Are companies heading in the right direction?

K

KrocanX

Well-known member
Hey,

recent announcements made me think of what manufacturers will be releasing in next years and if it is actually what I want or need. We all know that video tech did huge improvement past couple of years. Not so long ago I was using tapes and nowadays I shoot 4K Raw every day. Crazy. But I am happy with current tech? Of course not. I would like to see many improvements such as better ergonomics and overall usability. Unfortunately, it looks like companies rather add more resolution or cripple cameras or they are not able to deliver "all" features because of hardware limitation.

Do you believe your dream tech will be announced in future? Maybe you are lucky and your favorite company already selling what you consider as dream tech..?
 
Yeah, I agree. Like you said, most people by now have found a camera that is good enough. Many of them are thankful for the amazing improvement in picture quality over the past few decades.

For me there actually are zero cameras that are good enough, because of my unusually high valuation of global shutter. But if you just added global shutter to any of several cameras, then I would have a camera that is good enough. For example, a GH5 with global shutter for me would be good enough, and I would shut up and be happy.

I agree with what you said, there are always refinements that can still be made. Don't give up on the little things like: body shape and size, battery life, boot time, instrumentation, menu simplification, codec improvements, affordability, durability, and all sorts of things that are "little" but hey, you have to deal with them every day, so they can be a little annoying.

No matter how good you have it, if you can see something else you want, and it's just out of reach, it's hard to forget it. Your feeling goes from light pining to indignation if you think there is no good reason you don't have it, like artificial crippling or miscommunication between user and manufacturer.

My dream camera is actually in several ways less than cameras today, because I'm a minimalist. I would relish a really simple DSLR-type camera that is all-metal and has just a few buttons, the kind that Leica would make or something like that. The Digital Bolex wasn't too far off, just a bit too big and pricey.
 
You'll never see all of the best technology coming from Japan in one camera. You will get one that's very close for most people though.

The other 4 countries focus purely on image quality (for the most part). Either through intellectual property and/or asking you to pay a lot of money for certain specifications in their hardware.

The more technically knowledgeable we become, the more difficult it is to compromise.

[In 20 years, people might think we were crazy for holding an object to capture images when they can do it from the chips implanted in their foreheads or their contact lenses.]

As far as ergonomics, cameras are built in 4 ways; for the shoulder, for the hands, like a camcorder, and like a box. If better ergonomics for you exist on the shoulder, you will most likely never see a camera like that built with the technology you want. So you'll have to make the other 3 work - as we do - with additional equipment as there is no other way to build a camera (D16 doesn't count).

What's overall usability? If it's little things like more buttons and programming functionality, I think everyone does their best based on how the cameras are designed. There's only so much they can offer and cameras today have pretty great overall usability.

___

So are [camera] companies heading in the right direction? It depends on who you ask.

Today, cameras are complicated devices.

Besides any internal relationships or hardware roadblocks or market desires, you also have to consider human limitations. Maybe some people making the cameras we like cannot offer us everything that we're imagining.

For years, my personal dream tech was Canon's or Sony's AF in RED or Blackmagic cameras, and I just can never envision that happening.
 
I think many of us could agree that cameras are really good now yet still frustrating.

The cameras I have today produce footage I couldn't dream of when I started in video back in the 90s.
However every camera I have is frustrating to use. Not only do I have to have a lot of cameras to do a wide variety of work but they all have shortcomings.
Some can do high res, or super slow motion, or good autofocus, or good color, or easy to operate, etc...
But any combination of bad ergonomics, poor LCDS, lack of ND or insufficient built-in ND, lacking color, heavy file size, insufficient Codec, lacking audio, lousy zoom, slow this or that, not enough holes, etc and other misc issues plague them all.

Couple examples:
My NEX EA50 would be a fantastic run and gun (semi) shoulder mount camera with lots of real estate to attach things and the ability to use appropriate lenses BUT Sony intentionally left out built in ND so as not to compete with the FS700 at the time. The hassle of this neutralizes the other advantages that otherwise made it fast and easy to use.

My AG UX180 would be a great event camera but the extremely poor LCD not only has lag but is low res and highly reflective so it's hard to use. Attaching an external monitor makes it less friendly to run and gun. Plus focus peaking ONLY works in manual focus mode.

I would have gladly paid a few hundred more for either of those cameras so as not to have to deal with that.
 
There'll always be some crippling to protect the higher priced models from the same manufacturer. Unfortunately, there's some crippling - what, no CRL for 1D XMKIII?! - that is done for other reasons.

The ergonomics are a matter of preference and are the easiest issues to address. The global shutter isn't as important when you can get higher frame rates, though most manufacturers skip the intermediate resolutions like 2.5K that could deliver higher frame rates than 6K/4K.

Overall, the image quality and the workflow are getting to the point of "beyond retina" for very little money ... but enough about the smartphones. In terms of the bang for the buck in hybrid photo-video, 1D X MKIII 6K Raw with "some" auto focus, Nikon Z6 with Ninja 4K ProRes Raw are the latest milestones. It'll be interesting to see what GH-6 delivers in terms of specs.

As to the future of the photo-video manufacturers, it's bleak.
 
Having studied engineering design I think most cams are absolutely awful.

In the 90s I was a stills photographer and cams like the nikon D3 were just an extension of the body doubtless the nikon D6 and 1dxiii are beyond awesome for stills

Video cameras less so.

I imagine 2/3 cameras can give that extension of the body feeling but in my 'cinematic' world they are useless.

Design 'know what you want it to do then do it' is a critical thought process that I dont see occuring in video cameras at all. Mybe arri but thier specs are a mile off what I want.

What do I want?
Sharp (in focus)
Gradable (12bit)
No external wires, or add ons (remote monitor sender, remote audio receivers)
Low mass
Robust
Zoom 20-150
Ability to compose (in the sun)
Ability to correctly axpose (ND)
Ready to use out of the bag
Ability to shoot sport (HFR)
Stable
Hand luggage

Clearly that is quite a list and would probably need modules as some indy 'facs have had a go at and red (dont follwow them) may have had a crck at.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Firehawk. The images are great but I am often frustrated with the camera industry. We all have different needs but by now, they should have an idea what they are. The hybrid space is the most annoying for me but Panasonic has been the closest to getting it right. The S1 and the S1H are probably as good as we are going to get for being a true hybrid that excels in both stills and video.

This industry is challenged with value vs cost all of the time. I see them feeling the need to offer lower and lower price points which is a squeeze. Back in the day, what they charged the customers kind of had no limit. That awesome Panasonic S1 costs less than every FF "pro" body before it in time. So I can't get too mad at the makers. It is tough. I am actually one who wants them to charge more to get more pro features!

Sadly, there is a correlation between what the cameras cost and what we can charge. If one can get awesome images on the cheap, then why pay awesome wages to whom you hire etc... It is all draining away imho.
 
Bassman2003 yes I agree.
Like mentioned if we are happy to pay more for a better / more complete / less lacking / less frustrating camera....that would raise the price of cameras, give us closer to what we want, and also possibly help with our industry that has gone into the toilet with cheap rates since cheap cameras helped bring every kid into it as competition driving things down.

But then again maybe not as people have gotten used to cheap rates and even doing it themselves on their phone.
 
firehawk said:
we are happy to pay more [...] possibly help with our industry
Click to expand...

I'm with y'all, I would pay a premium if necessary for a camera made in good faith.

I'm unsure how much it would help the companies, though. A market is like the weather system, a set of complex interdependencies. If you raise the price, then you might lower the volume, and your total profit stays the same or even goes down. I would guess they try for the sweet spot. Then again, they may well be misjudging it and would make more money if they stopped with the silly crippling and just charged a little more.

I think wish lists like morgan_moore's are helpful. Instead of being ultra-specific on how to solve your problem, just tell them your problem:

morgan_moore said:
What do I want?
Sharp (in focus)
Gradable (12bit)
No external wires, or add ons (remote monitor sender, remote audio receivers)
Low mass
Robust
Zoom 20-150
Ability to compose (in the sun)
Ability to correctly axpose (ND)
Ready to use out of the bag
Ability to shoot sport (HFR)
Stable
Hand luggage
Click to expand...

(That is, if they're listening to us. Hello? Panasonic, Sony, Canon? Are any of your spies here?)
 
S1H finally shut me up. It has almost everything short of AF (which I’m fine without currently), global shutter (I don’t do a lot of fast action), and internal NDs (Step ups with xume with VNDs works well for me). For the next few years if I upgrade it would only be to add even more usability in an area above, out of convenience - not to solve an inherent frustration.

I’d be happy to sit out a few years of upgrades now, I agree, don’t care at all about the focus on pushing sensor size and resolution higher and higher.
 
I think the next genuine breakthrough is going to be more mind bending. Camera bodies with dual sensors and quadruple lens mounts for example. Each sensor with two lens mounts, and a high end CPU and software interface.

Picture a GH8 where the 8 is an infinity logo. You can record the same image through 4 different prime lenses at the same time via the 2 sensors / 4 lenses; or - you can split the sensor circuitry to have sensor A record at 24fps and sensor B record at 60fps, each on a wide and each on a 50mm. And now you have 4 clips of the same scene. You could also use computational tricks to pull out data for depth perception for keying without a green screen, de focusing backgrounds in post with precision, enhancing low light, and so forth.

You could expose the same scene differently for two alternative takes and styles; shoot with two different shutter speeds for options in post. Shoot one version shallow and the other deep. Live event and docu as a single operator would never be the same.
 
I recently tried the S1 at a camera store and was shocked how large it was. Coming from the Canon 5D series and holding 1 series before, I did not expect the camera to be that big. It had the Panny 24-70 f2.8 and I decided I would not want to do a full day photo shoot with this thing. Or take it on vacation as people would probably start pointing! The specs are great but I have decided to pass due to the size. Maybe I will give it another shot...

But I am like you, I am ready to get off of the equipment merry go round. Unless you are working in the high end space, I do not think it matters anymore.
 
filmguy123 said:
I think the next genuine breakthrough is going to be more mind bending. Camera bodies with dual sensors and quadruple lens mounts for example. Each sensor with two lens mounts, and a high end CPU and software interface...
Click to expand...
This is already here in the form of smartphones and the photo-video industry ain't going to step onto that landmine.

The Barcelona World Mobile Congress is in February and the new cams to be revealed there should have zooms, in-body upscaling, multiple cams/sensors and a whole lot of videocentric apps to go along with them.
 
Before we get to the science fiction stuff, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done with high resolution frame rates from S35 and of course FF sensors without paying a premium for the old technology (that's new to cameras).

There's still only a handful or two of 4K/60p S35 systems out there.
 
Coming from the world of shooting film, then Betacams alongside film, then a journey through almost every pro video format, we are all spoiled by the tools we have today.
The capabilities and quality of today's cameras are mind blowing to me, I have to pinch myself when I shoot RAW 4K with my C200, light it well then have it graded by a pro.

Sure, today's cameras all have ergonomic and operational challenges, I despise the Frankenrigs I have to use with both of my cameras but overall, I have few serious complaints
about today's cameras other than resolution wars and sensor size wars are stupid and counterproductive and camera audio still has a long way to go but overall,
I love the tools we have today in production. We're in the golden age of lenses, LED lighting tools that are easier and more flexible/interesting to use, editing software is so much
better overall than it used to be 15-20 years ago.

I'm at the point where I just want to use the tools I have to become a better filmmaker and storyteller. I don't need to buy anything, I just need to keep improving my skills. Honestly,
there is sea change coming in our business and with the tools. It's sad to think it a few years, some of the brands I've used most of my entire life like Canon and Nikon may not even exist
and that things are going computational mobile phone video for eventually almost all of the tools we use other than perhaps larger, crewed production cameras. That seems to be what the
sales numbers and market research are showing us though.
 
puredrifting said:
we are all spoiled by the tools we have today... I'm at the point where I just want to use the tools I have to become a better filmmaker and storyteller. I don't need to buy anything, I just need to keep improving my skills.
Click to expand...

100%. We have everything we need... then some. It's been a crazy time the last 10+ years in camera tech and I feel like where things are plateauing now are the sweet spot.

puredrifting said:
Honestly, there is sea change coming in our business and with the tools. It's sad to think it a few years, some of the brands I've used most of my entire life like Canon and Nikon may not even exist
and that things are going computational mobile phone video for eventually almost all of the tools we use....
Click to expand...

Agreed... I wish we could freeze time here. Plateauing doesn't sell, and as exciting as some things are from a geeky perspective I'm not looking forward to the constant reinventing of the wheel that some of this will lead to. If only because constantly focusing on gear pulls one away from craft itself. I can't think of much better than never *having* to buy another piece of gear again. I feel like I have a room full of everything I really need, but will inevitably need to replace items over the years due to competition to stay relevant technically.

And I'm not even shooting RAW. 10-bit vlog, 32-bit float sound recording, great clean lowlight, high brightness low power LED lights... what I am able to own and thus produce as a OMB today was completely unthinkable and unattainable in 2007. From a non business point of view, focusing on the dream to create many of us have always had, this is about as good as it gets.
 
Just for reference off the PC Mag --

A dozen-plus makers are churning out SSDs for the U.S. market, among them storage heavyweights Samsung, Micron, Intel, Toshiba, and Western Digital. And since the start of the '10s, SSDs have morphed from exorbitantly priced luxury items into commodities whose quality is almost uniformly high. An example? A 32GB SSD we tested in 2008 sold then for a whopping $800, which is $500 to $600 more than a modern one that packs 60 times the data. Plus, even today's humblest new SSDs are about five times faster than that '08 model.
Click to expand...

https://www.pcmag.com/roundup/361311/the-best-cheap-ssds
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top