Varicam LT vs EVA

L

Lighten Lens

New member
Title says it all. I've been having trouble deciding if the step up to a Varicam LT is worth double the price of the EVA. I know I'm getting a much better duo native ISO at 5000 vs 2500, however the EVA interests me because of the future proofed 5.7k Raw option. Would love to hear some opinions / comparisons from people who have shot with both. I would also be interested in finding out from Los Angeles based DP's what the demand is like for renting a Varicam LT. Is the market saturated with RED's? Would that make the Varicam LT a USP to rent out and own?

Discuss! :D
 
Last edited:
Lighten Lens said:
Title says it all. I've been having trouble deciding if the step up to a Varicam LT is worth double the price of the EVA. I know I'm getting a much better duo native ISO at 5000 vs 2500, however the EVA interests me because of the future proofed 5.7k Raw option. Would love to hear some opinions / comparisons from people who have shot with both. I would also be interested in finding out from Los Angeles based DP's what the demand is like for renting a Varicam LT. Is the market saturated with RED's? Would that make the Varicam LT a USP to rent out and own?

Discuss! :D
Click to expand...

I own the LT and would tell you that the iso 5000 is a bit misguiding. The sensor needs a lot of light or you'll get too much noise. I personally expose as if the iso were 1600 (but still keep the setting at 5000). I suspect Panasonic recognized that and decided to lower the higher iso setting for the EVA1 to 2500 (I think they should have done the same for the LT). Meaning, the 5000 for the LT and 2500 for EVA1 could very well be identical. Someone needs to do some tests to compare them. So it would be prudent not to assume that the LT is automatically better because Panasonic has rated its higher iso at 5000. That's my advice.
 
I've shot with both. It sounds like size and weight isn't an object for you? To me that is the biggest selling point of the EVA1.

The LT has larger photosites, so achieves it's lowlight performance in a more natural way. The EVA1 is similar but with 5.7k is doing more digital processing. It resolves more detail and looks super sharp and detailed. At first I thought it was too much, but after seeing more footage in various scenarios and a little playing around myself, so far I am pleased. Incredibly crisp and detailed with a nice image rendition. The LT image to my eye looks a little less clinical and organic, but as it is, I really like the look on both. To clarify, I'm talking in subtleties here as some might say the difference here is starting to split hairs. But I will say the LT image edges out the EVA1 to my eye.

That said, I don't think image quality is the defining factor between the two so much as feature set. Size/weight advantage on the EVA1 (not talking just the body weight, battery/media/accessories total kit weight); on LT, far more robust codecs and options especially at higher frame rates. Native PL mount.

In my mind it's sort of a self evident decision: I could afford either but as a solo op, EVA1 was the clear winner. If I was working on a larger set or production, the LT would be the clear winner. I guess 5.7K raw output could be a swaying factor... but I'm guessing (from the sounds of your context) that the clientele requiring 5.7K RAW output would also have the budget (and perhaps associated need) for 6k/8k output with high FPS? I'm excited for 5.7K RAW for me as a small op - amazing feature - but the positioning of the EVA1 as an A-Camera for solo ops and a B-camera for larger productions sounds right on point...
 
RayZan said:
I own the LT and would tell you that the iso 5000 is a bit misguiding. The sensor needs a lot of light or you'll get too much noise. I personally expose as if the iso were 1600 (but still keep the setting at 5000). I suspect Panasonic recognized that and decided to lower the higher iso setting for the EVA1 to 2500 (I think they should have done the same for the LT). Meaning, the 5000 for the LT and 2500 for EVA1 could very well be identical. Someone needs to do some tests to compare them. So it would be prudent not to assume that the LT is automatically better because Panasonic has rated its higher iso at 5000. That's my advice.
Click to expand...

This is technically incorrect. You may wish to rerate the VariCam LT in order to get imagery that you prefer, but it is indeed a 5000ISO camera when set to 5000ISO. As for the difference of the high Native ISO of the EVA1 and the VariCam LT, this is due to the two cameras using different sensors. The EVA1 sensor is 5.7K compared to the VariCam LT sensor that is 4K -- that's 17.2 million photosites v 8.8 million photosites in the same Super-35 footprint. Therefore the photosites are much smaller on the EVA1 and thus less sensitive to light. Nothing nefarious, just simple physics.
 
I've shot both. EVA1 is fantastic! It is not a Varicam. Nothing is perfect for all things, however to me the Varicam sensor represents the way I want an image to be captured.
 
From an LA perspective, Varicam LT has been a tough sale for those clients who care which camera you are using/charging them for. It just has not yet gained critical mass in the LA market. That said, many clients don't care which camera you are using or leave it to the DP and director and the images from the LT look great. From an operator standpoint, the LT is a compact but heavy little beast, especially when outfitted with a bigger brick battery, the stock EVF, baseplate, rods and a good size lens. It's not a lightweight, but is easy to keep steady and smooth because of the weight.

EVA 1 I have yet to use on a job, have just played with it a few times and it's tiny and featherweight compared to the LT. Same deal, for my clients, most prefer Canon but I am in the medium end of the market with occasional rentals of REDs and Arris for a few higher end shoots per year. Just picked up a new corporate client and they own six C300s, are still shooting 1080 and have a C300 MKII on order. They are a huge client and shoot a LOT of programming so I am happy to shot with their C300s or occasionally throw my C200 into the mix, shooting RAW or .MP4. Most of their content is web delivery, internal audience so C300 is a perfect. I have never been asked and rarely see Sony or BMD cameras at anything in LA, it's pretty much Canon, RED, Arri and an occasional F55 from a few of the production services companies who own them here. I am pretty much camera agnostic, of course, I like to rent out my C200 but I am glad to shoot with anything the client wants. I have been directing and producing as much as I have been DPing lately so I have been hiring DPs, which is fun. I know so many talented DPs who are better than I am so I like hiring them and concentrating more on the talent and script.
 
RayZan said:
I own the LT and would tell you that the iso 5000 is a bit misguiding. The sensor needs a lot of light or you'll get too much noise. I personally expose as if the iso were 1600 (but still keep the setting at 5000). I suspect Panasonic recognized that and decided to lower the higher iso setting for the EVA1 to 2500 (I think they should have done the same for the LT). Meaning, the 5000 for the LT and 2500 for EVA1 could very well be identical. Someone needs to do some tests to compare them. So it would be prudent not to assume that the LT is automatically better because Panasonic has rated its higher iso at 5000. That's my advice.
Click to expand...

Thats never been my experience. The LT at 5000 base and set to 2500 is noiseless. I love the noise at 5000 ymmv. Not sure what the massive aversion to some noise is. Go shoot film and come back to me. The noise pattern is more important.
 
Noel Evans said:
Thats never been my experience. The LT at 5000 base and set to 2500 is noiseless. I love the noise at 5000 ymmv. Not sure what the massive aversion to some noise is. Go shoot film and come back to me. The noise pattern is more important.
Click to expand...

Because the noise I get at iso 5000 is nothing like film grain. It's more patchy and objectionable. Instead, I try to get the image as clean as possible and add film grain latter in post. I am just trying to make the point that iso 5000 in the LT is not as "clean" as advertised and many users using the camera for the first time are shocked by that.
 
I agree with Noel - I think the noise on the LT feels more like film grain than any other digital camera I've used. 2500 dialed down from 5000 is very clean - I was switching between 1000 ISO (800 Base) and 2500 ISO (5000 Base) on a studio shoot last week when I needed to shoot 60fps. Not a single producer on monitor noticed the difference. On another shoot for the same project we wanted the feel of a 1980's dish soap commercial so I shot the whole thing at 3200 ISO (5000 Base) with ND 1.2 for the grain structure. I was really happy with the texture.

I also own the EVA1 and found that the 2 cameras match very well at 800 ISO (I posted another thread about this) but right now low light is where the LT leaves the EVA in the dust. 2500 ISO on the EVA has some CA and more noise. I'm sure when the new Intra codec comes out next year it will be a big improvement - but for now the LT is a class of its own for low light.
 
Last edited:
Varicam has been Panasonic's flagship camera line for well over a decade.. i highly doubt they'd release something away from the varicam line that is technically superior to their flagship line.. common sense when it comes to marketing. I'm sure the EVA1 is a fantastic camera and I myself am very interested in getting my hands on one to shoot with, but, it will never be a varicam.
 
EVA-1 is an impressive camera definitely best in it's weight class IMHO but a varicam it isn't. Great b-camera for the Varicam YES. Particularly coupled with an external recorder (until the 400Mbps all I codec is available). I just directed an action short, shot with an EVA-1 and I'm impressed. From a Varicam owners perspective, the weight and price are a huge plus. I put EVA-1 in places and situations I'd never think about putting my varicam LT.
it so far a 100% color match with my varicam. I'm using the same V log tools in post that I use for my VLT (from the the panasonic Varicam Vlog to 709 LUT in resolve, to the varicam LT filmconvert profile).
after having to fly the Varicam LT on a Gimbal for a show, I really appreciate the weight of this camera
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top