Here's a thing. . .form factor ?

Some of my main issues and likes with current camera forms.

Low profile:
I love how low riding the DSLR's, DVX100's, and other small cameras are. I dislike the the height of ENG, C300, XL2, EX3, AF100, and even the FS100.


Small enough to hand hold, big enough to attach additional equipment:
I love small cameras, but it gets to a point when if to do a professional level job, the camera reacquires add ons, then a small camera is self defeating. Cameras like the DSLR are so small that they need to be rigged. By the time the rig is complete, a monster has been born. So, at some point small is too small. The ideal small camera would still be big enough to have adequate space for controls, input/outputs, and surfaces to attach common professional accessories.

Pitch Rattle and Roll:
Despite advancements in OIS, a basic function of the camera body should also be conducive to preventing unwanted camera movement. So long enough and wide enough.

We shoot manual remember?:
That means letting my left hand controls focus while my right hand can take care of every electronically controlled realtime setting (except maybe sound).

Left:
Focus
ND
Audio
Manual Aperture

Right:
Focus assist
Electronic Aperture
ISO
WB presets
Shutter
 
Last edited:
I agree completely. The steady pace of electronics miniaturization guarantees that the guts inside a camera will get smaller and smaller. On the other hand, my fingers won't. Buttons and grips need to be large enough for my hand. Also, XLR jacks aren't getting any smaller, and the industry isn't moving away from them with any certain speed (The Red One toyed with mini-XLRs, but I agree with many of the users that remembering the conversion cables is a pain in the neck).

I know it looks like there's not much to it, but my design above is the result of 15 years of work with various types of cameras on various shoots. Designing the ideal camera has been a past-time of mine throughout that time. In other words, a lot of thought went into it.

I found that my old Sony TRV900 strikes a near-perfect balance of size and usability. Just add XLRs on the body and make the lens interchangeable. And of course upgrade the innards to a modern, large-sensor, solid-state design.
 
combatentropy said:
I agree completely. The steady pace of electronics miniaturization guarantees that the guts inside a camera will get smaller and smaller. On the other hand, my fingers won't. Buttons and grips need to be large enough for my hand. Also, XLR jacks aren't getting any smaller, and the industry isn't moving away from them with any certain speed (The Red One toyed with mini-XLRs, but I agree with many of the users that remembering the conversion cables is a pain in the neck).

I know it looks like there's not much to it, but my design above is the result of 15 years of work with various types of cameras on various shoots. Designing the ideal camera has been a past-time of mine throughout that time. In other words, a lot of thought went into it.

I found that my old Sony TRV900 strikes a near-perfect balance of size and usability.
Click to expand...

Although a bit larger than your drawing, it reminds me of the Panasonic SG-DVC30. A little 'bulldog'.
AG-DVC30.jpg
 
You do know the FS100 is actually not as tall as like the 7D right? Granted, with the LCD closed, but the 7D is 4.4 inches tall and the FS100 is 4 inches tall.

To me, the C300 really captures the world between DSLR and video camera from what I have seen. I have not had a chance to hold one yet, but from the reviews and pictures, it *seems* to be. As for camera body, this is where I'd like to see them go. I always hated using the HVX200 camera body. And the 7D was okay, but it needed a little bit more depth to it.

My problem with the FS100 is how long the camera is. It's too long. The AF100 and C300 are a bit too tall for me, I like the height of the FS100 myself. (I use an FS100).

What kills me about the C300 is I wish the XLR were built into the body and not on the extra unit. Also, I wish the EVF was external as well. I'd actually rather NOT have an EVF if it's in a fixed position.

I like modular because if I need my camera to be light on my blackbird stabilizer, I can pull everything off. I liked where sony was going, I just think they can go a bit further with it.

Basically, I want all the advantages of the DSLR (size/weight) and the video camera (usability for hand held). We shoot A LOT of hand held. Mainly, for action sequences. Being on a tripod does not work for this. And it doesn't look like blair witch because we practice a lot on the shots. We understand how to move smoothly even hand held when we need. If we need smoother, we use a stabilizer. Using a blackbird gives us a freedom you cannot get with an arm and vest with a heavy camera. We can go high to low beyond the range of and arm. It's great.

If I could give one HUGE complaint with the AF100/FS100, it's button positions. Given they are EVERYWHERE on the body, it's really easy to hit a button when just grabbing the body. With the 7D, changing iris, iso, shutter speed, so simple. It's a superior design. I'd love for those to be as accessable. I think Canon just does a better job of laying out the buttons and their locations A LOT better than Panasonic or Sony. I hated having to open the LCD to get to buttons on BOTH cameras.

But it will come in time, I am sure.

I agree that the modular abilities can be clunky and I think moving forward, I hope companies just get better at making better connecting pieces. XLR mics power through the cable, excellent. Why can't monitors do the same thing? Etc.

Red has some great ideas on being modular, but I don't see a lot of modules available yet. Add to that, the Scarlet is heavy. Not for a cine camera mind you, but I'm a different type of shooter. I represent just a new way of shooting really. Good/Bad? As I always say, it depends on the results. I think camera companies are struggling to meet multiple desires.

I can't wait to see what comes after the FS100 and the C300. I wish I could meld both cameras into one. :)
 
I think there is always a place for the ultra small (lipstick cams, go pros, and dslrs). Just that something more substantial and useful will be the mainstay of professional use.

The C300 is a good niche design. But the inability to be a complete solution without a rig system and breakout boxes, is what will keep it from being the bench mark in camera design.
 
Rick Burnett said:
You do know the FS100 is actually not as tall as like the 7D right? Granted, with the LCD closed, but the 7D is 4.4 inches tall and the FS100 is 4 inches tall.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the manufacturer mic bracket and lcd loupe are funky extensions. Which is why I said "even the FS100" because it is lower profile than some of the others I listed. The dimensions would be fine, if it weren't such an awkward design.
 
combatentropy said:
I know it looks like there's not much to it, but my design above is the result of 15 years of work with various types of cameras on various shoots. Designing the ideal camera has been a past-time of mine throughout that time. In other words, a lot of thought went into it.

I found that my old Sony TRV900 strikes a near-perfect balance of size and usability. Just add XLRs on the body and make the lens interchangeable. And of course upgrade the innards to a modern, large-sensor, solid-state design.
Click to expand...

It is simple, but that is the genius of it. It strikes a good balance of size and function. Looks like a well thought out idea. It is a little small for an all in one video camera for me, but I would find it a highly useful and compelling design, and an amazing bcam.
 
Last edited:
Jade Lane said:
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.
Click to expand...

sony-nex-vg20.jpg

I find the grip to be too level with the floor. Redesigning a grip which allows the hand to be angled forward (pinky lower, thumb/index finger higher) would be better.

Tuck your elbows to your sides and imagine you are hold a camera, now look at your hands natural angle. That is the correct grip orientation. The angle the NEX-VG20 has is uncomfortable for extended use.
 
Last edited:
James0b57 said:
Yes, but the manufacturer mic bracket and lcd loupe are funky extensions. Which is why I said "even the FS100" because it is lower profile than some of the others I listed. The dimensions would be fine, if it weren't such an awkward design.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I built my own mic bracket, but, now I just ordered parts to get rid of it altogether. I don't want a big mic as we run sound separate, I just need reference sound. We'll see if my solution works.

The LCD loupe I like. I thought I would hate it, but when I needed it, it was perfect. I like not having to have an EVF always built in that I cannot remove. While I still think I'd like the LCD to be removable so I can place it ANYWHERE when needed (like below the camera or even away from the camera altogether), I enjoy the setup more than I liked the LCD on the side of the AF100 and the EVF stuck up on top.

The best solution I think would be still an LCD convertible to EVF. After using the DP4 like this as well, I really enjoyed it (when shooting outdoors) and I don't have anyone to flag me and I'm too lazy to set a flag up :)
 
My favorite handheld camera of the cameras I've shot with is the Aaton 16-XTR Prod. Not sure if they make 'em anymore but for me it struck the right balance between being big enough to be steady and solid and small enough to not wear you down.

One of my biggest problems with HDSLR's is that they're so small and light. For some uses, that's great - but I much prefer footage from heavier rigs simply because I hate the way the fast vibrations of light rigs looks in the picture. I want some weight and bulk because it looks better.

I prefer footage from heavy, uncomfortable rigs to footage from light, comfortable rigs a great deal.
 
Jester2138 said:
My favorite handheld camera of the cameras I've shot with is the Aaton 16-XTR Prod. Not sure if they make 'em anymore but for me it struck the right balance between being big enough to be steady and solid and small enough to not wear you down.

One of my biggest problems with HDSLR's is that they're so small and light. For some uses, that's great - but I much prefer footage from heavier rigs simply because I hate the way the fast vibrations of light rigs looks in the picture. I want some weight and bulk because it looks better.

I prefer footage from heavy, uncomfortable rigs to footage from light, comfortable rigs a great deal.
Click to expand...

Gotta love the heavy camera movement.
 
My thought is this:

You can make a light camera heavier, but you cannot make a heavy camera light. So, when I used to float a 7D on my Blackbird stabilizer, I'd add a manfrotto plate beneath it just to add some extra weight. To me, the FS100 with a lens and battery comes in at 5lbs I believe last time I weighed it and I thought that was perfect.

I also prefer to have the center of gravity below my hands on my camera, just slightly, but centered. This is because, the hanging weight wants to equalize perfectly center, so it helps me to keep it more stable if I am hand held. It's easier to maneuver with the vertical center on center, if you rotate the camera a lot for different angles in your framing.

I spent a good portion of a night with a bunch of Berkey parts moving handles around my FS100 and then shooting with an 85mm lens to see how smooth it felt. I settled on just a little bit above the center and it works great.

The WORST position is the handle below the center of gravity, like a single pistol grip under the camera. The reason is, thing about hold a pencil in your hand balanced, it wants to fall in any direction but not stand. Now, turn your hand over and hang the pencil, it wants to stay straight at the bottom with no effort.
 
Rick Burnett said:
My thought is this:

You can make a light camera heavier, but you cannot make a heavy camera light.
Click to expand...
There is no complete solution all in one camera. There will always be a need for this or that size, this or that specialties.

Since a rig is not an integrated system with the camera, there is unnecessary bulk and waisted space. We can make a camera heavier regardless. No need to make a dslr size camera just because we can make it heavier. There are many more benefits to making a camera a bit bigger which has an efficient distribution of functionality.

Could you post a picture or drawing of your camera grip?
 
I much, much prefer a complete camera that is built properly to begin with than a ridiculously built-up rig with tons of crud hanging off of it. I can't stand DSLR rigs. I prefer shooting bare to using all that junk. The only thing they offer as far as I'm concerned is weight, but I'd still rather just literally attach a weight to the camera.

I don't like follow focuses either unless it's for my AC and not me. I'd rather pull off the lens directly and have the only limit to my precision be my own fingers, not some gearbox.

I also hate digital monitors. I want to be as intimate with the image as possible, not at arms distance... Fill my vision with nothing but the picture. I want a viewfinder that I can cozy up to.
 
Last edited:
very nice!

What is it?

Looks a bit like the JVC HD100u's with more height. Looks like a well balanced piece. The way the top handle is almost integrated into the body is nice. Probably has a good balance.
 
Last edited:
I don´t get it why there are still companies out there, that come up with new rigs, that still putt all the weight on your forearms instead of your shoulder.
Of course you can always hang some weights in the back, but why making it heavier than it needs to be?

Shoulderpad under the camera - nice balanced, and you can run and gun all day.

Frank
 
Postmaster said:
I don´t get it why there are still companies out there, that come up with new rigs, that still putt all the weight on your forearms instead of your shoulder.
Click to expand...

Completely agree here. How can you shoot all day if your arms are blown-out from supporting your unbalanced camera rig.

Postmaster said:
Shoulderpad under the camera - nice balanced, and you can run and gun all day.
Click to expand...

What about camera controls? If your camera is sitting on your shoulder, can you comfortably reach your camera controls? ( weights might be necessary for the camera can ride forward so you can reach the controls )
 
Postmaster said:
I don´t get it why there are still companies out there, that come up with new rigs, that still putt all the weight on your forearms instead of your shoulder.
Of course you can always hang some weights in the back, but why making it heavier than it needs to be?

Shoulderpad under the camera - nice balanced, and you can run and gun all day.

Frank
Click to expand...

i'm with ya. many rigs appear to be designed either for short takes with breaks in between, or they're designed by folks who haven't done a lot of "off-the-shoulder" work.

one thing i've long dreamed of having properly incorporated into handheld apparatus is the type of outboard controls you have on studio cameras. and this would be in keeping with the oft touted modular theme. even if you abandon the traditional ENG form factor and control layout, why not have things like rear zoom, follow-focus, iris, etc but positioned closer at hand (literally) on the handles of the rig? this would increase stability and versatility tremendously. certainly follow-focus is nearly there anyway, but for all the effort and money being directed into frankenrigs, they seem to remain, inexplicably, monsters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top