-
Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
-
My Matte box fits with a rubber gasget that comes in many sizes, and even a one you can cut out your own shape, so as long as the mix keeps out of the way, I think we’ll be ok.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
What makes a lens “HD” anyway? Ive never actually known what the difference was. The guys that chopped off the front of their FX1 used an SD lens:
https://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm
-
I fully understand, acknowledge and want the benefits of better glass, but what are Panasonic to do?
1) fixed lens, but as that keeps costs down, good glass for the price
2) removable lens, “starter lens” included that doesn’t do justice to the camera (because it costs a lot more to make a removable lens than a fixed one)
3) removable lens, no “starter lens” – good glass that costs about $20k from a.n.other lens company
Who is going to buy the JVC camera and stick a $20k lens on it? That’s just silly! At that point they’d not want the compression compromises of HDV and put their decent HD lens on a real HD camera. There’s got to be balance between the lens, the video format and the electronics.
Panasonic are not going to radically alter the specs of the HVX200, so no amount of polls are going to change that. What I think you should be asking is for the features of HVX200 on a shoulder mount camera that has a removable lens. Then I’d totally agree with you, but I could never afford it! The HVX200 is about getting the best quality for the price, and that price is already too high for some people.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
It’s all to do with MTF – that’s how much contrast the lens passes through as detail increases. As HD requires more definition, it needs a higher MTF or you’ll just get SD quality images at a higher resolution with no increase in definition. All things being equal, the better the MTF, the better the image. You also need to take more care over chromatic aberations as they are more easily noticed at the higher resolution of HD. Indeed, you need better lenses for HD than you do for 35mm film! That’s because the HD CCD is much smaller than the 35mm film frame, and hence the lens has to pass through finer detail. And that’s why an HD lens is not cheap.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Here are my answers your questions:
=========================
1. Do you want removable lenses on this camera?Yes.
2. Would you pay more?
Yes.
3. How much more would you be willing to pay?
Up to $1,000 USD added to the cam’s list price (although I don’t believe it needs to cost that much.)
=======================Given that Fujinon & Canon put bayonet mount hardware on even their _least_ expensive lenses, I don’t suppose it adds more than about $100 – $300 to the list price of a lens to put a bayonet mount on it. For example, Fujinon’s approx. $2,000 USD list price lens #S17x6.6 includes bayonet mount hardware; how much of that price can the bayonet hardware possibly account for?
Also, Canon has bayonet lens mounting hardware on their XL2 (and previous XL1 & XL1s) cam, and JVC has it on the new HD100. These cam bodies sell for less than $6,500 — and in the case of the XL1 & XL1s, considerably less than that. A complete guess on my part is that the lens mount hardware on these camera bodies accounts for about $200 – $500 worth of their list price.
Lenses and cameras which require electrical connections between the lens and the cam body (to support features such as autofocus, exposure, zoom motor & electronics power, and so forth) might cost a bit more, but these electrical connections (and control circuitry) aren’t likely to cost much.
So my guess — and it’s a complete guess — is that “removable lens” as a feature on a modern video camcorder shouldn’t add any more than about $1,000 to the list price of a cam & lens system, and it might sell for considerably less and still be profitable.
Now, as to _why_ I want “removable lens” as a standard feature on all high-end prosumer camcorders: So users can select the most appropriate lens given their client’s or project’s needs and budget — even if that means using only one most appropriate lens. “Removable lens” doesn’t always mean changing the lens every 5 minutes; it can also mean using one lens — the one which is right for most of your shooting situations, most of the time. But what works as a general purpose lens for one shooter often isn’t appropriate for someone else. That’s why built-in lenses on high-end prosumer cams suck.
It makes sense that cam makers offer “low-end”, less expensive prosumer models (such as the VX2100, FX1, and so forth) which don’t offer a removable lens feature. But the “slightly bigger brother” models, such as the Z1, should feature a removable lens.
This situation is really no different than whether or not high-end prosumer camcorders should feature XLR audio connectors. Just like a removable lens, an XLR external mic or audio connector allows using whichever external audio equipment is most appropriate for a client’s or project’s needs and budget.
Canon & JVC are currently the only companies who offer a “removable lens” feature on their high-end 1/3″ camcorders, and I’m glad they do, and I hope they continue to do so on their future 1/3″ and larger models. I also hope Sony does the same regarding their future high-end 1/3″ models.
Given the huge flexibility a removable lens offers, it makes sense to me that high-end prosumer camcorders should feature “removable lens”.
All the best,
– Peter
Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you’re from, and so forth. It’s the friendly thing to do. Thanks!
-
Say the HVX200 came with no lens and you had to supply your own – just hypothetically speaking – which lens do you put on it and why, and how much does that lens cost?
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Hi Graeme!
Why would pay 80,000 for a loaded Varicam where possibly anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 you could have a modified HVX200 with a lens mount.
An approximate 80,000 dollar savings is big, very big.
The fixed lens technology at this level can never beat even the basic of standard definition professionally engineered lenses. Just can’t…..
If they built a fixed lens design with a stabilizer, auto-focus in a short and light weight chamber without compromise to the lenses performance, giving us professional response, it would nearly double or triple the price of the camera.
It’s much much cheaper to choose the path of machining a B4 or 1/3 mount on a camera.
I have machined mounts out of blocks aluminum and other metals just as the Italians did. Not hard to too at all, basic machining 101.
Graeme! – Panasonic Already has the tooling/molds to build 1/3 and B4 mounts. They have for many years. They build them on all their other cameras now and have. So they don’t have to invent or have to travel a learning curve to do so one bit.
It’s in Panasonic’s resources ” NOW “…………
It’s always cheaper for a company to use what they have in there resources, then it is ever to reinvent, redesign or higher a third party to do it. They also would not have to hire Leica to design it. There is a bundle saved.
They had “NO” HVX200 lens in there resources. It’s all new to a certain dgree…..
It’s a new system. A good percentage of the DVX series lens can’t fully be carried over since the lens diameter is much larger. The technologies had to be improved on. The specs of the camera are much higher
What Panasonic does have in there resources is plenty B4 and 1/3 mounts already built.
Of-course this route means that Panasonic does not need to bank roll a lens to be designed and built, because Fujinon and Canon have already the offerings.
Panasonic already has a flowing channel between them. Just as Fujinon is a offering to the 6K HD100u.
Plus you can sell a camera as head only and leave it up to the buyer to supply the glass of his desire.
Therefore; Always cheaper to use your resources at hand then design from scratch a whole new system.
I must thank you Graeme, you made think of few new points that I should have written in the article. I will update the article with these new points. Thanks
I suggest you follow the ” Italian guys” link that show’s what two small guys ( Panasonic are ” BIG ” guys ) can do with a SD older Fujinon lens against the the Zeiss.
LINKS: The Italian guys———
https://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/
https://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htmGraeme I will take a Varicam, if you buy one for me! Please……Just one Vari! I’ll even take it without the lens. Otherwise that kind of money difference goes to my family that I take care of. 🙂
Michael Pappas
-
Interesting, I like the lens that they are offering with it. Its made by, or at least quality approved by a great lens maker and it is the zoom range I like, wide to med telephoto. This allows for better quality because it is not living on the edge of a quality hit due to the overly ambitions zoom range. Even if I was offered the option, a good idea thought it is, of having to choose between no lens and the one they offer now, I would choose the lens that is offered making the assumption that this lens is custom fitted in a way most off the shelf lenses are not, to this specific camera specification. The lens was designed with this camera in mind the camera was designed with this lens in mind, sort of like a hand in glove thing, know what I mean?
Strange but true.
Chris
-
Because the for the quality of the lens you’d have to put on the front to do justice to the electronics at the back end will cost plenty more than the camera itself!
“The fixed lens technology at this level can never beat even the basic of standard definition professionally engineered lenses. Just can’t…..”
Why?? Please elaborate. Whether the lens is fixed or removable doesn’t effect the quality of the image, only the ease of use of the lens to achieve the results you want. I’ve owned cameras with real broadcast lenses and they’re just lovely to use, but I’ll struggle to afford the HVX200 as it is, never mind what a decent broadcast HD lens costs, and there’s very little point putting a cheapo SD broadcast lens on an HD camera – you may as well have shot SD in the first place.
I truely beleive that for the money, Panasonic can put a better fixed lens on that camera than I could afford in a removable lens, which means that I get a better picture for my dollar by going with a fixed lens until I can afford to go into silly prices for both camera and lens.
That’s why I was asking what lens people would put on the HVX200 if hypothetically Panasonic made it removable.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
<<
>> It’s called RENTAL for the jobs that require more expensive glass………………
<<2) removable lens, "starter lens" included that doesn't do justice to the camera (because it costs a lot more to make a removable lens than a fixed one) >>>
Yeah! But that’s why Panasonic doesn’t make removable lens anyway. They package or sell head only.
In the end it’s cheaper. To make a lens requires for you to higher a 3rd party to design the optics and a long time of testing to marriage it to your system ( HVX200 ) this 1 or 2 years of R&D will cost more then going with mounts you already have in your resources that you make probably in China for a lot less.
Again Panasonic does not make lenses for these cameras. They do however machine 100 dollar b4 or 1/3 mounts, and they have had that science in there company for many years.
No r&d needed. No 3rd party to design it!
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up