VaricamLT: Panasonic VariCam LT

Status
Not open for further replies.
Even as a happy owner of VariCam's over the last decade, the LT hasn't excited me, yet, BUT if the difference is only $500 vs the C300 MKII, it's a no brainer: Panasonic
 
Arguments for and against investing so much in the Varicam LT if clients don't require it, or if you aren't shooting on projects where people hire you both for your camera skills but also the camera you bring to the job? (i.e. as a single owner/operator).

With cameras like a GH5 around the corner + Vlog... A7SII successor perhaps soon... an URSA Mini 4.6k... a Sony FS700... and even just another 12 months of high competition and ever lowering prices for digital cameras?

On one hand, I can't seem to justify spending such a high amount on something so likely to depreciate so quickly (even if the Varicam LT price doesn't come down, the resale value may dip drastically with newer camera announcements in the next 2 years... to the tune of over 50%+ I might assume, not 25%....?).

On the other hand, it's got everything I want in a camera, and at a certain point, image quality becomes as good or standard to what has been industry standard for ages (A Digital Super35mm equivalent with a base ISO of 5000 and DR @ 14 stops... need I even worry about next years next big thing now that this threshold has been crossed?). Perhaps for higher 4K VFR modes, or better codec recording modes... not sure. I also like the fact that it ticks pretty much every box and should be highly respectable. And perhaps by owning this camera, it may open up jobs of being hired as an owner/operator solely because of owning the VariCam LT that I haven't had before?


Anyway, thoughts as an independent freelancer on springing for this camera? I would have to do the 0% 24 month financing option.
 
I've spent a few hours with the camera recently, had some in-depth convos with the Panasonic folks and put it through a significant "stress test", below.

I'm considering for an upcoming series that will be largely handheld, so for me it's this versus the Amira (possibly the Alexa Mini). One thing that has particularly interested me is the dual ISO capability, as we will have night exteriors and also stage work. Traditionally I've had to rely on big heads like 5K's to push in a facsimile of sunlight into sets on stage (T4 or so at 800 EI), but I'm intrigued at the idea of shooting at maybe 2500 EI and getting the same oomph from 2K's. Any of my LED units will also become effectively more powerful. We'll save on power, heat, and rental cost (or better yet, I can re-invest savings back into more of the pricey units like Cineos). All very intriguing.

During a recent demo, we had a gray wall in the background. I adjusted the lighting so we had a gradient of roughly 40 down to 20 IRE across the wall. It's well known that this section of the toe is where noise is going to be the most obvious, so I wanted to compare the performance of the camera at the two native ISO's. What I saw was that there was a noticeable amount more noise on the wall at the native 5000EI setting than at 800EI. We tested dropping the ISO in increments and compensating with the iris until we arrived at what I felt was a more comparable noise level, which was 2500EI (down from the native 5000, not up from 800 which would have been much noisier).

That said; even at 5000EI, there was little to no extra noise in the other parts of the frame. Skin tones remained good, bright colors in the frame looked good, blacks looked good. We only saw the noise on the wall. I feel pretty confident that a deft hand with multi-pass noise reduction in post would be able to isolate and clean that stuff up pretty easily.

So to sum up--the results between the native ISO's are not dead identical in all ways, but for many scenes, they may be close enough. I had perhaps higher hopes but I'm not soured on this camera (and incidentally, the performance of an adjacent Varicam35 was exactly the same in these regards). I'm going to shoot some comparison tests between the Amira and the Varicam next week and I'll post for everyone's interest if I can.
 
CharlesPapert said:
I've spent a few hours with the camera recently, had some in-depth convos with the Panasonic folks and put it through a significant "stress test", below.

I'm considering for an upcoming series that will be largely handheld, so for me it's this versus the Amira (possibly the Alexa Mini). One thing that has particularly interested me is the dual ISO capability, as we will have night exteriors and also stage work. Traditionally I've had to rely on big heads like 5K's to push in a facsimile of sunlight into sets on stage (T4 or so at 800 EI), but I'm intrigued at the idea of shooting at maybe 2500 EI and getting the same oomph from 2K's. Any of my LED units will also become effectively more powerful. We'll save on power, heat, and rental cost (or better yet, I can re-invest savings back into more of the pricey units like Cineos). All very intriguing.

During a recent demo, we had a gray wall in the background. I adjusted the lighting so we had a gradient of roughly 40 down to 20 IRE across the wall. It's well known that this section of the toe is where noise is going to be the most obvious, so I wanted to compare the performance of the camera at the two native ISO's. What I saw was that there was a noticeable amount more noise on the wall at the native 5000EI setting than at 800EI. We tested dropping the ISO in increments and compensating with the iris until we arrived at what I felt was a more comparable noise level, which was 2500EI (down from the native 5000, not up from 800 which would have been much noisier).

That said; even at 5000EI, there was little to no extra noise in the other parts of the frame. Skin tones remained good, bright colors in the frame looked good, blacks looked good. We only saw the noise on the wall. I feel pretty confident that a deft hand with multi-pass noise reduction in post would be able to isolate and clean that stuff up pretty easily.

So to sum up--the results between the native ISO's are not dead identical in all ways, but for many scenes, they may be close enough. I had perhaps higher hopes but I'm not soured on this camera (and incidentally, the performance of an adjacent Varicam35 was exactly the same in these regards). I'm going to shoot some comparison tests between the Amira and the Varicam next week and I'll post for everyone's interest if I can.
Click to expand...

Seeing some tests would be very interesting! Varicam is an intriguing camera indeed, seems to be so well thought out that it might catch on. If the LT had ProRes 4K I think they'd make an even bigger impact.
 
bill totolo said:
Charles, will you be testing these cameras with and without in-camera noise reduction?
Click to expand...

Wasn't planning to Bill, because I think noise reduction is best applied in post. Unfortunately my test window tomorrow is limited to a couple hours so I will be focusing on just a couple of setups between Amira and the LT. If I decide I want to go with the LT for the upcoming show, I'll be doing more tests in next few weeks and I can try to add the noise tests then.
 
filmguy123 said:
Anyway, thoughts as an independent freelancer on springing for this camera? I would have to do the 0% 24 month financing option.
Click to expand...


That is a really hard question. Ive had various cameras which have presented me with various values.. I guess cost per anum, ability to hold certain jobs et al. FS100 was good value, F3 was bad value I feel FS7 will be OK/Good.

I think the image and ISO are going to be good for years with this camera, 8k will IMO only ever be a specialist item.. maybe if you are filming for some physical space like projection across many many screens in a shopping mall then 8k could be relevant. (say a fashion campaign that could be projected upright in some places and letter box other places)

So the Varicam could last as long as my sound devices recorder.. for a very long time... until there is a 'game changer'

Game changer. Auto focus.. and this is the one missing feature that threatens all cameras from F65 to Amera and could put them on the ebay 10% of new price shelf. Cinematographers laugh at AF but if a nice implementation comes then it will gain traction at all but high drama levels.

(seriously you need to consider C300ii AF.. would it change your game?)

It also does not have some magic stabilisation. Again a 'game changer'.

Then you move on to is it a camera that will pull you on to projects 'wanted varicam owner op' .. I cant see this. But maybe it will gain quick traction on docos that need an interview covered in Portland Or.

But you might see an advert 'wanted operator with varicam experience'

As for actually renting it to a show? no.. they have a crazy cheap deal with the hire shop who have a spare, and also are providing dolly, cine glass.. the prodco does not want the paper of splitting the hire

Id say if you are a bit wealthy and have a reasonable corporate client base maybe paying $200 rental for your camera when hiring you (the dont care the camera and will pay that for C300, Fs7 or varicam) then the Vari could be fun to own..

Break the cost over three years.. (11months worked per year)

FS7 = $10k = $3.3kpa = $300/per month or $30/day if you work 10 days per month

Vari = $20k =$6.6kpa =$600/per month or $60/day if you work 10 days per month.

If you are charging $800 a day.. then probably the $60 vs $30 is no big deal.. so get the camera that will be more enjoyable to use and shoot for your reel with!

--

One bummer.. my office our insurance goes right up if we have too much kit on site. The vari would be an insurance problem for me.

S
 
Last edited:
The main problem with the Varicam for me is the strong video look. All I have seen from the 35 and LT have it. That's ok in a camera in the FS7 or FS5 price range. But the Varicam 35 is Alexa territory and even the Varicam LT is priced above of what I would tolerate a video look.
 
I have to agree with Strattos to certain degree: there's something wrong with that low light promo of LT provided by Panasonic. It have a little video look. On the other hand promo of varicam 35 looks absolutely gorgeous. Some of the shots there made my jaw drop.
 
sometimes video look can do with the shooter and not the camera, in my experience...

I've seen footage from RED cameras that looked lame, depending on who shot with it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top