Here's a thing. . .form factor ?

Jade Lane

Jade Lane

Active member
3 years or so now since the 'revolution' kicked off and still we're seeing more and more HD Video enabled DSLR's

As far as I'm aware the revolution was an accident in a camera body traditionally designed for a long long time to take still pictures ?

How is it there still is'nt that much development in a better, weighted, ergonomically functional camera body form factor, within the prices we're currently seeing. Just look at the history of the Eclair ACL, Arri SR2/3, Aaton A-Minima (my favorite camera).

I know the AF101, FS100, C300 & Scarlet have moved forwards but they're still mainly a box shape, have our needs changed and after 70+ years of movie camera design is the DSLR form factor (or a pumped up version) really where its going ?

It seems to me with all this technology producing now great images the 'shape' of a camera is far down the list of priorities.

Just like Godard wanted and Beauviala always strived to design wouldn't it be great to start seeing camera body's that fitted better with our bodies or dare I say it an extension of the human hand ?

I personally don't mind the NEX VG20 and if it's image was as good as a Hacked GH2, it was a bit heavier and had XLR inputs instead of the in built Mic it would be a start in a better direction.

This troubles me somewhat, please don't shoot me down for having an 'opinion' its just questions for debate thats all.
 
features, sensors, electronics and technology aside, I think the ikonoskop has the most ergonomic, blend-with-body like form -that is if you have small lenses. ;)
 
I too really like the Ikonoskop's shape but not the price tag when you add up what you need to actually use it.
 
The JVC HMxxx cameras have a decent design -- balanced on the shoulder, battery on the back, viewfinder up front, but with a much lighter weight and lower profile than traditional ENG cameras. They're a step in the right direction, although not nearly in Aaton territory yet. Too bad there's not much inside them I would want to buy.

The Arri SR was always my favorite 16mm camera to shoot with.

- Greg
 
The shape is down on the list for a reason. Modular builds are the future. Think about smart phones as an example. The apps have created a device that can be transformed into a massive range of tools, thanks to generic IR transmitters and the like. An HDSLR can be used as a still camera. Get a rig and it's a great shoulder mount. Put it on a tripod with enough attachments and you have a cinema camera. You choose the right loadout for the job at hand, giving you added versatility. This has no impact on the high end market or the low end consumer market, but in the middle versatility and portability seem to be priorities.
 
I understand what you're saying but Modular builds take time to set up and take away the spontaneous feel, what you've said above would also apply to a better designed camera body but with the ergonomic advantage of filming handheld instead of focusing on another artform (photography) ?
 
In other words, I do not think making cameras bigger again is the answer. Meanwhile most add ons are after thoughts, or cannot interface well with the cameras, whether because the cameras are not made for being modular, or because the add on market cannot support development.
 
Modular is simply the way of things these days, even on (heck, especially on) high-end Alexa/Epic shoots, the cameras are so completely covered in cables and accessories that you can barely see the camera beneath it all.

As much as I'd love to have something in the form-factor of an A-Minima (but with a large digital sensor), that doesn't seem to be the way anyone wants to go at the moment.

Personally I don't mind starting off with a small box and building a rig around it to suit the different ways I want to shoot with it.
 
A digital A-Minima, give it to me !

I don't believe that everyone wants to shoot with a massive clumsy rig, maybe thats what people are getting use too ?

I don't think making cameras bigger is the answer either just a better more ergonomical shape, the DSLR video afterthought still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
 
IF rigs and add ons were more intuitive and developed with specific camera bodies, and if camera bodies were meant to be ergonomic and modular, that would be my ideal combination. Current rig systems are clumsy, and cameras are not ergonomically correct for modularity. Growing pains.
 
I think this is a really interesting topic and worth thinking about. One of the reasons for somewhat box-like camera ergonomics- in my opinion- is the essential modualr nature (as people have already addressed) especially when it comes to lenses.

I've shot several projects with a Scarlet lately, and how we balanced the camera depended entirely on what lens we were using. The difference between using cine lenses and Cannon lenses was massive. No way to balance without taking into account one or the other. Cameras now are just brains, then when you add the lens and kit to balance it, they become 'cameras' again. I'm not sure the camera by itself can offer an ergonomic solution.
 
It really depends on the type of shooting you do. For many years, the micro budget film maker had to put up with the ideal form factor for ENG work, which was not necessarily the ideal form factor for narrative.

I think the C300 has a really nice form factor for narrative. Small, lightweight, good positioning of LCD and EVF, ins/outs in a sensible place. Bulky enough to get a decent grip and also look professional (which, i find, is important for both clients and talent, to an extent).
 
Ergonomics for me means, big (illuminated) buttons and switches in the right place instead of going into many levels of menus.
Handheld is only suitable for a niche of applications - actually it´s often a last resort, when you can`t achieve your pictures otherwise.
Usually one would prefer a stable image, instead of a shaky Blair Witch look, that introduces a ton of motion blur (that would render better optics and sensors obsolete). Unless it is motivated by the story of course - but even that is quite seldom.

If you go shoulder mount (in contrast to handheld) you need a certain wight and size to make a stable image and get it balanced right for hours of operation.
So downsizing the camera and make it even more light wight, would be quite useless.

Modularity is a big deal for me and I really like the FS100 in that regard.
From a Hasselblad size to a full blown rig within minutes is just great and speeds up my workflow on the set.

Since the physics of optics not gonna change soon, the size and weight of the glass dictates you counterweight anyway.
Of course you can always jump around like a mad man with a consumer size photo camera and a pancake lens, if that´s what you want - but your films will exactly look like that. The idea of having a super tiny lightwight camera that you can wave around with one hand for hours, and getting great, stable material out of it (of course without practicing with a steadicam for years) is a pipe dream of the new bread of DSLR filmmakers. But I doubt that would happen anytime soon.

my ct2

Frank
 
Shooting video with photo still lenses is a new thing that people started doing (first with 35mm adaptors and then with HDSLR's) because it's cheap and produces great results. Canon and Red's new products seem to respond to this new trend and thus have created 'SLResque' cameras, but let's face it, neither the SLR form factor nor stills lenses are ideal for video production.

I think part of the problem is also the sensor size and the type of lenses available. The Ikonoskop, Aaton A-minima, JVC GY-HM series and ENG traditional cameras are all 2/3rd sensors, which allow the use of relatively small lenses. ENG type of zooms in particular are great when used with this format - they offer crazy focal lengths, fast/constant aperture and ergonomically they are a perfect match (the servo acts as a grip, the lens controls are slightly in front of you and the camera body rests in your shoulder)

When you step up to to Super 35 and FF sensors, the lens size also increases. Something like a Canon J17 for Super 35 would be of an incredibly stupid size and any attempts to improve the camera ergonomically would be in vain (look at the Optimo 24-290; amazing lens, daft size). The closest thing to an ENG type of zoom you can get for S35 is the Sony SCL-z18x140 F3 lens (18mm-252mm), but the aperture performance isn't very good (T3.8-T6.8; if you are after super shallow depth of field it sort of defeats the point of having a big sensor).

I'm not sure it's physically possible to make a zoom with great range, compact size and fast aperture for big sensor cameras, but hopefully things will improve. If they do, camera ergonomics will too. In the meantime, modular seems to be the way to go.

By the way, great post and great opinions (+1 with Frank's comment).
 
dracalat said:
Shooting video with photo still lenses is a new thing that people started doing (first with 35mm adaptors and then with HDSLR's) because it's cheap and produces great results. Canon and Red's new products seem to respond to this new trend and thus have created 'SLResque' cameras, but let's face it, neither the SLR form factor nor stills lenses are ideal for video production.

I think part of the problem is also the sensor size and the type of lenses available. The Ikonoskop, Aaton A-minima, JVC GY-HM series and ENG traditional cameras are all 2/3rd sensors, which allow the use of relatively small lenses. ENG type of zooms in particular are great when used with this format - they offer crazy focal lengths, fast/constant aperture and ergonomically they are a perfect match (the servo acts as a grip, the lens controls are slightly in front of you and the camera body rests in your shoulder)

When you step up to to Super 35 and FF sensors, the lens size also increases. Something like a Canon J17 for Super 35 would be of an incredibly stupid size and any attempts to improve the camera ergonomically would be in vain (look at the Optimo 24-290; amazing lens, daft size). The closest thing to an ENG type of zoom you can get for S35 is the Sony SCL-z18x140 F3 lens (18mm-252mm), but the aperture performance isn't very good (T3.8-T6.8; if you are after super shallow depth of field it sort of defeats the point of having a big sensor).

I'm not sure it's physically possible to make a zoom with great range, compact size and fast aperture for big sensor cameras, but hopefully things will improve. If they do, camera ergonomics will too. In the meantime, modular seems to be the way to go.

By the way, great post and great opinions (+1 with Frank's comment).
Click to expand...

I think something like the multiple crop options in the new D4 and D800 become quite interesting for this reason. You can be shooting with the compactness and simplicity of a prime, shoot your mid-shot, and with just a touch of a button, punch in for your close-up.

With options like the Zeiss CP.2s in F-mount, that becomes a very intriguing option.
 
yea...a smallform handheld with a side vf / the a-minima read my mind . I think sony is the ony company now ready to make a camera like this . If it had the fs100 sensor, imagine !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top