Panasonic Varicam 35 & Varicam HS

Hmmmm....not sure what to think about that footage - largely because it's pretty irrelevant as most stuff looks good in promos and on the web - the GH4 stuff for instance looks spectacular.

Nothing nasty there for sure, and the lit people stuff did look really nice.

I think there's a wide consensus that most cameras can create these nice-looking images these days and its success and popularity comes down more to other factors:

Specification (important to producers and commissioners) - frame rates, pixel count

Operation (important to operators) - so how nice it is to use, any serious pains in the backside, and especially any major glitches

Price (not so important in many spheres, but vitally important if it's going to establish itself as a widely used product throughout the market and sell in large numbers)

Specs look pretty standard and well up to scratch - and appealing if the 120fps 4k is true. Wonder what the rolling shutter will be like. Operation looks like it will probably be good, looks like a well-made and well laid-out camera, plus you would hope that the fact that it seems to be about 2 years behind the game is because it's been thoroughly tested and debugged! It will be interesting to see the final price - I was right about it being vastly more expensive than the F55, but I do wonder if they will greatly reduce the price upon release as even though I did guess right it still did seem a crazy price in today's market.

Steve
 
Last edited:

I was hoping more direct 240 fps scenes such as wildlife, sports, or any other fast-paced action. At least something to show true Varicam frame rates. If I'm not mistaken, 240 fps is only on the HS 1080p mode and not 4K. Too bad. Very fine cam regardless, but not so fine price considering many other mfgs in the market now. Not sure what I'm really paying the $60K for. Is it the fine quality of the image sensor & DSP or fast turnaround workflow format considering no raw built-in or they must recoup the enormous R&D costs ASAP and then discount this by 50% later on?
 
Certainly the original release said 240fps for the HS model and 120fps in 4k for the 35mm one - that's pretty good and would elevate it above F55 (only 60fps at 4k) and Amira (high frame rates but not 4k). F65 does 120fps at 4k but is out of the question for lots of users, which only leaves Epic (150fps in 4k) but that's a love it or hate it camera.
I think it's fair to say, as lots of people have, that it's not such a barn-storming, game-changing spec sheet to warrant paying 3x the cost of its rivals.
Steve
 
Footage looks great, distinctly digital, but not in a bad way to my eyes (if that makes sense?). I've always had a soft spot for those Pannie colours - they just pop.
 
F65 does 120fps at 4k but is out of the question for lots of users, which ........
But am I right in thinking the basic price of the F65 is also around $60k - so if that's out of the question for cost, the Varicam is going to be as well!?

Agree with you about the footage - yes, looks nice..... but for the price was anybody expecting it not to? But it really shows off camera technique, lighting etc first and foremost, which is the same for most of the camera promos.
 
But am I right in thinking the basic price of the F65 is also around $60k - so if that's out of the question for cost, the Varicam is going to be as well!?

Yes, for sure. I think if it was around that price it would probably have the same group of users - ie top end with big budgets. Maybe they see the GH4 as their indie / popular, owner-operator camera and this as their high end offering - but that would be a heck of a gap if they just had a £1,200 camera and then a £40,000 one!

Steve
 
Nice images. Very saturated an vidid, more Fuji than Kodak. Digital, but has the Mojo. But a true Wow! would only come to mind, if this came in around 15K.
Now it's more like a Porsche: You expect it to look and perform according to its price tag.
Actually it is like an Audi R8. Great sports car from a company, that´s famous for its great performing, high-techie, well engineered limousines.
But why buy it, if you can also afford a Porsche or Ferrari...
 
The images are beautiful, rich, saturated, natural and the detail is awesome. Digital with Mojo as you guys already said. I would love to shoot with a camera like this but it's out of my ballpark for purchase, for sure.
 
Footage looks great, distinctly digital, but not in a bad way to my eyes (if that makes sense?).

Not sure. Very digital yes, very videoy like F55. Not feeling any mojo. Looks very good and panasonic color looks good and different from others. But very videoy. Still prefer alexa and for $60K I buy used alexa and enough left for a lens.
 
Not sure. Very digital yes, very videoy like F55. Not feeling any mojo.
How can you tell what's intrinsic to the camera, and what's down to lineup, grading etc etc? I wouldn't like to say I can. We don't even know the workflow do we? Was it recorded as "video" in the camera, or recorded RAW?

Because if RAW, the mojo can be more or less anything the processing software and producer wants it to be.
 
I think the footy looks great. Welcome back Panasonic. Pricing has to adjust. A lot has happened since this camera was priced and announced. Either way it looks beautiful and I welcome Panasonic back into the fold. Lets see how they apply what they have to other cameras down the line.

Side note. The image was definitely graded. I think this was one of the best first look samples of any camera I've ever seen. Pretty much shows all aspects of filmmaking from studio to nature.
 
Truly gorgeous sample reel. One would not expect a camera demo video to be graded to look "like film". We are heading into a new era of digital image aesthetics vs film aesthetics and that is OK with me. Cameras like this and the f65 can do things film has never been able to do. I bet the really stellar qualities of these images don't quite make it thru Vimeo compression. The tonal scale looks magnificent.
 
How can you tell what's intrinsic to the camera, and what's down to lineup, grading etc etc? I wouldn't like to say I can. We don't even know the workflow do we? Was it recorded as "video" in the camera, or recorded RAW?

Because if RAW, the mojo can be more or less anything the processing software and producer wants it to be.

Light Iron from Vimeo commented this was shot using the new AVC-Ultra format
 
Footage looks great, distinctly digital, but not in a bad way to my eyes (if that makes sense?). I've always had a soft spot for those Pannie colours - they just pop.

I tend to agree. It looks like it would make a great TV production workhorse.
 
Back
Top