Why DO we still have big cameras?

[tarzan]

The idea to start this thread came to me the other day, when I was shooting a news event using a Panasonic AGHPX600. Someone there (I think he was a fashion print photog) asked me why, if there are so many models of video cameras on the market that shoot "just as good a quality," do so many TV stations like mine still invest in such large cameras, instead of smaller, more lightweight ones. I was a little busy shooting my b-roll at the time, but my quick answer to him was that many of us prefer to work with cameras where we can still control a lot of stuff manually and have more bells and whistles on it, and that in many cases, the smaller cameras are harder to operate because the controls are so small. That was MY brief answer to the question anyway.
Other more self-serving answers that I might give if I had more time and felt more comfortable saying it to strangers would be:
-The big camera makes me feel and look more important than all the other people at the event who are there with cameras.
-The big camera is harder for a reporter to learn to use, and so having such heavy hardware in our shop makes me feel reassured that I'm not likely lose my job soon to an MMJ reporter.

Now, of course those are MY answers, not the answers from those who run TV stations. I do know of plenty of stations out there where they've pretty much gone completely MMJ, and even the full-time photogs use small MMJ cameras, but so far, my shop still has the big ones for the photogs and just a handful of small ones reporters can sign out if they really need to shoot something solo. And honestly, I really don't know the correct answer as to why some TV stations still invest in big cameras. In the old days, of someone had asked, "why are your cameras so big and heavy? I've got a home VHS camcorder and it shoots just as good a quality..." -I would have laughed and said, "No it doesn't." But now, I'm not so sure. Is a AGHPX600 or AJ-HPX2000 really that much better quality than some of the smaller HD memory card cameras out there used by MMJs?

Not that I want a smaller camera, I'm happy with the one I have mainly for the reasons I stated above. Just wondering, what answer do the rest of you give when someone in the field asks why TV videographers' cameras are still so big in this day and age?

 

[Ben Longden]

2/3 inch 3CCD chip is my starting point.

Having said that, I have played with 35mm size chip cameras that were 1/3 the size of my shouldermount...

While the small handhelds can do true HD (1080 etc) the chip size means their depth of field is so small that its like a fixed focus camera..

For me its size that counts... size of the chip, the quality of image and the glass in front..

 

[The Thing on The Sticks]

the short answer is Chip size, functionality and ergonomics. There is also reparability, compatibility and transmission chain stuff to consider as well as many smaller cameras do not have sdi or time code compatibility.

 

[MidwestPhotog]

As someone who made the switch to freelance and use dslrs, the big things I miss are:
-the shoulder mount form factor. Even the ex3 I used in news was more fatiguing to hand hold than a much heavier camera on my shoulder
-access to controls without digging into menus. Having to dig down to change white balance or shutter speed or gain or audio levels means missing shots
-auto takeover. Out OMBs shot on nx-5us, which had great access to controls, but tried their darndest to 'help you out' with exposure. It took me almost a week to realize my exposure kept changing because I had somehow bumped the button that turned on auto shutter speed.
-output options. Lots of little cameras might have a micro Hdmi out, but nothing that works with existing live truck setups

That said, small size can nice. I've got a pretty small camera bag with 2 dslrs, lenses and audio, and a couple led panels. A support bag with lightweight tripods and light stands, and I can load in a 2 camera shoot in one trip by myself.

 

[Lensmith]

The real reason, to me...is the lens.
All of those smaller "just as good quality" cameras don't have a good enough lens to truly zoom in as far as those bigger models with better glass.

Too many don't understand the lens is least as important, if not more, than the electronic body of the camera.

 

[svp]

Since our station has HPX370's, the chip size really can't be used as a reason. However, the station paid for the best lenses they could get for these cameras and it makes a world of difference over the stock glass. Plus, I've yet to use a small camera with a picture as crisp as what I get out of the 370 with that lens. The ergonomics of a shoulder mount camera is nice BUT considering I believe a tripod should be used 99% of the time, I don't think that's a valid argument. In fact, for ride alongs or big scrums such as at sporting events, I'd much rather use my NX5U where I can rotate the LCD screen and hold that camera up in the air seemingly forever to get the shot. Holding up the big camera over a crowd to try to get a shot really sucks. In the end I just feel the quality of the picture on the big cams is still superior to the smaller cams BUT that is slowly changing. The biggest reason I prefer the bigger cameras is because you can fit all your accessories on it (light, wireless receivers, etc) and it not become this awkward thing that feels impossible to use. Small cams are great until you start adding things. Then they really become a pain in the ______. As for the DSLR rigs I see some guys running around with. I think its just ridiculous to try to run around shooting video with those contraptions.

 

[cyndygreen1]

Agreed on "what everyone else says"...shoulder mount gives more stability, most of the prosumer cameras lack a real lens (especially a doubler).

What I hate is the balance of the smaller cameras - not shoulder mounted so you have to find new ways to stabilize while on the run. The smaller form does allow you to blend in at times - a good thing and a bad thing. Re the latter I've found that attitude with a small camera establishes you as a pro just as much as size with a big camera. I use a Panasonic HMC150 and pretty much chose it cause the manual controls are pretty much in the same spots as with the DVR Pros I used at my last TV job. I almost never go into the menu except to erase or format cards.

Re repairs - well, since this is a one person camera and I take good care of it, none (knock on wood). Much better than any tape cameras I've used - the tape carriage broke down eventually on all of them (prosumer - never the pro models).

And yeah - DOF sucks. I have found some tolerable work-arounds but still dream of my older bigger cameras and the ease of getting exactly what I wanted when I wanted.

And in closing - job security re size of camera? The HMC150 has enough dials and switches and whistles to confuse any reporter who is lacking in brain cells. I've found that few reporters wanted to shoot anyhows...that was not their interest.

 

[satop]

no small cameras please

we tried the smaller "next generation" eng cameras a few years ago. lasted less than 2 years. Here is what i found.

the lens. The lens was not nearly good enough. I remember shooting a POTUS event, and the producer in NY saying to me over the ifb, zoom in. I was zoomed in! I remember shooting crime scenes, where the photogs next to me are like wow there is the gun, and i was like what gun, all i see lights a block away.

the top light. how do you power it? not from the stock pannasonic battery, not enough power in them. so, now we needed another battery.

not to mention trying to mount wireless recievers, and now a live u etc to a small camera, what are you really saving? the thing becomes heavier than the shoulder mount camera, and a lot more unbalanced.

Plus the smaller cameras are not made for the ruggedness that is ENG News.

 

[Joda]

The biggest difference is not in the low light capabilities which do many people assume, but in the highlights. Try taking a short of someone on stage with one of those toy cameras..... White blob.
Big cameras can handle so much various light situations in one frame.....

 

[Run&Gun]

There's a reason the basic design of the full-sized ENG camera hasn't changed in probably 30 years, it's damn near perfect. There are times when the form factor of a small camera is needed/wanted, but that's only about maybe one out of 100 shoots for me.

It looks like most of us are on the same page with our reasons: Ergonomics, size/mass(absorbs vibration=steadier shot), the fact that you can carry around a larger, heavier, more capable camera on you shoulder all day as opposed to just a few minutes of a baby cam out in front of you, physical switches, [chip size, LENS(this can't be overstated ENOUGH), basic optical principles and physics-just go over to almost any still photo board and throw the question out about crop sensors vs full frame], etc., etc., etc. SVP, just because you're shooting on a tripod doesn't mean that little fixed lens cameras are any easier to shoot with. If switches aren't there, you have to jump into menu's for simple things and it has a $hitty fixed lens with "infinite focus & iris" and servos that behave like an epileptic turtle, then being on a tripod doesn't fix any of those problems. Then there's the on-camera accessories like wireless and a top-light. PITA, PITA, PITA. For 99% of what I do, I'll take my 25lb 2700 over a four pound "my first sony".

And Ben(not picking on you), you mean the DoF is so large. On the smaller chip cameras, the focal lengths used(for equivalent FoV on 2/3") are wider, so they have a larger/deeper/bigger depth of field compared to larger chip cameras, like our 2/3" ENG cams and other larger chip, single sensor cams. Sometimes that extra DoF can be helpful though, like shooting sports(my first Betacam had 1/2" chips and I thought I was 'the man' shooting basketball and football. Lol. I could follow the ball or a player fairly tightly from basket to basket and barely move my focus barrel).

And another thing that Tarzan touched on. How the camera itself looks. It's "presence". Sometimes you do need the "commanding presence" of a large camera for a "dog & pony" show in front of clients. Especially when it's something like a large corporation and they're paying agency rates. It makes it look like they're really getting their moneys worth and YOU know what you're doing.

 

[1911A1]

On top of all the other good points that have been brought up so far, I also tell people that the bigger cameras are built more ruggedly than the little ones.

 

[pixlmgr]

small cameras

I just got the opportunity to swap from a Sony EX3 with a good fujinon 18x1 with doubler, to a PMW-320 with the same lens. The new camera is so much easier to hand hold, fits on the tripod better, and is 5 pounds heavier. I wanted a camera that balanced well, even if it weighed more. I still wish they could have afforded the 500 with the pool feed card, but it wasn't in the cards.

 

[At the scene]

The idea to start this thread came to me the other day, when I was shooting a news event using a Panasonic AGHPX600. Someone there (I think he was a fashion print photog) asked me why, if there are so many models of video cameras on the market that shoot "just as good a quality," do so many TV stations like mine still invest in such large cameras, instead of smaller, more lightweight ones.

I think I would have said " the same reason why I don't see you shooting with one of these"

Unless of course he had one of these! Then I would know why he asked!!

 

[canuckcam]

Use the tools that meets your need. Sometimes an iPhone is required, otherwise a full shoulder camera works better.

Compact - by the time you add all the doodads slinging off your DSLR rig to make it ENG-ready (light, wireless (x2) shotgun mic, handle, viewfinder, focus assist, pistol grip, etc.) it's unwieldy, lots of wires to snag and break and even more bulky than a shoulder camera. The only things I have slinging off my camera are the coily XLR for the shotgun mic and the strap.

Balance - With the new Sony PMW cameras they're so light that I prefer to use a heavier battery on the back (especially with a wide lens) so you're pulling down on the lens instead of pushing up (like with a small camera) - heavier on the back but much much easier on your arm. BVW-600... it was so... perfect.

Lens - while DSLR lenses are superior in image quality vs regular ENG lenses, they're varifocal - that is, it doesn't hold focus throughout the zoom range (you can't zoom in, focus, zoom out.) Cheaper DSLR lenses don't have circular apertures so you'll see octagons and such on out of focus highlights. That said, high quality DSLR zoom lenses hold their aperture at the telephoto extreme of the zoom range. At least with the Canon 17x 2/3 lens, I lose (IIRC) 1/3 to 2/3 stop of light at the extreme telephoto range. And a tripod handle-mounted zoom controller is super handy to be shooting sports highlights with.

Everyday ruggedness - I don't mean dropping-on-ground ruggedness, but just getting banged around in a scrum, in the back of your vehicle, etc.

I'm not sure I'd put repairability in though. All these new fancycamsâ„¢ are basically a few circuit boards sandwiched together. They're not like the old Sony BVP cameras with discreet boards that you can swap out even in the field! And those old cameras were completely sealed, too. No fans, no vent holes...

 

[satpimp]

You buy the right tool once. The cheap one over and over. Bigger chips. Control. Longevity. Lenses. I love some of the "little" cams, but if I'm buying for a fleet of daily multiple use cameras that have to reach a standard every time with different users.... Go big or go home.

Some of the baby cams take so much rigging to make them punch above thier weight that is just doesn't seem worth the money or brain drain.

Some of the cameras "look just as good". To me that translates as a person who doesn't know better, or a crap camera with a professional behind it with proper support and light control.

I've had a Leica still camera for 10 years... It's in the last two or three that I've finally started to see the best from it. It's lasted through my ignorance because it punches above it's weight

 

[cameragod]

I keep getting told "You can shoot a whole film on an iphone"
and my reply is you could clean a whole hospital with a toothbrush... that doesn't make it a good idea.

 

[tarzan]

Everyone's made some really good points here. Of course, in order to convince bean counters at TV stations and/or their parent companies of the wisdom of investing in larger cameras as opposed to cutting corners, you'd have to literally sit them down in front of a big screen TV and show them examples of the same shot taken with different types of cameras and lenses and chips, and sometimes even have to explain how they look different. Otherwise the average layman doesn't understand all the photography and videography jargon what we know.

 

[Run&Gun]

Unfortunately, the decisions are rarely made now(or include input) by those that it actually affects. Honestly, it's not SO much the absolute picture quality that's the downside of the baby cams, it's the usability of the cameras. And those that don't have to use them day in and day out don't understand and don't care.

Maybe if you could put it in a way to make the office dwelling bean counters understand... There's nothing wrong with sitting in a bus seat for 10 minutes, it does the job, but if you had to sit at your desk for eight hours in it instead of a cushy, swiveling, high backed office chair with armrests... Then they might start to understand.

 

[svp]

I remember when I worked in DC and Fox News went HD with P2. All their guys got a HPX500 & a HPX170. Our bureau went with HXP2000's. Its about having the right tool for the job. Most times its the bigger camera but the smaller cams are better for certain situations.

 

[code20photog]

Something that people don't think about, but the smaller cameras, the "prosumer" types, even the handheld ENG cameras, are a much bigger target for thieves. When was the last time you saw a kid shooting skateboard videos with a XDCAM F350?