The Video/Digital Cinema News Cycle is Eating Itself?

LOL.

It's a fine survey for its purpose. Just a feeler...wanting to gather people's thoughts.

They also asked about 30 other questions you're choosing not to list.

Like would you prefer SDIs?

Or is a shoulder-mounted camera important?

RAW internal? External?

AF? IBIS? File sizes? Codecs? ETC. ETC.

Did you even spend the time taking it or just read the first page and decided to make a fuss about nothing?
 
Norbro, you are delightfully simple. Your love for collecting all kinds of affordable cameras is also a nice addition to this forum. But this survey is not going to make a good camera.
 
Don't speak like you know me. I can buy any camera I want. CASH.

JVC is simply reaching out and asking for people to help.

This is what we should want.

You didn't take the survey and made a big deal about nothing. Because if you did take it, you'd like some of the questions based on your thoughts of what a perfect camera should be.

They even ask about a servo lens, and connections some people haven't even heard of.
 
Samuel H said:
Needs depend a lot on the kind of production, size of crew, etc. If you gave me an F55, I would hardly ever use it: too big, too heavy, and requiring everything else in the gear list to become bigger and heavier. But of course, I'm just a hobbyist who spends way more time on his hobby than most people would find reasonable... XD
Click to expand...

And I’m just the opposite. Maybe because i’ve spent my entire career doing it(we didn’t have a choice 20+ years ago), but running around by yourself with a 20lb-30lb shoulder mounted camera isn’t the end of the world and is actually easier in some situations.
 
James0b57 said:
Nice! So, you also agree with the list. Yes, majority of shooters prefer a smaller lighter option. Even if they end up rigging later. But the odd thing is, how awful connectivity is with more small body cameras.

You may be willing to sacrifice ease of use and image wuality for size and weight. And i may be willing to deal with weight for a more complete camera system and image quality. However, at the end of the days we both are moving towards the same general philosophy. The only thing is, they do not make the camera yet. In fact they may even be intentionally not making the camera. I don’t believe they are intentionally withoholding, i just think they are stuck in their ways, and not able to solve the solution that most of us see clearly.

One of the issues, is us though. We constantly muddy the argument saying all the individual features we want, and it sounds like we all disagree and have SUCH PERSONAL TASTE in camera design.... news flash: we don’t!

Camera design features and ergonomics are pretty much the same for all of us.
Click to expand...

Connectivity is almost alwasy going to be limited(awful) on small cameras. There’s only so much real-estate, so they will have to sacrifice types and numbers of connections. Or get into proprietary types, “special” or “non-standard” connections.
 
I would like to know you some day. And if you ever are in LA let’s get brunch.

The survey is trying to understand the market. If they were using it to design a camera, then smh lol.
 
Run&Gun said:
Connectivity is almost alwasy going to be limited(awful) on small cameras. There’s only so much real-estate, so they will have to sacrifice types and numbers of connections. Or get into proprietary types, “special” or “non-standard” connections.
Click to expand...

So very true. That is the achilles heal of smaller bodies with current technology implementations.
 
James0b57 said:
I would like to know you some day. And if you ever are in LA let’s get brunch.

The survey is trying to understand the market. If they were using it to design a camera, then smh lol.
Click to expand...

They of course wouldn't design a camera just based off of one survey and only that.

They would also call in people like you and others to provide them valuable feedback based on career and life experiences.

This is just one part of the research process to get the ball rolling.

But if they see 10,000 people favor an EF mount, guess which mount they are likely to use?
(IIRC, I believe Mitch mentioned the same thing happened with the EVA1.)

Just the early stages of R&D.
 
Samuel H said:
Needs depend a lot on the kind of production, size of crew, etc. If you gave me an F55, I would hardly ever use it: too big, too heavy, and requiring everything else in the gear list to become bigger and heavier. But of course, I'm just a hobbyist who spends way more time on his hobby than most people would find reasonable... XD
Click to expand...

You may be over exagerating how heavy an F55 is vs how easy it is to use and how good the battery life is. No to mention inage quality that nips at the heals of Venice, Red, and Arri.

By the time a tiny A7 was kitted out to have the same functionailty as a proper ENG camera or a bare bones F55, the rig and weight would be similar to the bigger cameras, just much less elegent and reliable. Not to mention over heating issues that smaller hybrid cameras have.

Anyone one of us would prefer something small and light. Big ans heavy is not a design preference, but a design compromise. You just can’t do things with a smaller camera that you can with a bigger one. Technological and physical limitations are just a current reality.
 
James0b57 said:
You are talking about options and possibilities. No camera manufacturer has made an essential camera design yet.
Click to expand...
That's because, in the digital era, there was a great deal of divergence in the deployment of cameras. ENG vs. YouTube /Vlogging vs. cinematic/narrative vs. corporate/interview, etc. There's still divergence but, instead of four to six different type cameras, you ought to be able to get by with a couple.

Plus, built-in wireless, including audio, auto focus, etc, internal SSD's, etc. can make the camera itself light and the external rigging mostly unnecessary.
 
They just got started with quantum computers. Moore's law is just about to blow up.

davedv said:
Regarding Moore's Law, there is a growing realization in the semi-conductor industry that Moore's Law is coming to an end:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601441/moores-law-is-dead-now-what/
https://www.cnet.com/news/moores-law-is-dead-nvidias-ceo-jensen-huang-says-at-ces-2019/

The technical version of the law, which is that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles every 24 months, seems to have already slowed. There have been increasing challenges in switching to smaller production processes, and everyone kind of expected that the laws of physics would bring about the end of Moore's Law at some point. Even Gordon Moore himself said in 2015 that he didn't see Moore's Law surviving the next decade.

The more colloquial version of Moore's Law, that computing power will continue to grow at an exponential rate, may also be in trouble. You might imagine that even though the increases in transistor density have slowed down, the semi-conductor manufacturers would find new and creative ways to increase computing power. But so far this hasn't really happened. Intel and others have struggled to keep producing new processors that are significantly faster than their predecessors. Sure, they might add more processing cores, but the amount of compute power in each core has not been increasing very quickly.

So, from this perspective, it's not that Moore's law has caught up with our camera desires. Instead, the end of Moore's law has made it difficult for camera makers to give us the same kind of dramatic, year-over-year performance improvements that we've enjoyed since the start of digital imaging.

I don't think we've fully felt the effects of the end of Moore's Law yet, but it's going to have a pretty broad impact across a lot of different fields.
Click to expand...
 
What do y'all think of the ergonomics of the GH5? With its flip-out screen and XLR adapter, it's about as good as a DSLR can be, in my limited imagination.

Sure, I would prefer certain improvements internally (global shutter, RAW recording, less resolution, even longer battery life) but on the outside, what more can you do?

Shoulder cams are a valid choice, and I totally understand their attraction: good balance with large lenses, that awesome slot for a wireless receiver, etc. But for those who are interested in the DSLR body style, I'm curious what shortcomings they still see in the GH5.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
What do y'all think of the ergonomics of the GH5? With its flip-out screen and XLR adapter, it's about as good as a DSLR can be, in my limited imagination.

Sure I would prefer certain improvements internally (global shutter, RAW recording, less resolution, even longer battery life) but on the outside, what more can you do?

Shoulder cams are a valid choice, and I totally understand their attraction: good balance with any kind of serious lens, that awesome slot for a wireless receiver, etc. But for those who are interested in the DSLR body style, I'm curious what shortcomings they still see in the GH5.
Click to expand...

As far as ergonomics, all mirrorless cameras have terrible ergonomics for shooting video. They work but the ergonomics are conceived for stills shooting, which is all wrong for video. To shoot a mirrorless handheld, you need to put it in a cage and hang a bunch of gak all over it. That is not ergonomically sound, but it's a hack that can work for some. I do it and can shoot well with my XT-3 but the rig now weighs about 8lbs to make it work for usable handheld. If the camera is too light, you get micro jitters, which looks terrible, you need mass and weight, which is kind of dumb when you think about it, buy a tiny camera because it's small and light, then add a ton of gak to make it big and heavy again.

Personally I think the GH5 is a great camera, the IBIS is handy, great specs, fairly easy to shoot with. But the XT-3 has better color science and more internal high quality recording options, plus the APS-C/S35 imager that most prefer over M43. While the GH5 can use a lot more lenses than the Fujifilm, I like the Fujinon XF lenses a lot more than most of the Native M43 lens offerings. And the XT-3 AF is better too. But that's just me, I could be 99% as happy with the GH5.
 
Last edited:
In the GH5's case the main shortcomings are bad AF, a small sensor, and questionable color science. If those are irrelevant for someone then it's pretty much the perfect camera besides making it a bit better with some additions like you mentioned and others (internal 10-bit 60p and more dynamic range).

Someone on here also mentioned it would be ideal to have V-Log and not V-Log L.
 
puredrifting said:
As far as ergonomics, all mirrorless cameras have terrible ergonomics for shooting video. They work but the ergonomics are conceived for stills shooting, which is all wrong for video...
Click to expand...
Which opens another can of worms. Why aren't the video geared hybrids - GH-series, S1, A7S/II, XT-3 - built as video cameras, especially since most of the aforementioned companies make camcorders as well? It's so odd that even a keiretsu should have been able to accommodate this.

groveChuck said:
If you prefer a stripped down camera, then Moore is less, more or less???
Click to expand...
Less is only more when I step on a weight scale.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top