The Video/Digital Cinema News Cycle is Eating Itself?

DLD said:
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.
Click to expand...

Because people want stills cameras that shoot video! You know this...you share the statistics every week.

We obviously need both bodies - and lots of improvements and changes in every which way - but the small stills cameras are a necessity. A few pros on the forums are in the minority (as these cameras aren't built for them) compared to the hundreds of thousands that buy them and don't know what DVXuser or a DVX is.
 
I can understand it with regard to XT-3 and even Z6 and S1/H ... but GH-3/4/5 and A7S/II are clearly videocentric models and would be far better serving their customers in a different shape/layout.
 
Well, I mean...this is pretty much the Mac/Windows debate but for ergonomics.

Every day both sides comment on their own preferences, and I'd be one of the first to tell you I would hate a videocentric shape/layout model based on what I personally can do with a mirrorless because of how it's shaped and programmed.

We really just need both, always.
 
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.
Click to expand...
Are you asking about ergonomics, or functionality? The GH5 is somewhat uncomfortable to hold. I don’t think it is very ergonomic. It has a lot of features.


combatentropy said:
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?
Click to expand...
The body is a bit small, but that is a good thing for M43. The lenses and everything can be smaller. But the camera is so small, it wouldn’t be my preference for most work. The GH5 is a pretty good camera though.

combatentropy said:
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.
Click to expand...
Shoulder cams are not a preference.... having all the features in one body is the preference. The size and need for shoulder mount to support the weight is the by product of having all the features in one camera body. No one says “damn, i wish they made a camera that gave people back problems and f’d up their spine.” Dream camera, right?
 
There was only one job I used a GH5 and GH5s on for A cam. Despite myself and all my reasoning, i enjoyed shooting with them.

The zoom lenses were tiny and fast. There was plenty of dof control. The 10bit images were great.
 
James0b57 said:
Are you asking about ergonomics, or functionality?
Click to expand...

Ergonomics.

(1) Physical attributes: weight, size, shape, screen size, screen range of motion, viewfinder, inputs, outputs, etc.
(2) Operator accomodations. So if you want, you could also include instrumentation: zebras, false color, viewfinder or flipscreen resolution, the placement of buttons and knobs, the ease of use of menus, start-up speed from off, etc. Things that you interact with.

Just not image quality, like sensor size, resolution, dynamic range, codecs, image stabilization. I wanted to focus just on the outside and get that out of the way, then focus on innards.


The GH5 is somewhat uncomfortable to hold
Click to expand...

Is there another DSLR that you really like? I think you said you preferred the DSLR body style. Maybe I just picked less than the best example.
 
Last edited:
NorBro said:
... Every day both sides comment on their own preferences, and I'd be one of the first to tell you I would hate a videocentric shape/layout model based on what I personally can do with a mirrorless because of how it's shaped and programmed.

We really just need both, always.
Click to expand...
Or really, all, always.

Let's have a given feature set as DSLR, as a DSLR/Video hybrid like Canon C-series, as a small hand-held consumer camcorder, as a shoulder/sticks large size pro ENG cam, as a Mini/Z box, et cetera, et cetera. The beauty of this is that there ought not be a dual choice Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux debate. It's just a shape of things to come.

PS. Personally, I can't wait for the (real) Large Format 16K camcorder and the 16K vs. 32K debate.
 
So, no camera news, you say?

Here you go - Hasselblad X1D II 50C Medium Format Mirrorless Camera. 50 MPX. Under $6K.
 
The Octopus is great. Looks like this one might actually get off the ground. Nice to have the options and modularity. Especially nice for indie filmers. Will be interesting to see the reliability of these, or whether there with be hackintosh style headaches with every firmware update.

In any case, this is what Red promised, but never entirely delivered. If you think about it, sony did it with the F35 and F23. ;)
 
combatentropy said:
Ergonomics.

(1) Physical attributes: weight, size, shape, screen size, screen range of motion, viewfinder, inputs, outputs, etc.
(2) Operator accomodations. So if you want, you could also include instrumentation: zebras, false color, viewfinder or flipscreen resolution, the placement of buttons and knobs, the ease of use of menus, start-up speed from off, etc. Things that you interact with.

Just not image quality, like sensor size, resolution, dynamic range, codecs, image stabilization. I wanted to focus just on the outside and get that out of the way, then focus on innards.
Click to expand...
When it comes to cameras, the word ‘ergonomic’ takes on a more specific meaning. Maybe it is my own interpretation of the word, but also, maybe it is the way we interact with cameras. However, cameras have levels of ergonomics, and we could be focusing on one aspect over another, or considering the whole work flow. When i am talking camera ergonomics, i am typically referencing the physical feel and operation. Much in the same way one might debate whether a handle or a glove fits.

The GH5 is so small, in my hands it feels dainty and precarious. The grip is too small. A hanging pinky makes me feel like the designers were pinky-less designers. The yag and the hot shoe adapters are clever, but they don’t help make the camera feel any better, and cables stick straight out the side and your other hand now has to find a new home. The hot shoe adapters unbalance the camera and the worry of it snapping off takes up a little of my mental energy. Energy that is spent worrying about things other than a camera breaking, i hope.

The GH5 is not ergonomic in my opinion. Features and options are nice, but execution is what ultimately makes a camera ergonomic.



combatentropy said:
Is there another DSLR that you really like? I think you said you preferred the DSLR body style. Maybe I just picked less than the best example.
Click to expand...
A truly ergonomic small mirrorless/dslr style video camera doesn’t exist yet. Market analysis or lack of innovation or whatever reason, it just hasn’t been made yet. There are easy ways to do it, but for whatever reasons, it is not advantageous to anyone to make it. Economies of scale, i gues. That is why i see consumer cameras leading professional cameras in innovation for the foreseeable future.

Assuming there is no rigging or add ons, then I prefer a large dslr style body, with a more slanted grip. Even for still photos, i’d prefer a more slanted grip. I think dslr’s are still tied to the film days, where the grip housed the film roll and had to be veryically straight. With digital, there is no reason to stick to that design philosophy, except that photogs are used to it.

The Canon 1D and the Nikon D3 flagship bodies feel good for professional work. Robust and solid. Feels good in the hand. Room for physical controls. Room for outputs (if a company was bullish enough to do it).The optical view finder could be turned into an output hub and the evf could be next to it on the left, or operators side. And the internal battery actually last long enough to get through a real world scenario.

At the same time, they are small enough to configure into anything that an Arri mini or Balck magic would. They can even fit into a lot of situations that a zcam or go pro is being used for. Anything smaller than a full size SLR/DSLR is going to be built out. I’d rather have a unibody for the core features for professional work.

Canon did not continue the 1DC concept, and instead continued the awful Cx00 series. The ergonomics of the Cx00 series can be worked around with auto focus or a good focus puller, or going shoulder mount with it. But the body does not work well by itself. The side handle only works when the camera is in front of you in your hands, fatigue can set in pretty quickly that way. And when it is put up on the shoulder the side handle is now too far out to the side and too high. Whereas, an ENG body ingeniously has the grip on the lens barrel. Not perfectly comfortable, but highly effecient and practical. The c300 has to be reconfigured everytime you change shooting positions.

There is just no way to comfortably hold a GH camera without some sort of add on. Much like there is no way to type on a cell phone without some sort of add on. A full size dslr is similar to an ENG body, it might be bigger than you think you want, but the effeciancy of not having to build out the camera is a complete joy and creative liberty.

Now if we start getting into cameras and uses outside of pro use, then there are plenty of other solutions and options.

The nice thing, is we have options. We have a lot of affordable andd usable options. We also have options on how we pursue a career utilizing video. It really is what you make of it.
 
Last edited:
@combantentropy

If i remember correctly, you prefer the small camcorder with a flip screen for ergonomics?
 
Agree with all... but then I was introduced to something new to me...Kodak film..and it was love at first sight
 
niki said:
Agree with all... but then I was introduced to something new to me...Kodak film..and it was love at first sight
Click to expand...

Ah, there we go! That solves some things. But not very good for three hour interviews with a budget. ;)
 
Thank you for your thorough treatment of the pros and cons of various DSLRs. That is exactly what I am looking for.

James0b57 said:
If i remember correctly, you prefer the small camcorder with a flip screen for ergonomics?
Click to expand...

It is my current favorite. I began in 1990 with a shoulder camera and believed it proper. When the VX1000 came out, its digital tape was super cool, but I thought the body style an ergonomic disaster. Basically, your hand gets tired. It was its lowly cousin the TRV900 that changed my mind, although it took a while.

Your first guess is to hold it like the VX1000, and therefore it suffers from the same flaw: your hand gets tired. A solution is the monopod: portable but steady (at least, steady enough for what they were paying me). But you need both a ball-joint head and a slide-off mount to overcome a monopod's awkwardnesses.

Some time later I discovered that my body can serve as a monopod. Instead of holding the TRV900 (or similar handicam) in its strap, tuck your hand beneath the lens and push its battery against your chest. With a DSLR the flip screen is too close to your chest to see. With a handicam, especially when a ridiculously long 5-hour battery is attached to the back, the flipscreen is in a good position if you just look down.

Stability. Mobility. All in one.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
Stability. Mobility. All in one.
Click to expand...

You also mentioned the posture of “bowing” was good for documentary, as it is less offensive that the bazooka of shoulder mount. I always liked that thought.

The handycam is pretty good. One of those little sony’s and then a beefier Panasonic DVC30 were the first cameras i clocked over 100hrs of material on.

One of the reasons i converted over to full size dslr, was perhaps more of a design philosophy. I like having a camera that is highly adaptable. Arri minis, Reds, FS100, zcam, A7, c300, go pro, and many other cameras in a box are highly adaptable, but they are not exactly ergonomic on their own. A dslr is essentially a scultped and ergonomic box that is highly adaptable, but also highly functional by itself.

I’ll try to find an old handy cam and mess around with it. See how the form factor has aged.

Although, the size of a dslr is small enough, that it can be made to operate like a handycam with an accesory, but a handycam can’t be modified to do what a dslr does.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top