Panasonic Drops Price of Varicam LT to $9,995.00!

So anyway...

The colors on the VariCam LT and the EVA1 are far more pleasing than those on the competition. Getting them where you want either in camera or in grading is far easier. Don’t take my word for it, take the word of the many people who have tried them out and reported this back. They agree with me. The only cameras that compare are far more expensive.

Then there’s the matter of sensitivity. The VariCam is the low light king. It can shoot at high ISO with far greater performance than any other pro production camera. The difference is huge.

Just two factors of many factors to consider, but two of the most important. It’s a camera — what does the picture look like?
 
Mitch Gross said:
So anyway...

The colors on the VariCam LT and the EVA1 are far more pleasing than those on the competition. Getting them where you want either in camera or in grading is far easier. Don’t take my word for it, take the word of the many people who have tried them out and reported this back. They agree with me. The only cameras that compare are far more expensive.

Then there’s the matter of sensitivity. The VariCam is the low light king. It can shoot at high ISO with far greater performance than any other pro production camera. The difference is huge.

Just two factors of many factors to consider, but two of the most important. It’s a camera — what does the picture look like?
Click to expand...

Low light....that is something that can be tested and I'd be interested in seeing low light footage of the VariCam vs. say.....the Sony A7S.

But 'color science' (or as you put it 'colors being far more pleasing than those of the competition?). Sorry but that one is
far, far, far too individual of a thing to be advertised as a 'feature' in my humble opinion. If I was to go by the words of
most people I talk to who have tried all these cameras, I'd be buying Canon everything. But that particular thing I prefer
to judge for myself as cameras that I have been told have 'terrible color science' are just fine in my opinion and sometimes
even factually more color accurate than the camera which I have been told has 'more pleasing' color science.
 
Doesn't matter what's said; all opinions on the matter are invalid.

Nothing personal; just business. You cannot get paid by one company and provide thoughts on all cameras.

No one has to like me or my posts to understand this.
 
alaskacameradude said:
Low light....that is something that can be tested and I'd be interested in seeing low light footage of the VariCam vs. say.....the Sony A7S.
Click to expand...

Well, the man did say "far greater performance than any other pro production camera". The A7S is a great tool, but it is not a "pro production camera". It's a hybrid stills/video camera that can be used professionally, but is a different class of device than something like a Varicam LT. Limiting the scope to production cameras it's low-light competition is RED Gemini and Venice I'd say.

alaskacameradude said:
But 'color science' (or as you put it 'colors being far more pleasing than those of the competition?). Sorry but that one is
far, far, far too individual of a thing to be advertised as a 'feature' in my humble opinion. If I was to go by the words of
most people I talk to who have tried all these cameras, I'd be buying Canon everything. But that particular thing I prefer
to judge for myself as cameras that I have been told have 'terrible color science' are just fine in my opinion and sometimes
even factually more color accurate than the camera which I have been told has 'more pleasing' color science.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Last edited:
Fahnon said:
Well, the man did say "far greater performance than any other pro production camera". The A7S is a great tool, but it is not a "pro production camera". It's a hybrid stills/video camera that can be used professionally, but is a different class of device than something like a Varicam LT. Limiting the scope to production cameras it's low-light competition is RED Gemini and Venice I'd say.
Click to expand...
Oh don't misunderstand. I understand that 100%. A7s is a stills camera form factor. I'm just
saying that I'd like to see how close the Varicam comes to the A7s as the king of all low light cameras
that I am aware of. Obviously the A7s has some severe disadvantages (like needing 15 stops of ND in
sunny conditions....lol)
 
It's also worth mentioning that you have to be specific about which one you're talking about.

Because the a7S was dethroned and replaced by the a7SII as the better low-light camera in every way (less noise, better color science, and more detail at higher ISOs).

But people now also compare the a7SII and a7III against each other and they are extremely similar in their low-light performance with the a7SII having better detail and less color shifting (both at higher ISOs), but the a7III having less visible noise, IIRC. This explanation on paper would make sense as the newer modern camera provides a slightly cleaner image, but the a7SII with less MPs was still designed for better overall low-light performance.

The native/base ISO also isn't 3200 like it was in the original a7S. (What an inconvenience that was.)
 
You guys are cute.

Let’s break it down, and for simplicity just talk about the LT since this is a thread for the LT price drop.

Mitch Gross said:
The colors on the VariCam LT and the EVA1 are far more pleasing than those on the competition...
Click to expand...
What is the competition?

Varicam LT is not directly competing with the Venice. Let’s be honest. The Venice is a Full Frame cinema camera from a newer generation. And Reds are not ENG centric enough to be a direct competitor.

C300mkii?
Sony F5/F55?

What else under $15,000 has that image quality and all of the pro features including onboard XLR and integrated battery plate?

Mitch Gross said:
Then there’s the matter of sensitivity. The VariCam is the low light king. It can shoot at high ISO with far greater performance than any other pro production camera. The difference is huge.
Click to expand...
Does anyone disagree with this and why?
 
Personally, I think the Varicam LT looks great. I haven't used it, though. But from everything I've seen online and the stuff I've watch that was shot with it, I believe it's very close to the best players, right behind the Arris and the Venice.

And yet that low-light test still puts it clearly behind the Amira, even in an aspect that's supposed to be its strong point. (I didn't even check the noise, it's the skin that bothers me - though only when compared side-by-side with an Amira).
 
James0b57 said:
You guys are cute.

Let’s break it down, and for simplicity just talk about the LT since this is a thread for the LT price drop.


What is the competition?

Varicam LT is not directly competing with the Venice. Let’s be honest. The Venice is a Full Frame cinema camera from a newer generation. And Reds are not ENG centric enough to be a direct competitor.

C300mkii?
Sony F5/F55?

What else under $15,000 has that image quality and all of the pro features including onboard XLR and integrated battery plate?
Click to expand...
Yeah I’d say C300ii and F5 and I’d add C200, and BMD’s Ursa Mini Pro G2.
Maybe Kinfinity Mavo or Terra.
 
Possibly the most comprehensive camera comparison was by Radiant Images a while back:


It’s pretty obvious which cameras can handle highlights:
48181280171_1457b8018a_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
Samuel H said:
... yet that low-light test still puts it clearly behind the Amira, even in an aspect that's supposed to be its strong point. (I didn't even check the noise, it's the skin that bothers me - though only when compared side-by-side with an Amira).
Click to expand...

I am curious about this statement.

Which of these do you prefer:
48181276166_eb212a9a4e_z.jpg

1. Left or right?

48181842676_4579984630_b.jpg

2. Left or right?

48181891822_2681e4d6c6_b.jpg

3. Left or right?

48181344287_37d8fccba6_b.jpg

4. Do you have a favourite?
 
Last edited:
The high iso performance on cameras is typically overrated.


An A7s or A6300 can look good from a distance, but actually starts falling apart after 6400 iso. Colors bleed and eventually noise reduction is too heavy to be considered cinematic quality. However, they are still a bench mark of low light performance, they just lack image quality is all.

The Varicam native 5000 is not perfect, but having worked with it, i know it is something worth looking into, if one has to shoot in low light. I haven’t seen anything realisitcally compare yet. But it is not magic or anything.
 
Last edited:
docmoore said:
Found this older test of Scarlet W and Varicam LT:

http://www.thebriannguyen.com/2016/...varicam-lt-complete-dynamic-range-comparison/
Click to expand...

48181892827_a4dd6505ea_b.jpg

This one shows that the Varicam has been engineered to roll off the highlights nicely. While i don’t think it can handle +5 stops on a face convincingly, it handily beats red and black magic. Red makes up for it with a little extra shadow detail. Sony F55 and C300mkii also do quite well in the highlights, but if i had to rate them:

1. Varicam
2. F55
3. C300mkii

Where the F55 gets and edge is that it also has incredible shadow detail. I just prefer an in camera roll off. So, the Varicam wins this one for me.
 
Last edited:
James0b57 said:
The high iso performance on cameras is typically overrated.


An A7s or A6300 can look good from a distance, but actually starts falling about after 6400 iso. Colors bleed and eventually noise reduction is too heavy to be considered cinematic quality. However, they are still a bench mark of low light performance, they just lack image quality is all.

The Varicam native 5000 is not perfect, but having worked with it, i know it is something worth looking into, if one has to shoot in low light. I haven’t seen anything realisitcally compare yet. But it is not magic or anything.
Click to expand...

In this price range it seems to me that the Varicam LT is in a class of it's own, especially for narrative work. It's telling that so many budgeted productions with chose Varicam with the DPs stating that dual native ISO was a deciding factor. I haven't shot with Varicam yet but from what I have heard the secret sauce to low light shooting with the cameras is shooting at ISO 5000 and dropping back a bit reduce the noise even further.

I think it amazing than you can shoot compressed RAW with the LT for less than $10,000 if you have to purchase a Atomos Inferno. Sure it would be great to have a viewfinder and other pieces of kit but for $10K you can shoot with similar quality to that used on Netflix and Amazon series. And best of all the camera's sensitivity allows you with a much smaller lighter camera package.
 
alaskacameradude said:
Yeah I’d say C300ii and F5 and I’d add C200, and BMD’s Ursa Mini Pro G2.
Maybe Kinfinity Mavo or Terra.
Click to expand...

Great selection.

So we can essentially go through them one by one:

C300mkii vs LT
F5 vs LT
C200 vs LT
BM ursa mini pro G2 vs LT
Kinfinity Mavo vs LT

I find it a lot different when comparing the cameras one to one, rather than as a group. Chances are, the LT will win most of those comparisons unless someone has a specific need.
 
I don't think it's fair to compare the VariCam LT to other cameras in the sub-$10k range. Varicam is not a sub-$10k camera if you have to add anywhere from $2k-5k worth of accessories to even get it shootable. It's a $12-15k camera.

It doesn't even have a monitor or viewfinder at $9,995. Not to mention the eye-watering pricing of expressP2 media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top