Spot on, Grug! FF Sensor with crop options is an excellent alternative (as long as you are happy shooting 1080 and 4k is not imperative). I am tempted to get the D800 as soon as it's out for that reason alone.
Here's a thing. . .form factor ?
- Thread starter Jade Lane
- Start date
Spot on, Grug! FF Sensor with crop options is an excellent alternative (as long as you are happy shooting 1080 and 4k is not imperative). I am tempted to get the D800 as soon as it's out for that reason alone.
ethan cooper
Well-known member
Jade Lane
Active member
Greg Smith
Veteran
The problem with many "modular" products is that the hardware for linking the modules to each other tends to add up to a bulkier design than if everything is directly and permanently connected together. Look at the "modular" ENG camcorders of the late '80s, where you could attach different formats of VCRs to a single camera head. The connectors and frame to make this work dominated the design and made these cameras larger, heavier, more expensive and less maneuverable than their fixed-configuration brandmates, and they did not do well in the market. Also, adding connectors and cables to a design makes it less reliable.
Even if the connection between components is wireless, the additional bulk, complexity, power consumption and reduced reliability due to the transmitters and receivers can be felt. Who wants to change batteries periodically in two devices instead of one?
Actually, I think in some ways we're moving the other direction. When I started in this business 30-some years ago, it would be unthinkable for a professional video camera to incorporate a built-in recording device or a non-interchangeable lens. Nowadays, in many levels of the market, these features are absolutely standard and even felt to be desirable.
Didn't somebody once say "modularity is the future -- always has been, always will be?"
- Greg
Even if the connection between components is wireless, the additional bulk, complexity, power consumption and reduced reliability due to the transmitters and receivers can be felt. Who wants to change batteries periodically in two devices instead of one?
Actually, I think in some ways we're moving the other direction. When I started in this business 30-some years ago, it would be unthinkable for a professional video camera to incorporate a built-in recording device or a non-interchangeable lens. Nowadays, in many levels of the market, these features are absolutely standard and even felt to be desirable.
Didn't somebody once say "modularity is the future -- always has been, always will be?"
- Greg
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
@Greg Smith,
Many of the points you touched on explain why franken-camera rig designs have not been able to be the answer. Not matter how well thought out they are in current form, they are still 'fixes' and clumsy after thoughts to a problem. The solution should be more thoroughly designed from the ground up.
I've shot with big and small cameras, and I prefer small with the option to go big. Just need a more elegant solution.
Many of the points you touched on explain why franken-camera rig designs have not been able to be the answer. Not matter how well thought out they are in current form, they are still 'fixes' and clumsy after thoughts to a problem. The solution should be more thoroughly designed from the ground up.
I've shot with big and small cameras, and I prefer small with the option to go big. Just need a more elegant solution.
MPB
Well-known member
seems like the dslr paradigm has led us to assume that modular must = frankenrigging.
the basic form factor of the industry's "workhorse" cameras remained fairly stable for a long time. inovation isn't a bad thing, but the balanced, shoulder-mount box with the most-needed controls arrayed in places that fall easily to hand was rugged, predictable and it worked. ok, maybe things don't have to be that heavy anymore, and we don't need tape drives.
i know a lot of folks have come up on dslr's and other rigs. i started on the smaller format cameras, and learned to appreciate their nimbleness and versatility. moving to shoulder-mounts was a change, but i'm frequently not inclined to go back. i'm certainly not inclined to try to work with the erector-set method required for so many cameras now. that doesn't strike me as modular, it just looks like poor planning and design to me.
if the overall shape, ergonomics, controls, and essential elements remain the same, real modularity ought to be governed by those facts.
the lens is going to remain at the front of the camera. lens mounts are a given.
the optimal position for the viewer isn't going to change much, dictated by the overall balance and ergonomics. just put a good viewer in place and forget about it, it isn't an avantage to have to bolt something on here.
i realize aftermarket outboard recorders allow for a less expensive camera package, but if you can package a recorder for $2k, it's got to be less expensive to build it into the camera. modularity in recording seems largely a software issue. but ok, let's say you really want to whittle down the basic package to bare bones - make it dockable. it wouldn't be the first camera to be designed that way. at least then the hardware is still integrated and the form factor remains intact.
i can't really even address audio, the Beachtek approach is for the birds.
i guess i'm calling bullshit on the idea that modularity is an excuse for poor design, when in most other circumstances modularity offers an imperative for proper integration.
the basic form factor of the industry's "workhorse" cameras remained fairly stable for a long time. inovation isn't a bad thing, but the balanced, shoulder-mount box with the most-needed controls arrayed in places that fall easily to hand was rugged, predictable and it worked. ok, maybe things don't have to be that heavy anymore, and we don't need tape drives.
i know a lot of folks have come up on dslr's and other rigs. i started on the smaller format cameras, and learned to appreciate their nimbleness and versatility. moving to shoulder-mounts was a change, but i'm frequently not inclined to go back. i'm certainly not inclined to try to work with the erector-set method required for so many cameras now. that doesn't strike me as modular, it just looks like poor planning and design to me.
if the overall shape, ergonomics, controls, and essential elements remain the same, real modularity ought to be governed by those facts.
the lens is going to remain at the front of the camera. lens mounts are a given.
the optimal position for the viewer isn't going to change much, dictated by the overall balance and ergonomics. just put a good viewer in place and forget about it, it isn't an avantage to have to bolt something on here.
i realize aftermarket outboard recorders allow for a less expensive camera package, but if you can package a recorder for $2k, it's got to be less expensive to build it into the camera. modularity in recording seems largely a software issue. but ok, let's say you really want to whittle down the basic package to bare bones - make it dockable. it wouldn't be the first camera to be designed that way. at least then the hardware is still integrated and the form factor remains intact.
i can't really even address audio, the Beachtek approach is for the birds.
i guess i'm calling bullshit on the idea that modularity is an excuse for poor design, when in most other circumstances modularity offers an imperative for proper integration.
Greg Smith
Veteran
Wonderfully said.
But "handheld" cameras bug me as well -- these developed because the electronics became small enough to build home-movie "handicams" that weren't so heavy you absolutely needed to use your shoulder to support them. And they sold well, for that limited purpose. But again, somebody got the idea that this meant we all wanted cameras with the viewfinder on the back end.
- Greg
Last edited:
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
What is all this obsession about shoulder-mount and hand-held all about anyway?
Are you guys all working as a one man show, shooting weddings and newsreels only?
Heck, even on my documentaries, I´m 90% on a tripod, crane, dolly, slider andwhatnot.
Frank
Are you guys all working as a one man show, shooting weddings and newsreels only?
Heck, even on my documentaries, I´m 90% on a tripod, crane, dolly, slider andwhatnot.
Frank
G
Guest
Guest
True. I have been wanting to get more into tripod based acquisition and composing, but for the most part, I like to keep things spontaneous and informal. Tripod and the whole 'old school' American cinema techniques will always be the bench mark in my mind, but I did not develop under those standards, and sometimes I am jumping in or out of a car (stopped usually) to follow subjects at those in-between moments. I am not hand held 100%, but I NEED the option of being able to go anywhere. Only handheld form factor gives that confidence and flexibility. Also invaluable, is the smaller body is less imposing on people in the wild.
MPB
Well-known member
G
Guest
Guest
One configuration that worked well for me was a mini 60D rig setup. My first go round was the configuration below:
267851_10150251508377420_502562419_7326377_1612228_n by onesielaff, on Flickr
With the flip out screen, I put a diopter on it and used it as an EVF. The rig ended up being a bit longer than the one pictured above, and had a center grip for low shots. It was about the size of the Aaton A-Minima but the matte box and a stabilizing cross bar made it wider. Then I had a naked T3i at the ready for back up, lensing alternative, or whatever.
The configs are front heavy and not really suitable for long stationary takes, but are extremely well suited for unpredictable fast paced work on the go.
267851_10150251508377420_502562419_7326377_1612228_n by onesielaff, on Flickr
With the flip out screen, I put a diopter on it and used it as an EVF. The rig ended up being a bit longer than the one pictured above, and had a center grip for low shots. It was about the size of the Aaton A-Minima but the matte box and a stabilizing cross bar made it wider. Then I had a naked T3i at the ready for back up, lensing alternative, or whatever.
The configs are front heavy and not really suitable for long stationary takes, but are extremely well suited for unpredictable fast paced work on the go.
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
If Garret Brown taught us anything, it is that being able to grab the camera from the center is the most ideal place to control and move the camera smoothly. With technology, there is less of an excuse as to why we can't create something with the grip close to the C.G.
CG by onesielaff, on Flickr
All the old and current models are based on old tech designs, except the Ikonoskop, but it has limited grip and viewing options (not a bad thing. Simplicity is next to efficiency). The C300 is just a large DSLR.
Greg Smith
Veteran
There's many kinds of movies to be made out there, and my experience comes from the handheld ENG tradition, although I do many different types of shooting. But I consider myself something of a specialist in covering unplanned events where you're in motion all day, looking for the good shots, and I've been, at times, called in to other people's shoots when the production calls for high quality (meaning "steady") hand-held ENG looking footage. So I take some pride in my ability to hold the camera well. Sometimes I'm alone, often I work with a reporter/interviewer, and if it's a really luxurious shoot I might have someone to operate sound as well.
That said, I probably shoot 80% or more on a tripod or other support, myself. But it's the 20% that requires my most advanced skill set.
And it's easier to put a shoulder-mount camera on a tripod than to redesign a box with a rear viewfinder for comfortable all-day shoulder use.
- Greg
G
Guest
Guest
This is a good one.
Jade Lane
Active member
Surely by 2013/14 the form factor will change again with http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/misc.php?do=bbcode#basicVideo actually being in a smaller http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/misc.php?do=bbcode#basicVideo camera's not a http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/misc.php?do=bbcode#basicStills camera ?
Maybe some kind of Professional Camcorder / DSLR hybrid ? does anyone remember those Panasonic designs kicking around last year ?
I don't think the majority of independent film makers using DSLR's are that interested in taking still pictures, didn't most of the 5dMk2 sales go to people using the camera for Video, if that was the case wouldn't it make sense for the 5dMk3 to look more like a Video Camera with the Stills option as secondary ?
Maybe some kind of Professional Camcorder / DSLR hybrid ? does anyone remember those Panasonic designs kicking around last year ?
I don't think the majority of independent film makers using DSLR's are that interested in taking still pictures, didn't most of the 5dMk2 sales go to people using the camera for Video, if that was the case wouldn't it make sense for the 5dMk3 to look more like a Video Camera with the Stills option as secondary ?
G
Guest
Guest
Hmmmm. At $2500, I would think that a dslr sells more than an FF video camera, but I haven't looked up the numbers.