Have $2k, I refuse to spend!

P

Paul V Doherty

Active member
I refuse to become party to the artificial camera wars perpetrated by the big three.
The corporate leviathans dole out incremental advances timed perfectly to satisfy the gullible with slightly better video with each new generation.
We don't want a DSLR with video as an afterthought.
We want a dedicated large sensor interchangeable lens video camera with XLR audio, multiple frame rates, full HD and good DSLR features thrown in but not the primary purpose.
We know such a camera can be made right now for less than $5k, indeed probably for $2k to $3k en masse.
Whomsoever releases such a camera will get my $2-3k, in a heartbeat - and not one second before!
ATTENTION Nikon, Canon et al!!!
Are you listening?
Release the damn camera already, for you shall not recieve one penny from me until you do.

Does anyone agree?
Send the message loud and strong to the big three by refusing to buy into crippled so-called upgrades and awkward compromised DSLR's with tacked-on video!
SAVE YOUR MONEY and force the manufacturers to give us what we already know they are developing for release once the current generation has run it's course
 
Paul V Doherty said:
We know such a camera can be made right now for less than $5k, indeed probably for $2k to $3k en masse.
Click to expand...

We actually don't know this at all.

I think it's also a bit unfair to accuse the camera makers of *holding out* this sort of thing...we're still basically in the 1st and early 2nd generation of DSLRs with HD Video capability and look how astonishingly good they are! Product R&D take time, a lot of time.

They've opened up remarkable possibilities in a very short amount of time...they aren't perfect, but they're closer to what using real movie cameras is like than using a camcorder. If you're making serious stuff, you'd more than likely want to do an outboard audio solution anyways, the audio built into a camera is never going to be as flexible as a good outboard solution...and it's not portable. Let the camera be the camera, and synch the audio with a good outboard device.

A 5D along with a Zoom H4Nn would get you nearly everything you really need - sure you wouldn't have multiple frame rates, etc., but you'd get a good large sensor, great interchangable lenses, and a pro built body.

Lots of people on these boards are using the 5D, 7D, and GH1 to make fantastic video, they all have their strengths and weaknesses, but I think there is no doubt that they've opened up possibilites that simply did not exist before, and they are good enough to make real films if you've got the content, and work within their limitations...which are really quite few considering they're still basically first generation. I think focusing on what *can't* be done is less useful than focusing on what *can* be done - just look at some of the great stuff users have posted...great stuff can be achieved with almost any of these cameras if you utilize their strengths.

Of course, if you don't have good content, none of the above is going to matter.
 
I'm really concerned about form factor.
If Nikon packaged the D90 in a motion or video form factor with 23.976p, 24p, 25p & 30p, plus XLR audio and full manual control I for one would jump on the bandwagon.
This could EASILY be done for $2k - the price of the D90 and 7D proves it.
Come on, Nikon!!!!!
 
Mention must be made of the absolute necessity for multiple frame rates.

True 24p is incongruous with some output media, and causes all sorts of headaches for soundtrack sync if any part of the chain is running at 23.976p, for example.
One cannot shoot multi-cam unless all are running at the same rate.
23.976p is an absolute must if any new camera is to be integrated with existing 23.976p video cameras.
Furthermore in PAL world (after all, the majority of the world is PAL) any new camera MUST feature 25p if it is to be seriously considered as a stable-mate for other cameras.
Don't make the mistake of thinking only film makers and indies are interested in large sensor "film-style" cameras.
The concert video and sports markets alone justify the abovementioned criteria.
Form factor and 25p are CRUCIAL to the success of any pretender to the VDSLR throne
 
Paul V Doherty said:
This could EASILY be done for $2k - the price of the D90 and 7D proves it.
Click to expand...

No it does not. You're making a pretty big logic leap here without knowing anything about the development cost or technological background behind designing these cameras. The D90 and 7D are still camera with video capabilities tacked on to them; the compression and video hardware behind them aren't very good. To make a camera like you wanted would require some pretty serious R&D effort.
 
The component parts already exist, little or no r&d is required.
Take the DVX100 form factor, insert D90/7D sensor & optics, plus HV20 HDV encoding & transport (or equivalent solid state with a decent bit rate & codec.
ALL the parts already exist.
Somebody just needs to put it all in one package.
 
Huy Vu said:
No it does not. You're making a pretty big logic leap here without knowing anything about the development cost or technological background behind designing these cameras. The D90 and 7D are still camera with video capabilities tacked on to them; the compression and video hardware behind them aren't very good. To make a camera like you wanted would require some pretty serious R&D effort.
Click to expand...
BTW your assumption about my understanding of r&d and production costs is both impertinent and evidence of hubris beyond pardon.
Your impertinece is duly noted
 
Paul V Doherty said:
BTW your assumption about my understanding of r&d and production costs is both impertinent and evidence of hubris beyond pardon.
Your impertinece is duly noted
Click to expand...
The big three, like all profit-driven corporations, answer to shareholders.
By doling out piecemeal improvements slowly over time, they effectively sell the same product several times over to their customer base.
For example, when Nikon eventually releases the holy grail large sensor video camera many otherwise satisfied D90 owners will buy-in, crying "at last, here is the camera I REALLY wanted when I bought the D90" - until the new-improved version comes along.
This is a sad reality of retail, but it does not diminish the fact that the "holy grail" video camera is not far-off, and it will represent a watershed moment in camera technology.
All that matters for shareholders is who releases such a camera first.
 
It's funny, lots of people have the same exact argument in regards to a cure for cancer and AIDS. Except, you know, their cause is actually important and stuff.
 
Paul V Doherty said:
The component parts already exist, little or no r&d is required.
Take the DVX100 form factor, insert D90/7D sensor & optics, plus HV20 HDV encoding & transport (or equivalent solid state with a decent bit rate & codec.
ALL the parts already exist.
Somebody just needs to put it all in one package.
Click to expand...

And this doesn't require R&D? It's not Legos part that you can mix and match, there are overriding concerns to address. If you take a look at Barry Green's recent series of test on the 7D you'll see that the 7D video hardware really doesn't do that good of a job compared to a dedicated video camera like the HMC40. Unless you work for Nikon or Canon and knows first hand what it takes and costs to develop a camera, you really can't make assumption about how much it costs to make this stuff. It's like when people complain endlessly that Panasonic can make P2 cards for $50 because it's "just like SD cards" but there's a conspiracy to jack the price up to $1000.

I don't see any point in refusing to buy a camera until one comes out that does everything that you need. You'll never make any film that way and you'll be waiting for the rest of your life. There will ALWAYS be something better coming out and by comparison what you have will seems antiquated. Get what you need now and upgrade when the time comes.
 
Huy Vu said:
And this doesn't require R&D? It's not Legos part that you can mix and match, there are overriding concerns to address. If you take a look at Barry Green's recent series of test on the 7D you'll see that the 7D video hardware really doesn't do that good of a job compared to a dedicated video camera like the HMC40. Unless you work for Nikon or Canon and knows first hand what it takes and costs to develop a camera, you really can't make assumption about how much it costs to make this stuff. It's like when people complain endlessly that Panasonic can make P2 cards for $50 because it's "just like SD cards" but there's a conspiracy to jack the price up to $1000.

I don't see any point in refusing to buy a camera until one comes out that does everything that you need. You'll never make any film that way and you'll be waiting for the rest of your life. There will ALWAYS be something better coming out and by comparison what you have will seems antiquated. Get what you need now and upgrade when the time comes.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you didn't read my posts thoroughly: take the D90, add XLR audio and full manual controls, house it in a video form factor and I will be the first to buy one.
NONE of this requires r&d - Nikon dabbled in video cameras in the early 1980's - they could re-use their original video camera housings for all I care, I would still buy it.
Nikon can easily outsource a balanced audio module if need be.
None of this is rocket science - it is merely marketing "experts" and bean-counters holding us to ransom.
 
Paul V Doherty said:
The component parts already exist, little or no r&d is required.
Take the DVX100 form factor, insert D90/7D sensor & optics, plus HV20 HDV encoding & transport (or equivalent solid state with a decent bit rate & codec.
ALL the parts already exist.
Somebody just needs to put it all in one package.
Click to expand...
It gets tedious seeing these same posts telling multibillion dollar companies that they don't know how to run their own businesses...

If we take your argument at face value, the actual act of "repackaging" will involve creating new housings, etc., which -- as we've been told by Panasonic, any single hardware change like that costs them $5m dollars. Five million dollars. Then they have to create packaging, test it, develop a user manual, fix the bugs that will inevitably crop in, create new video functions to address the specific video functionality, and then -- oh yeah, a marketing campaign. While in your imaginary world that might all be free and no effort whatsoever, well, in the real world that all adds up to tens of millions of dollars.

Look, they know what we want, and they haven't been able to deliver it yet. There are two possible reasons: either A) it is not technologically feasible to do so at a price we're willing to pay, or B) they are profoundly incompetent idiots. Seeing as we're talking about multibillion dollar companies here, who obviously know more about building and selling cameras than anyone else ON THE GLOBE, I tend to rule out option B.

Of course, there's always option C, that they're just meanies who could do it but just won't because... well, they're mean. Or they're trying to "protect" some other line of equipment. But I find that argument to be almost as silly as option B.

Which leaves option A. They know what we want, and when they can build it, affordably, and sell enough of them that it's worth it to them, they'll do it.

In the meantime -- if none of today's products suit your needs, don't buy them. That's the simplest, easiest thing to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top