Panasonic Varicam 35 & Varicam HS
- Thread starter dcloud
- Start date
steve phillipps
Veteran
I wouldn't be too surprised if it was $25,000 dollars - but for BODY only - as in, no recorder. Then another $15,000 for a recorder.
For me I don't think the ability to do 120fps at 4k should be underestimated. This was the hook for the original Varicam for a lot of users - Sonys could only do 30fps but the Varicam could do slow motion. That fact alone meant that the 720 Varicam cost the same as the 1080 Sony.
Also I'm not so sure global shutter is quite such a big deal now, Epic has one and was used on lots of high end stuff for a couple of years. Phantom HD doesn't have one either and that wasn't exactly a prosumer bit of kit!
Steve
Panasonic Varicam 35 and Varicam HS way out of my league. Their prices make me realize how affordable the Sony F55 is. Checkout the press release here http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wc...4032604396&surfModel=Content04042014032604396
steve phillipps
Veteran
Don't wanna say I told you so....:dankk2:
Steve
Steve
That price is comparable to the F65 - and very good though I suspect the Varicam will be, it's specs indicate it won't be in F65 territory.
The Varicam seems almost certain to be in the same league as the F55 (which should be taken as a compliment) and should be priced competitive to that.
If it really does go on sale around $60k, it's a joke.
The Varicam seems almost certain to be in the same league as the F55 (which should be taken as a compliment) and should be priced competitive to that.
If it really does go on sale around $60k, it's a joke.
steve phillipps
Veteran
In what way not similar / competitive to F65? The Varicam 35 will be a solid-build, pro-grade body, it will do 120fps at 4k and no doubt have a great image. I think sometimes we do need to take a small step back from on-paper specs - I bet the latest phones have better specs than a Nikon D3 but I know which would take better quality stills!
Steve
Steve
Last edited:
Just for starters, non global shutter, and the F65 has a 20 Mpixel sensor as Q67. Hence (as with the forthcoming "6k" cameras) it should give "true" 4k resolution for luminance - not just have a 4k Bayer sensor. I believe there's much more, but the F65 is out of my field. I'm prepared to accept that if you're in the real digital cinema field, it is worth the extra over the F55 in Sony's range.
I did also say "in the same league" as the F55 when making the comparison, and by that meant that whilst they are in many ways comparable (sensor resolution being identical, for example), then in some ways the F55 has a big advantage (global v rolling shutter, for one), in other ways the Varicam may be superior (such as frame rates, as you say). None of this should be taken as a criticism of the Varicam or the F55 - in absolute terms, they both have a very good spec indeed.
Overall, I'd still maintain they are comparable - I just wouldn't expect the s35 Varicam to cost more. To be twice as much is just absurd.
steve phillipps
Veteran
Again I think you need to go a little deeper than baseline specs, and again there are loads of parallels out there, including with stills cameras: Nikon D3S - £3,100; Nikon D610 - £900 and yet it has twice as many pixels! Even just a more rugged chasis and weather sealing can bump prices up and put gear into more "pro" categories.
Not saying the Varicam and F55 are not comparable, just think it shouldn't a surprise that there's a massive price gap.
Steve
Not saying the Varicam and F55 are not comparable, just think it shouldn't a surprise that there's a massive price gap.
Steve
I can't pretend to be an F65 expert, but I have asked (an F55 owner) why anyone would ever want to spend twice as much on a single camera, considering what the F55 offers? He assures me that if you're in that market (with huge budgets) the differences do make it worthwhile - and they are more extensive than the quick headline ones I've mentioned.
I appreciate what you say about how stills camera pricing can go - but from everything I've heard here, it sounds like whilst the D3S and D610 are both good cameras in their own way, the analogy is like a rival to the D610 has come along - but D3S prices are being asked for it.
Hmmm - looks like that question has now been answered - http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ress-release-adds-ProRes-to-VariCam-4K-and-HS
I suppose it's good news it has RAW output at all - but not having compressed RAW will make for far more difficult workflows than with the likes of RED or Sony. It also has implications for any future as a camera for OB live usage - it's using the compressed 4k RAW output via a live adaptor back that is being used in the current 4k OB trials.
The f55 just got a lot more attractive to a lot of people then! Steve you were right about the price. As awesome as this camera will be I think panasonic have a big challenge to break back into cinema territory again given that is the only market for a camera this price. I think the f5 is the best option for working freelancers in tv and corporate now as it has an upgrade path to 4k built in or just buy an f55 and be done with it.
combatentropy
Veteran
Yeah, why is the Varicam 35 nearly twice as much as the F55?
They seem to me the same, except the Panasonic has higher frame rates, but the Sony has global shutter.
They seem to me the same, except the Panasonic has higher frame rates, but the Sony has global shutter.
Run&Gun
Veteran
After some chatting at the Panasonic booth this afternoon, the lack of 'global shutter'(which is a huge concern for me) MAY not really be an issue. It may just be that Panny isn't calling it a global shutter, but the way it's actually processing and working, the end effect is that of a global shutter. But I want to see some real world testing and stressing. I spoke with someone involved with the testing of the camera and not an engineer. I plan on going back tomorrow and speaking with engineers actually involved with the development.
steve phillipps
Veteran
Is there not a parallel here now with the likes of the new Black Magic URSA - could you not equally say that the F55 now got much less attractive as you can get a camera that does the same but at a third of the price? Why would anyone buy an F55 at that crazy price when could get the BM? As with the Varicam I think, all cameras are not the same even if specs on a sheet seem to say that they are...
Steve
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
In no way does the URSA compete with the F55.
steve phillipps
Veteran
Why not? Must confess I haven't looked at the specs yet, what am I missing?
Steve
William_Robinette
Shallow Member
The fact that one company is and has been a world leader for ages in broadcast and cinema with a quality product out and working everyday all over the world.
And the other is a computer peripheral producer turned camera maker with an awful track record.
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
Look at the specs side by side. It will be pretty clear that the F55 is playing a league above the URSA and priced accordingly.
Also what Mr Robinette has said. BM have a terrible track record. Its a running joke.
Two big differences. The URSA is the new kid on the block, is one trying to gain territory. Being cheaper is one way to help that along, that's marketing, the Varicam is also a new kid on the block - and by being far more expensive, that's not going to help.
Secondly, I'd disagree the URSA does the same as the F55. A lot remains to be seen, but it seems that the only codec for coded video is ProRes? That may please some, maybe not others? And the F55 seems to have "system" all over it - coded XAVC, compressed RAW options, reliable options for working as a live cabled camera, very good viewfinder options? (I don't see any eyepiece option for URSA? The ad photo shows operators using the screens for viewfinding on a bright sunny day with no shades - really?
)All that said, then let's see how things go. It may indeed put a LOT of price pressure on the F55, and now that's been out a while, maybe we'll see price drops there as a result?
But don't all the above make the price tag of the Varicam seem even more ridiculous? You may be correct to say F55 has got less attractive due to the URSA - the Varicam has become less attractive still.
I think you know the answer to that as well as I do! Reliability and trust. It's one thing to get a given level of performance in terms of image quality etc - another to guarantee it as much as possible, maybe under poor conditions, a long way from support. Even guarantee a working camera at all!) Black Magic have made for name for high basic specification at a low price, but have been criticised for such as underdeveloped firmware and what has been described elsewhere as "giving the products a half-baked feel in the eyes of many users".
That may be one thing for some users (given the low basic cost) - a price well worth paying - but would you feel happy at the moment to take something like an URSA on a long trip to somewhere remote? Where you just expect the camera to work, and carry on working?
I would be as confident as possible with something from Sony or Panasonic - but with URSA........? Maybe if it proves itself in the future.
No, but I've always said that specs can't tell you how good a camera is - but they can define upper limits.
And from everything I've heard, the Varicam seems only definitely superior to the F55 on one single fact, and that's a higher frame rate at 4k. Prove me wrong if you can, but in every other single respect I'm aware of, they are either equivalent or the F55 is better. And that's not talking about just image quality, but also system integration (the live back for the F55), codec choices and availability, and matters such as RAW compression for the F55.
[EDIT - I see others are thinking along similar lines!]
steve phillipps
Veteran
That's actually a pretty good point - the F55 has hardly been problem-free! Perhaps the premium for the Varicam will be down to quality of components and manufacturing?
Steve