with Canon Cinestyle zoom, 500 delivers 580 lines @ 1080 25pn and Varicam max out at 720...

And Jeff sorry but even old Varicam outperform HDX900... 900 is for TV and Varicam is a digital cinema camera equivalent or better than S16... and the CCD's are just the same size, NOT the same sensor...

I have added an AVC-Intra P2 110 with my Varicam and its perfect... I get 10 bit color... a 500 has only 8 bit outputs...

You can buy a Varicam F or H and add the AJA Ki-Pro and have the best 422 10bit system... with VFR 4 to 60 Fps... many prefer the 2700 Varicam over the 3700 just for that... the advantage of FilmRec which is equivalent to PanaLog of Genesis for film look is perfect... also add a SGblade w/ Roto3 with my relay and get a 400ASA camera in 0db... because Varicam is very light sensitive... its 640ASA @ 25fps @180degrees in FilmRec at 0db's... a day and night difference with all the others...

Additionally whenever you want you just put a tape and by turning on the special compression that is unique to Varicam's the Dark Compression mode of DVCPRO-HD specially designed for FilmRec... and you have the cleanest shadows ever and a run and gun camera...

Varicam F or H is a best buy against a 500 or a 300...

I really don't understand why they sell them... I was thinking to sell mine, because now I have Viper... but Viper doesn't do the the VFR as Varicam does so for ads Varicam is still rents every day... They even request it for a series "because they wanted the film look that is much better than F900R... even the noise in Varicam looks like grain"...!

So grab them as they are still available...
 
Last edited:
Evangelos Achillopoulos said:
And Jeff sorry but even old Varicam outperform HDX900... 900 is for TV and Varicam is a digital cinema camera equivalent or better than S16... and the CCD's are just the same size, NOT the same sensor...
Click to expand...

Evangelos,

I certainly trust your eyes and am a fan of Varicams. I do find the 27F a little too noisy for my taste. Regarding the CCD's in the HDX900, I have been told directly by Panasonic that the Varicam 27H, HDX900, HPX2000 and HPX2700 use identical sensors.

It's the tonality of Varicam and HDX900/HPX2000/2700 that I love that is lacking in the HPX500 to my eyes, besides resolution differences, same as you. No question that Varicam 27 series and 2700 are aimed as a film camera option, more than the HDX900 or HPX2000.

A Varicam 27 series for $10K or less is a compelling option to an HPX500, especially if recording via 10-bit HD SDI output.
 
My Varicam has outperform in noise analysis everything that got in my hands... I don't know if its just mine... it has done all the upgrades, and its one of the first ever build, I thing is the second in Europe...

read this pdf...

http://www.motionfx.gr/Files/Latitude_DR_Objective_Comparison_Feb09.doc.pdf

Thats the setup with a RED...

With_flash.jpg


And thats with lights off for the measurement...

RED_no_flash.jpg


thats a Varicam at 0.45 in FilmRec exaggerated to show the blacks...

Latitude-Varicam-045-CG.jpg


And thats Cinealta F900R

Latitude-Cinealta-HG3-cor.jpg


The exactly same tests have being done by Alfonso Perra DoP and in the case of RED, my test and his are identical except of the firmware version that fix the DR in the midium noise level...


Jeff, I have being told by a top Panasonic guy from US, that yes the use the same CCD's but the Varicam's gets the 2% of them that are top performing in the quality tests in the production lines... the tip of the pyramid... he told me that the first Varicam's took a very rare quality sensors that were the best performing out of thousands...

So it might be the same, but silicon doesn't have the same quality in all CCD's...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top