HVX-200 Vs. Varicam- What do you think?

[Accountclosedduetopolicyviolations]

Whatever you are smoking,stick to it…it seems to work.
Both “gurus” missed my point altogether.
jiri vrozina

[Graeme Nattress]

Communication is a two way thing……

Graeme

– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP

[Vincent Rice]

Its a silly question, a ‘category error’. The two cameras are not in competition.

Take the same project, same talented and experienced crew, and the same complex commercial shoot. Which camera would produce the better-looking, quicker, CHEAPER, result. There’s no contest.
Now, what about that once-in-a-lifetime solo cruise to the arctic to watch the whales and icebergs? Again no contest.

[Pierre]

(Vincent Rice)
” Its a silly question, a ‘category error’. The two cameras are not in competition.”

That’s an interesting point of view Vincent. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Michael

[Donatello]

“When taking into consideration the test above is the audience going to see a difference worth my $55K?”

in general your “test ” really don’t matter … if you can afford 65K plus $$ for lens ( total= 100K +) you can see the difference day-night .. if you can only afford a 6K camera then you’ll ask if the audience is going to see the 55K difference (it’s much more $$ then that)

take a look at TV to see what they are shooting on ? if there was no difference between a hand size dv camera and what ever they are shooting on they would consider the less cost version… the shows/projects that do use hand size dv camera i think you’ll find 90% are because of $$$$$ and the other 10% becuase it fits the look/show/project. you don’t see all the shows/projects switching to $4K HDV camera’s …

[Ryan]

I agree with the one person who said that they are not even comparable.

There is a reason that those cameras cost that much more. Anyone who gets proper financing will continue to use the high-end stuff for the simple reason that it is high-end stuff.

I don’t think the HVX is going to be a bad camera, but look at the market they are targeting. There is a reason they target certain markets with certain products. It is meant for independant and corporate.

Then again your budget dictates what you use. If your projects are small then you use cheaper equipment.

I think to ask if they are comparable when you are in a position to purchase is like asking what the differences between a dodge SX and an Aston Martin Vanquish are when you are about to buy a car.

Just my opinion

Ryan

[Pierre]

(Dontello) “in general your “test ” really don’t matter … if you can afford 65K plus $$ for lens ( total= 100K +) you can see the difference day-night .. if you can only afford a 6K camera then you’ll ask if the audience is going to see the 55K difference (it’s much more $$ then that) ”

The test matters if you have a project you really care about and there is only so much money to go around. I had similar thoughts between the Varicam and DVX-100… ultimately I went with the Varicam on the project because there really was a HUGE difference between those two cams. The Varicam footage was beautiful, it was obviously the right decision.

Now that the HVX-200 is on it’s way (for some of my projects) the choice will be easier (because the quality gap has just been closed that much more). Although, we’ll all just have to wait and SEE.

Thanks for the reply-

[Pierre]

Ryan,

(You wrote) “There is a reason that those cameras cost that much more. Anyone who gets proper financing will continue to use the high-end stuff for the simple reason that it is high-end stuff.”

Wow! The camera companies certainly will love you. It sounds like you’ll pay simply because it’s “high end”. Can you always SEE high end? If so, please explain or tell me where I can see it for myself. What is “High End”? Do you mean expensive?
This logic reminds me of the story of a very famous photographer who when asked why there was a semi-truck full of incredibly expensive equipment parked in front of the studio (but none of it was being used)

[Toke]

[Ryan] “There is a reason that those cameras cost that much more.”

And that reason is because of history and tradition.
Broadcast quality cameras have been a niche product section for a long time and that’s what these 2/3″ cameras are based on; older broadcast cameras.
Low volumes mean high cost per unit.

I can’t see why there would be some kind of law of nature and that couldn’t change.
IT-sectors development is also pushing camera’s ahead.

Nobody seems to wonder why you can do post production today with $5k set, which would have cost couple of years ago $50k and decade ago $500k.
Why this advancement wouldn’t touch the acquisition side of industry?

Camera manufacturers just have to eat their own markets, because sooner or later somebody will do that.
And I think hvx-200 is the first step to this direction.

Targetting modern high quality videocameras to mass market will eventually explode the markets and after that you can have same quality with fraction of a price used to be. It’s all about volume.

And after all, what’s so high end in 720p 8-bit color quite compressed video?

Next step forward would be cheap 1/2″ 1-chipper with changeable lens.
After that cheap 2/3″ and so on…
And more color depth for me, please!

[Tony]

Michael,

Proper financing would be a budget where you do not have to beg, borrow, and steal the resources, crew and equipment necessary for a professional shoot.

It is also a shoot in where the crew will actually be feed a meal which does not consist of crackers and soup.

Regarding your question will the audience see the perceived quality difference on screen. Well the answer is NO!!! assuming they are color blind, deaf, stupid, retarded and cannot read or write. If they can tell the difference is there actually a ticket dollar value to attach to the difference? Would this mean that low end movies shot on the 200 should only charge $1.50 and a Varicam movie should charge $9.00 for tickets so the audience would know in advance they will be seeing a significant quality difference which merits the increase in ticket prices?

Two days ago I viewed a 2K projection test of the Dalsa Origin camera. Could I tell a difference in the ability for the Origin to capture a huge amount of dynamic range (advertised as 13 stops), incredible resolution and color space? No!!! I could see absolutely nothing in fact because I was so distracted by the sexy female model and the beautiful scenics. So much so that I had to go up to the front of the screen and reach out with my hand because the images were so “life-like” I felt I could reach in and touch the scenes.

Would I have reacted the same had the images been shot on a Varicam or 200. Most likely yes because that sexy model would have been in the scenes again.

Ok no honestly of course I am joking about not being able to see a image quality difference. It was in fact some of the most impressive digital cinematography images I have seen which demonstrates significant improvements in dynamic range, colorimetry and spacial resolution. Would a pay $9.00 to see productions shot on this camera? Yes.

This overall tone of this thread is starting to sound more like a discussion about “the have’s and the have not’s”. For those who cannot or will not accept there is or may be a quality difference between a 2/3″ CCD camera versus a 1/2 or 1/3″ CCD then it will never matter what format or camera you shoot your project with. For those who can then it does matter given they can afford or will budget properly to acheive the quality and content results they desire to complete.

My best recommendation for those who are in the “have not” category of never having been exposed or worked on a “high end/big budget” digital cinematography shoot is to make it a priority to get on the set and watch and learn how the equipment and crew interact with each other to create the imagery. For those who are in the “have” category then I recommend doing the opposite and visit a “low to no budget” set and see how the crew and equipment interact to create their images. Prehaps between the two some newly found knowledge and techniques can be cross applied to future jobs. I personally have done both and can appreciate how both applications maximize the tools sets, crew experience and equipment made available for the project.

Just one final word of warning when visiting the “low to no budget” shoot bring your own lunch because there are only so many crackers and fritos to go around for the crew.

Tony Salgado