Canon R5 Announced with 8k

Video cameras had figure things out quite a while ago. And even though old cameras were big beasts, they still had a very small ergonomic section for core exposure controls.

I don't see the need to reinvent the wheel, just because cameras got smaller. Keep what works. And put it in the body that people are buying.

49671586192_5173a6ae68_n.jpg


49680423952_56ff86cd2d_n.jpg


49680339322_768c261734_n.jpg


I am just wondering why every new camera is some attempt at new control layouts, when really good designs have been around for decades.
 
I'm starting to think you're just really bored, lol.

So many mirrorless cameras have perfect locations for their buttons in various places where the right hand/fingers can change aperture, shutter, WB - and other functions you program buttons to have - all simultaneously, in seconds.

The dials are beautiful and a work of art.

These cameras are used by people holding them with two hands (sometimes up to their face), and using your thumb and index fingers to make changes is beyond perfect.

HDMI port relocation, button relocation...this is not what they need.

I think I see an ND filter knob and XLR input on your doodles...focus on that, that's good, lol.
 
NorBro said:
I'm starting to think you're just bored, lol.
Click to expand...
I think you don't realize I do this for a living, and I am passionate about it. I have based my life around this craft. I am not bored, this is very serious to me.

Sure, I have more time to talk about it with you. But that is a good thing. You are keeping the conversation alive, meaning more people will read and think about it. A few more good ideas may even get posted. I am only trying to created HDMI port awareness. We are going into the 2nd decade of the "DSLR revolution", Komodo is a badass camera that is roughly the same bulk as a pro mirrorless camera, BM pockets are DSLR's repackaged nearly, S1H shows that Panasonic is taking the mirrorless sector seriously. But going into the second decade, if we don't have a serious discussion about some things, we're not really passionate about shooting, but just passionate about buying cameras.

Zcams and Komodos are cool, but in a gimbal world, mirrorless is king. The only problem, is that they are designed for stills.

We need mirrorless cameras that are designed for video first.
 
What we need is an engineer from one of the big three to tell us what is possible and what is not to rule stuff out.

Because we are both playing make believe right now...drawing wings on cars.

Need someone with real knowledge to enlighten us with particular feedback and say things like:

"No, a button will never go there because the way the body is alloyed wouldn't allow space for a control panel in that location. So if you'd like us to redesign the body for you, that will be 2.7 million USD."

Or..

"No, HDMI ports cannot be placed anywhere else in these particular bodies because our supplier in _______ design them to function on a horizontal board that also works with the audio transmission. If you'd like HDMI in another sector, we have to increase the body by 3 inches and it will cost..."

(Just making stuff up, but need real answers.)
 
You're making it really complicated and are not seeing it...and no one is providing feedback because they think we're crazy.
 
NorBro said:
You're making it really complicated and are not seeing it...and no one is providing feedback because they think we're crazy.
Click to expand...

Who is saying it isn't difficult? But that is a camera manufacturers job. They've done some amazing things over the years. As well as some silly ones. I'm not even asking them to do anything new though. Just to reuse old good ideas, to meet the new needs.

look, I get that video people love them a camcorder, but they also need to use gimbals, or go shoulder mount, or float with two hands, or eye to EVF. There isn't currently a camera that works in all those situations as well as a redesigned mirrorless style body would.

If you're worried about the engineers and the marketing teams of camera manufacturers, and not thinking about video shooters, then you are the one over complicating it. Because they are totally capable of making something like I am describing. And we are totally capable of paying for it. But I don't see the need to go around buying stills cameras hoping the next one will have a new log profile. It is a stills camera.
 
Last edited:
James I think you’re the only one here complaining about HDMI port positioning on a mirror less stills cameras that shoot video.

I think we’re all aware of the issues, but the priority for most of the manufactures isn’t the users that inhabit this forum. We’re a tiny minority.

Cine users even less so.

Your solutions are terrible for the majority of their market.

Your opinion that the HDMI port position is just that. Your single opinion. I don’t see a lot of vehement agreeing with you here and this is the place you SHOULD be getting the most acceptance.

I hate where the EVF Lemo is on an Alexa classic. It’s on the front of the camera down near the lens port facing forward.

It’s the reason why Arri ROTATED the PL mount ears 90 degrees on the Alexa from having the ears at the 4pm potion to now being up at 1pm. Because the ears started fouling on the stupid giant lemo connector.

I asked the Arri product manager and he told me that’s where the EVF cable and board had to go to keep the cable as short as possible and as close to the other image processing board. So they moved the mount orientation. They changed their own standard that had existed for years.

And it’s still a pain in the arse.

You’re not going to win here. I don’t think you understand how this design thing / corporate mentality.

Like when Homer Simpson designed his dream car. The customer actually often has no clue what’s right for them. (Or what can be done)

And you’re still very much arguing all this from your own individual user perspective. That’s why you’re not getting a lot of support from what you perceive as an obvious flaw.

JB
 
If we are arguing about how a stills camera should be designed, then yeah, I don't think anyone should change that.


But I have gotten agreement that users would like to see a video camera design similar to mirrorless cameras. The success of the GH series is also a testament of this.


The off putting thing, is seeing the twist on what I am saying. You and Norbro are the only ones painting it as if I am trying to change the stills industry to suit the video one, or even just my personal preference. I am not. What I am seeing, is on a video forum, that we are constantly discussing stills cameras. And why? Why is a video forum as excited for new stills cameras as we are for a C300? Because there is also a need for smaller form factors, no?

So, this is more about discussing, what would this size and shape of camera be if it were designed with the idea that it is a a video camera, and not a stills or hybrid one?

I do not see why we have to keep hammering that the stills industry won't change their designs, because we all know that won't happen. But it is good to discuss what designs are possibly beneficial to video users.
 
Last edited:
This is why I like modularity - so you have a basic unit that can be reconfigured to different designs for different shooting styles. The YAGH was a nice step in that direction. Maybe it would be cool to have an extension like that to come off the left side of camera and bring operator controls there and reroute the HDMI out the rear diagonal.

When I'm shooting on gimbal, I don't mind the HDMI placement, but the exposure controls are actually in the worst place for me (because I hold the gimbal with my right hand and reach up with my left). It would be nice if they were on the left side of camera or if I could connect a remote by cable and attach it to my gimbal handle.
 
ahalpert said:
When I'm shooting on gimbal, I don't mind the HDMI placement, but the exposure controls are actually in the worst place for me (because I hold the gimbal with my right hand and reach up with my left). It would be nice if they were on the left side of camera or if I could connect a remote by cable and attach it to my gimbal handle.
Click to expand...

Very good point!

Was noticing in your gimbal post, that you are right hand dominant for operating. Most people are. So, mirrorless stills cameras create a sort of hack work around. Not exactly preferred design choices for video operators, even if the body size and shape are.
 
Not saying these exact control types are ideal, but having a few critical exposure controls on the operator side has benefits for shoulder and gimbal users.

49826914281_989bf08aac_n.jpg
 
Frankly, while we are at it, why discuss optimal HDMI port placement ? Let's talk SDI.
As I see it, there is no reason why a video centric minimalist camera shouldn't just have an SDI connector instead.
A right angle SDI cable on a semi-recessed SDI connector makes even more sense.
Yes that's slightly more real estate, but who wouldn't trade real estate for reliability ?
I mean if you are going to try to think outside of the box, then really do it. HDMI sucks anyhow.
 
Last edited:
James0b57 said:
- dslr/mirroless ergonomic shape was a big hit with film makers.
Click to expand...

That's actually not the case at all. It was the affordable part that was a big hit with aspiring filmmakers, because at the time consumer video cameras were either lousy or horrendously expensive.

Saying that the ergonomic shape was a big hit with filmmakers is right up there with saying that the "Blair Witch Project" succeeded because of the crappy camera work.

- mirrorless body shape is one of the best shapes for gimbal work because it doesn’t add much length behind the lens, allowing for more optimal balance and clearance.
Click to expand...

The Z-Cam and BMD Micro and upcoming Komodo tiny boxy shapes are much better for gimbals than the dSLR body shape. Balancing a Pocket 4K/6K on a gimbal is annoying because of its width.
 
NorBro said:
Well, it's 10x bigger and a cinema camera, lol. :huh:

Around and around...

You want to buy a two-seater and then you ask where the back seats are...

(I don't know anything about cars.)
Click to expand...

It's a box with wheels, but that's not important right now.
 
In some ways, perhaps slight front facing controls to allow for a side swinging LCD.

49826987951_ede05b62c4_n.jpg
 
Tamerlin said:
That's actually not the case at all. It was the affordable part that was a big hit with aspiring filmmakers, because at the time consumer video cameras were either lousy or horrendously expensive.

Saying that the ergonomic shape was a big hit with filmmakers is right up there with saying that the "Blair Witch Project" succeeded because of the crappy camera work.



The Z-Cam and BMD Micro and upcoming Komodo tiny boxy shapes are much better for gimbals than the dSLR body shape. Balancing a Pocket 4K/6K on a gimbal is annoying because of its width.
Click to expand...
There are some people besides me that have mentioned the flatter mirrorless shape allows better balancing for them.

Also, liking the mirrorless shape, or something similar to it, doesn't mean that Komodo or Zcam is bad. They are both good. The only thing is, there is no video centric mirrorless design yet. they keep getting closer, but not there yet. They wouldn't be trying to get closer if it weren't a recognized profitable endeavor.

The BM pockets are way too wide, and for pro use, I don't think they are good designs. They seem well made for people who prefer touch screens to dials and structured indexed menu systems. But the BM's are very wide, and don't have an EVF, so they create about as many issues as they solved. I can understand their appeal to some, but do not see them being more than a hobbyist camera by design.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top