Ha ha, yeah, I didn't think of that. Don't use this for your next documentary on U. S. gangs or Middle East riots.
View attachment 83534
Seriously, as much as I love the Digital Bolex, I think we should chuck nostalgic designs, which were shaped by the rolls of film they had to hold, among other obsolete considerations. The best design in my book has been with us for some time now:
View attachment 83533
Electronics are ever shrinking. The only consideration left is what fits best in the hand, what fits the needed jacks and screen, what's easiest to pack.
For a camera the size and weight of the Digital Bolex the handle is a nice balanced stable solution with an EVF and even something as long as a 12-120 Angie zoom. All up weight with an EVF around 7lbs. About the same weight and balance as its film namesake. One hand for the camera, one hand for the lens, elbows against the body and EVF against your eye makes a stable triangle with the camera close to the body. Easier and more stable to shoot than my current Canon GL2 like the lower picture since the weight damps out small muscle movements. You move with the body and turn at the waist, not with the arms. The weight is structurally supported by the skeleton, not by muscular strength alone. Done it with Bolexes and Bell& Howell filmos a few decades ago. Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.
A balanced over the shoulder rig is better, but that is not what most of these modern rail rigs give you. All the weight of camera and lens is out front and you cant hold and operate at the same time. The classic ENG style 2/3" cameras evolved the shoulder rig to near perfection decades ago IMO. Camera could sit balanced hands free on the shoulder ready to shoot. Both hands on the servo zoom lens to operate. Still my personal favorite kind of setup without an external stabilizer.