VaricamLT: Panasonic VariCam LT
- Thread starter Camera Expert
- Start date
- Status
Mark Broadbent
Member
Maybe for a direct image comparison however on the usability front, particularly for any doco, owner operator work etc its hardly a realistic comparison even just on the ergonomics front. An Alexa body is over double the weight of the LT and also uses twice as much power.
I've read a few comments saying that no one would move on from an F5 to the LT. Well I'm planning on doing just that. Better ergonomics, better viewfinder, better codec options, the 5000iso option and if the 35 is anything to go by for my tastes a much more pleasing image. Probably my only very minor issue is cropping to go to 120fps. Would have been nice to only crop from 120-240. Sure, the Alexa Mini would be a nice choice however in Australia anyway they are double the expected price of the LT, if not more. That's a big deal in the owner/operator world that I sit.
Also comments that no one will shoot drama on it or the 35, well several BBC shows have moved to the 35, Season 4 of Orange is the New Black has also gone Varicam. Master of None season 1 looks great. On the feature front I don't know the current state in the US however in Australia cinematographer Don McAlpine (Predator, Patriot Games, Romeo + Juliet, Anger Management, X-Men Origins etc) just shot his later feature on it. It is more than capable. No, I'm not expecting it to unseat Arri but still I see a lot of potential in both the 35 and LT for drama work.
Also a cheap secondhand Alexa doesn't have built in ND filters, and doesn't have true DCI 4K resolution. Plenty of reasons to prefer a Varicam LT.
btw, Shortland St (NZ's biggest soap opera, has been running for decades and decades) recently switched over to Varicam S35. Using *three* Varicams simultaneously.
FHD mode of the Samsung NX1 had basically similar rolling shutter level to the Arri Alexa.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
So, so noisy.. I don't know, is that preproduction model?
KyleProhaska
Veteran
I think the footage looks pretty great. That's probably the best "camera test" type footage I've seen. Lots of variety in there. The stuff inside the lighthouse? Nice.
Lol, wow, this is beyond ignorant. Colorists are artists and no one gets into "the ballpark" of anything by sitting on the internet and then practicing for a little while. I'd bet that 1% of you on this entire forum could barely color grade a local commercial. What a joke.
Also, you know nothing of film. What scratches are you talking about? LOL.
I visit here once in many months and knew it would be a waste of time and this thread reminded me why, and . So many amateurs posting. What are you guys talking about in this thread anyway? There are maybe four actual professionals here, and about 500 kids talking, YET AGAIN, about some new camera you can't afford and are angry at because you are hobbyists with DSLR's and wedding videos to shoot. WHO CARES about new cameras anymore?!? Make a deal with Kodak, rent an Varicam, Amira or Alexa, or go the F home.
Oh, guys, 2011 called and it wants its "game changing" camera news back.
High1ander
Well-known member
You are so missing the point and overreacting. You do realize "ballpark" doesn't mean 100% accurate, but usually closer to 75-90%. I have no problem with people after reading up, learning the pitfalls of a certain camera can "ballpark" images to be "80% correct" so to speak. But we all know that if you want it to be 100% or 95%, you need a pro (and also pro-equipment, like calibrated monitors). But guess what, most stuff works on a base of "close/good enough", where 80% works fine for wedding video with color grade, but you need 95%+ for feature film, and commercials you can go from 85-100%Lol, wow, this is beyond ignorant. Colorists are artists and no one gets into "the ballpark" of anything by sitting on the internet and then practicing for a little while. I'd bet that 1% of you on this entire forum could barely color grade a local commercial. What a joke.
Also, you know nothing of film. What scratches are you talking about? LOL.
I visit here once in many months and knew it would be a waste of time and this thread reminded me why, and . So many amateurs posting. What are you guys talking about in this thread anyway? There are maybe four actual professionals here, and about 500 kids talking, YET AGAIN, about some new camera you can't afford and are angry at because you are hobbyists with DSLR's and wedding videos to shoot. WHO CARES about new cameras anymore?!? Make a deal with Kodak, rent an Varicam, Amira or Alexa, or go the F home.
Oh, guys, 2011 called and it wants its "game changing" camera news back.
I have also worked with and met a couple of pro colorist, some that worked on major Hollywood movies, and they sure as s*%t didn't know "everything" that they are supposed to know. But, that is the case with most professions, I meet people all the time that are "Pros" but that doesn't know all the things you expect them to know. That said, in most cases they really are good at what they do, worth every penny, it's just that they aren't the be-all end-all.
Last edited:
Bassman2003
Veteran
I agree. Showing some great versatility and dynamic range. Much better than the African footage and blows away Vince's cameras from 2011!
As to Alohype's noise, the look of this camera really extends out of the broadcast Varicam look to me. Those cameras were not the cleanest images out there. At the time, the noise gave it "film look" cred. But to be honest, I was not distracted by noise in this video. If anything, amongst all of the great light gathering I thought it had a bit of a video look at times. But that could probably be overcome.
Last edited:
The first 30 seconds (not counting the one with car lights from behind the runner ... those will obviously be blown, as that sort of a shot goes up to 20 stops or more) are shot with only street lights present. It may be noisy but it's a workable sequence where the only other high end camera that might get close is C300 MKII (A7S/II would outperform all). And that means that one can acquire images 24/7 with the LT. A low budget independent might indeed stick with A7S/II but a pro crew won't have to sub out a camera and that counts for a lot.
I don't see the LT as much of a F55 competitor as I see it as a F5 killer. No. F5 smasher. I think the street price will be much closer to the F5 than we think.
The F55 not only has a global shutter but also integrated RAW solution instead of external. The F55 has overall better specs than the full sized Varicam 35 too. If it wasn't for the dual ISO I think only Panasonic fans would even look at it over a F55. The LT is at least much cheaper.
The images so far look the same as the Varicam 35 as they should. The lower price is more in line with the camera. The Varicam 35 is priced in the Alexa range but can't really compete. The Varicam image looks great but it's pure video. It just looks like video. Like the FS7, F5 and F55. I wouldn't want to shoot a feature with it. But for TV and other things it's great. Sure it looks better than the FS7, F5 etc . But that is not saying much. Those also look like video.
The boxing scene for example looks so video. I could never feel I'm watching a movie looking at that. The low light scenes reminded of a7s footage. Can't really say it looks that much better looking at vimeo. I think the best feature is really the double ISO. But for the new 18K price it's much more at home than the Varicam 35. Now I think it has a chance. Just not going to make any damage to Arri's feature film dominance. Not the LT not the 35.
The F55 not only has a global shutter but also integrated RAW solution instead of external. The F55 has overall better specs than the full sized Varicam 35 too. If it wasn't for the dual ISO I think only Panasonic fans would even look at it over a F55. The LT is at least much cheaper.
The images so far look the same as the Varicam 35 as they should. The lower price is more in line with the camera. The Varicam 35 is priced in the Alexa range but can't really compete. The Varicam image looks great but it's pure video. It just looks like video. Like the FS7, F5 and F55. I wouldn't want to shoot a feature with it. But for TV and other things it's great. Sure it looks better than the FS7, F5 etc . But that is not saying much. Those also look like video.
The boxing scene for example looks so video. I could never feel I'm watching a movie looking at that. The low light scenes reminded of a7s footage. Can't really say it looks that much better looking at vimeo. I think the best feature is really the double ISO. But for the new 18K price it's much more at home than the Varicam 35. Now I think it has a chance. Just not going to make any damage to Arri's feature film dominance. Not the LT not the 35.
I'm with k0bayashi here.
Two totally different markets. I have a FS7. But in comparison the FS7 is a camera for peasants with b.o. and stinky feet. This Varicam LT looks on the level of the current Varicam 35. It will be a truly professional camera. Have you seen a Vraicam 35? Just operating it already feels from a different world. In the world of Varicams, Arris and the F65 the FS7 is a plastic toy. It's not only about the image.
It doesn't matter if PB and CNN use a FS7 for a docu show which needs portability. This the only reason really. They use DSLRs too for Christ's sake. Obviously image quality and industry standards are not the main focus.
Even though I have a FS7 and think it's great for the money it gets pretty tiresome that every time a high end camera is announced FS7 users have to come on and say overpriced, FS7 basically as good or any variation of that. It's not. Varicams are high end cameras. The FS7 is not on the same level. Yes, 20% more image quality can be worth 10, 20, $30k more for people who don't count beans. Specially when the rest besides image quality is so much better. It's just a fact of the industry these cameras are made for. The high end.
For people who can't understand that there are cameras like the FS7.
But the Varicam image is for sure better than the FS7. How I wish my FS7 was giving me Varicam footage. Nope! Wish it was that easy.
Well sorry. I have no more time to write. Have to spend the time with Resolve to make my FS7 footage look really good, kinda.
Two totally different markets. I have a FS7. But in comparison the FS7 is a camera for peasants with b.o. and stinky feet. This Varicam LT looks on the level of the current Varicam 35. It will be a truly professional camera. Have you seen a Vraicam 35? Just operating it already feels from a different world. In the world of Varicams, Arris and the F65 the FS7 is a plastic toy. It's not only about the image.
It doesn't matter if PB and CNN use a FS7 for a docu show which needs portability. This the only reason really. They use DSLRs too for Christ's sake. Obviously image quality and industry standards are not the main focus.
Even though I have a FS7 and think it's great for the money it gets pretty tiresome that every time a high end camera is announced FS7 users have to come on and say overpriced, FS7 basically as good or any variation of that. It's not. Varicams are high end cameras. The FS7 is not on the same level. Yes, 20% more image quality can be worth 10, 20, $30k more for people who don't count beans. Specially when the rest besides image quality is so much better. It's just a fact of the industry these cameras are made for. The high end.
For people who can't understand that there are cameras like the FS7.
But the Varicam image is for sure better than the FS7. How I wish my FS7 was giving me Varicam footage. Nope! Wish it was that easy.
Well sorry. I have no more time to write. Have to spend the time with Resolve to make my FS7 footage look really good, kinda.
abreu-canedo
Well-known member
I've got no skin in the game, here.
I personally felt that the boxer piece looked a little videoish. I know that is a vague term, but it does describe my feeling in a single word. But you know what, I thought the same thing about the F65 early demo pieces. That silent short, amongst others, felt super videoish. Again, my apologies for use of that word. But then the F65 went on to deliver many stunning pictures. I have no doubt in my mind that th Varicam LT will be able to deliver stunning images as well. But the camera isn't even out yet. Let's wait until it comes out and folks are out working with it before we make any definitive conclusions about its imag quality and what it is capable of.
As as far as the comparison, well, I think it is ok for people to want to compare. But let's not get carried away. The Varicam LT is not trying to compete with the FS7. Sure, you can say that the FS7 can do internal 10bit HD and output RAW. But the FS7 is trying to appeal for the budget crowd that is willing to compromise in order to get those images. On the other hand, the Varicam LT, just by virtue of its price alone, is saying: "hey, professionals that may use the Amira, I'm here!" They are trying to be the portable, more doc friendly version of their flagship Varicam 35 in the same way the Amira is to the Alexa. And Panasonic seem to want to compete for the same rental house big budget market. You can argue if whether on paper it compares well to the Amira or not, but only time will tell if image/usability/price ratio makes it a contender.
Also, my statements are not meant to put down the FS7. It is a great camera in many regards. But different horses for different courses. We are all open to state our preferences. But I think we risk going too far when we mistake our preferences with the cameras themselves...if you know what I mean.
Im very excited to see what this camera can do and I hope to use it on a job once it comes out. Although I will say, I am not a fan of their P2 format. I much prefer the SRMemory cards (even if they are expensive as heck) and SSDs.
I personally felt that the boxer piece looked a little videoish. I know that is a vague term, but it does describe my feeling in a single word. But you know what, I thought the same thing about the F65 early demo pieces. That silent short, amongst others, felt super videoish. Again, my apologies for use of that word. But then the F65 went on to deliver many stunning pictures. I have no doubt in my mind that th Varicam LT will be able to deliver stunning images as well. But the camera isn't even out yet. Let's wait until it comes out and folks are out working with it before we make any definitive conclusions about its imag quality and what it is capable of.
As as far as the comparison, well, I think it is ok for people to want to compare. But let's not get carried away. The Varicam LT is not trying to compete with the FS7. Sure, you can say that the FS7 can do internal 10bit HD and output RAW. But the FS7 is trying to appeal for the budget crowd that is willing to compromise in order to get those images. On the other hand, the Varicam LT, just by virtue of its price alone, is saying: "hey, professionals that may use the Amira, I'm here!" They are trying to be the portable, more doc friendly version of their flagship Varicam 35 in the same way the Amira is to the Alexa. And Panasonic seem to want to compete for the same rental house big budget market. You can argue if whether on paper it compares well to the Amira or not, but only time will tell if image/usability/price ratio makes it a contender.
Also, my statements are not meant to put down the FS7. It is a great camera in many regards. But different horses for different courses. We are all open to state our preferences. But I think we risk going too far when we mistake our preferences with the cameras themselves...if you know what I mean.
Im very excited to see what this camera can do and I hope to use it on a job once it comes out. Although I will say, I am not a fan of their P2 format. I much prefer the SRMemory cards (even if they are expensive as heck) and SSDs.
Last edited:
combatentropy
Veteran
Lol, wow, this is beyond ignorant. Colorists are artists and no one gets into "the ballpark" of anything by sitting on the internet and then practicing for a little while. I'd bet that 1% of you on this entire forum could barely color grade a local commercial. What a joke.
Also, you know nothing of film. What scratches are you talking about? LOL.
I visit here once in many months and knew it would be a waste of time and this thread reminded me why, and . So many amateurs posting. What are you guys talking about in this thread anyway? There are maybe four actual professionals here, and about 500 kids talking, YET AGAIN, about some new camera you can't afford and are angry at because you are hobbyists with DSLR's and wedding videos to shoot. WHO CARES about new cameras anymore?!? Make a deal with Kodak, rent an Varicam, Amira or Alexa, or go the F home.
Oh, guys, 2011 called and it wants its "game changing" camera news back.
Once again a purely personal attack with no concrete details to illustrate your point, just like the responses by Mitch Goss and mcgeedigital. Anyone can call names. Coincidentally this strategy of belittling is also used in brainwashing and abusive relationships. A message of "You're too stupid, so shut up and trust me," is used by many to keep someone else in a bad situation for a long time.
From my experience from years of color correcting my own videos and inspecting hundreds of other people's videos, I believe that the video- or film-look is largely a matter of color correction, as well as all the other praises and complaints of test footage from cameras these days. Of course you can't color-correct a VHS camera to the same as an F55. But you can color correct all modern, large-sensor, 24p cameras to have the mojo you like and, I think, futhermore color-correct them to reasonably match on a multicamera shoot (for at least the casual viewer, not necessarily for a pixel peeper).
Well, I don't often see it, but here's a new film shot on Super 16 shared by another DVX member. I think it looks great, but yes, there are a few occasional scratches --- or specks of some sort for just a frame.
Last edited:
hammerhorror
Well-known member
Does anyone know if you can use the E-Series P2 Cards to record the 1080 AVC-Intra 100 mode on the Varicam LT? I have a surplus of these cards so it would be nice to be able to use them for 1080 AVC-Intra recording.
maranfilms
Veteran
must be my monitor showing ridiculous amounts of noise, everything else looks really great. I'm wondering if it's a grain added that's coming across as noise after re encoding. IDK but the noise is atrocious on my pc. I like the film though, really creative, and well executed in my opinion.
Unfortunately no. There's a great amount of noise on my monitor. Wondering is that due to added grain/noisy (preproduction?) camera/ or compression.
Does anyone knows if processing on both Varicam 35 and LT is the same? I mean, is it like FS7 to F5 in base recordings?
- Status