Absolutely. Its own forum would be the best. But putting it with the big Varicams make no sense. I think it has more in common with the AF100 because it is indeed filling the void left by the AF100, different spec or not.
EVA1: Panasonic AU-EVA1! Announcement and latest updates
- Thread starter soarprod
- Start date
- Status
Absolutely. Its own forum would be the best. But putting it with the big Varicams make no sense. I think it has more in common with the AF100 because it is indeed filling the void left by the AF100, different spec or not.
filmguy123
Veteran
FS7 has internal 10b 422 60p. Variam LT has a ton of other distinguishing features, from its build itself, to the remote screen, to 4K raw at 120fps, proxy recording, more robust codecs, PL mount, etc. The clientelle really are two different bases, and a lot more seperates them than just budget. I wouldn't buy a VaricamLT if it was half the price... I can't work with the thing! I demoed it and was exhausted after an hour. It's a beast, and does not serve the OMB or independent filmmakers well. And the EVA-1 is missing out way too much on the very high end to serve the LT customers well. 4K 60p 10b would be irrelevant to that.
G
Guest
Guest
Woah! Speak for your self!
The sad perception that only pro jobs require image quality. there are plenty of enthusiasts that would love a good image, and willing to throw down $3K-$10K for it. It is sad that 8bit and inappropriate codecs have plagued the enthusiast segment.
G
Guest
Guest
The reasons to pay more, are pro i/o, pro powering options, pro form factor, reliability, and so many other factors. If I have learned one thing, is that the pro market is not discerning in image quality. 8bit is for the pros. Sure, cinema is all about the image, but even there, few people are that discerning. Demanding image quality is for enthusiasts only. Doesn't matter if they are pro or not, they are the only ones that care. This segmenting of image quality is a horrible waste of time.
G
Guest
Guest
The right 8bits after 11stops of dynamic range? Even the 1DC struggled with 8bits in <12stops latitude. Even at 4GB a minute! Eventually a "spec" becomes an issue.
filmguy123
Veteran
Huh? I think you've misread my post. In response to this:
Clarification to quote added in []
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
I meant to quote the post above yours:
I disagree that a certain level of image quality and moderate data rates should cost more.
Last edited:
Guys, you need to bring it up with Panasonic. I couldn't care less. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with it. I was just stating the obvious. That the limitation in specs is normally to protect higher products. It has been that way for a while.
Don't like it? Voice it with Mitch or vote with your wallet. I got nothing to do with it.
But I don't think specs alone tell the whole story. I would wait till we see some footage before complaining about anything. People want good images. If the image is great it will sell. It has been this way with Canon.
Don't like it? Voice it with Mitch or vote with your wallet. I got nothing to do with it.
But I don't think specs alone tell the whole story. I would wait till we see some footage before complaining about anything. People want good images. If the image is great it will sell. It has been this way with Canon.
G
Guest
Guest
I am saying that we as buyers obsess about things that don't matter so we get bad cameras.
We obsess over image quality specs in the pro sector and end up with bad ergonomics and mediocre i/o implementations.
Meanwhile this one thing "image quality specs" which is something that is currently so bad, that a hacked dslr threatens the market. Why is image quality the dividing factor when basic image quality hasn't even been achieved? There is a lot of room for improvement. Most pros don't care about image quality because broadcast can't handle image quality. However, enthusiasts want image quality, but no practical camera exists for them. And to think, it would just be a line of code. Anyways, if you keep perpetuating the idea that image quality is the major difference between pro and enthusiast, then you will influence the market negatively.
Pro cameras need better ergonomics and functionality. Enthusiast cameras need better image quality and better compromises on data rates.
from the interview with luc bara on cinema 5d we've already learned that it won't be 800 and 5000 because of the higher resolution of the sensor compared to the varicam. it'll be "800 and something between 800 and 5000". so maybe 800 and 3200 or even a bit more (4000 ?).
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Go buy a FS7 then if 10bit 4k 60p is such an important thing for you. We don't need to turn this into a "well this camera does it so why not" type of discussion now do we? None of us here can ever dream to understand what goes on inside of a camera to make it work the way it does.
While the Varicam LT can record 4k 60p it also does so to the AVC-Intra LT codec. I can't seem to find any information on what this codec actually is compared to the regular AVC-Intra codec. I don't know if LT drops to 8bit or not but it is clearly some form of reduced AVC-Intra to make 4k 60p recording work. Maybe somebody can chime in with some details on what AVC-Intra LT actually is since the Panasonic website only mentions it in terms of NLE support.
The Varicam LT can't record 4K in higher than 60fps, internally or externally.
A reason as good as any for working out. :smile:
Sure, I can se instances where a smaller size and less weight will be very helpful, but if the image is you priority then you do what is necessary to make it work. In my opinion the LT is small/light enough to be used by a single person.
Last edited:
In a perfect world Pana would have just slapped an extra cfast slot on the thing and let people have their cake and eat it too. Internal raw and 800mpbs 4k60 10bit to cfast, with wide open cfast slot with no latch like on the ursa so people working on a budget can just spend 200 bucks on an ssd enclosure and a short breakout cable and have real cheap recodring media, making it pretty much the perfect indie camera. That would most likely require more processing power and extra components, inscreasing the price of the camera, so I guess compromises have to be made somewhere.
One of the things it does is that the AVC-I 4K-LT codec has a 0,5 pixel aspect ratio, while the AVC-I 4K422 has a 1,0 pixel aspect ratio.
G
Guest
Guest
That is essentially what I did. I rejected the latest offerings in favor of existing options.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
EVA1 is not a VariCam, but both the VariCams and the EVA1 are part of our Cinema line of cameras.
But so was the AF100 too right?
Mitch Gross
Veteran
But that is not the case here. The EVA1 will have everything we can fit into it. The limitations on what we could fit were determined by the physical size & weight as well as the power consumption. Put in a bigger processor and it would require more power, or mean that the size of the camera would grow. A part of the design concept was a camera that would work well on a drone or gimbal, or squeezed inside a car at eye height. Another factor is price, as adding too much into the camera would mean we would need to raise the price. Given the design parameters, which were arrived at by meeting with many clients around the world, we are squeezing as much as possible into the EVA1.
The VariCam LT is capable of much more than the EVA1. It is also more than twice the weight and a nice chunk larger (although not nearly as much larger as most think once you strip away top handles and other accessories). The VariCam LT has almost three times the processor power within it compared to the EVA1.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
Honestly we don't know yet. We're trying to squeeze out at much as possible.
- Status