Jump to content

Pro camcorder ergonomics - why are they so rubbish?


Recommended Posts

Camera ergonomics are so bad that people had to create accessory brands to help the problem 😮 

And they went pretty big nowdays !

and finally, I say all that, and i made the extreme choice of buying a Sigma fp ... at least, with that body i didn't expect any ergonomics and created mine.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well, that's a matter of opinion, as you say. I think it makes sense and anyone who's worked in broadcast can instantly pick up one of these (or an FX9 or FS7), start shooting, and find most of t

New blog post https://www.eoshd.com/news/pro-camcorder-ergonomics-are-overdue-a-big-change/

I agree.  I had the EVA1 for 2 years, which I gradually got frustrated with as it had a hideous way of changing the frame rates. The camera would have to reboot and sometimes crashed. Then, the c

5 hours ago, Pewwinck said:

Thanks for answering Barefoot 🙂

When i see the quality and character of a 16mm bmpcc sensor. i believe it would surely be possible in a reasonnably small body. this sensor with a 8-80 f2.8 fixed lens on a PD150 body ergonomics would be a dream for me 🙂 and for a lot of documentary run n gun  style film makers.  But no brands want such a longevity now because they want you to buy a new camera every 1 or 2 years, and we do !!!

🙂

I guess that is essentially the space that cameras like the DVX200, CX350, UX90 and Z150 fill. Camcorder style, 1" sensor (or 4/3rds for the DVX200), with zoom lenses covering around 9-120mm.

Of course they generally lack things like raw, log, 10-bit etc, but that essentially comes down to market forces. Anybody who cares about maximum image quality is also far more likely to favour a larger sensor cinema camera. You might be in the minority who feel otherwise.

Red cancelled their original Scarlet concept ("3K for $3K") for similar reasons - once DSLR's started recording video, they most knew people wanting to move to a more "cinema" style camera would be far more likely to purchase a FF interchangeable-lens camera, rather than a fixed lens s16 camera. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, barefoot_dp said:

I guess that is essentially the space that cameras like the DVX200, CX350, UX90 and Z150 fill. Camcorder style, 1" sensor (or 4/3rds for the DVX200), with zoom lenses covering around 9-120mm.

If only the DVX200 had a MFT mount then you could have paired it with the Panasonic 14-140mm for when you need a big 10x zoom, or a 25mm f1.7 when you need better lowlight performance, or a 60mm f2.8 for pretty headshot interviews, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

If only the DVX200 had a MFT mount then you could have paired it with the Panasonic 14-140mm for when you need a big 10x zoom, or a 25mm f1.7 when you need better lowlight performance, or a 60mm f2.8 for pretty headshot interviews, etc

I think AF was the primary reason Panasonic went with the integrated lens there. I sooooo wish they made an interchangeable lens version alongside it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...