Thanks for the contribution. I have been working with these "heavy and expensive" cameras and camcorders since 1980 and could have done my work on countless documentaries, television shows, sports, music and other live events with nothing less than these devices. Everything is where it belongs and you don't have to equip a DSLR with all sorts of accessories so that you can make all the important settings that a broadcast camera offers right from the start.
Absolutely. A 22x zoom lens that is f1.9 across the entire zoom range. Versus all the UA-camrs running around with a 24-70mm f2.8 lens, which is less than 3x zoom.
@@SparkFosterFilms although if they use larger sensor they'll have shallower depth of field and probably sharper picture. B4 lenses are full of compromises due to their zoom range and parafocality. None of these are bad qualities but just different use cases. A DSLR user will never need a parafocal zoom lens, a broadcaster will (almost) never need an ARRI master prime, and a cinema DP will rarely need super fast autofocus. Yet all of the very different types of lenses and cameras are useful in their own field.
@@hbp_ It's "parfocal" not "parafocal" and it's one of the most sought after features of professional zoom lenses. A DSLR user would benefit greatly from a parfocal lens, but most can't afford them. There is no correlation between sensor size and image sharpness. "Sharpness" is determined by the optics and the resolution of the sensor. Larger sensors are not inherently sharper than smaller sensors. All other things being equal, a larger sensor will produce a brighter image than a smaller sensor, due to having more surface area for light to make contact with. This enables the user to shoot at a lower ISO rating for reduced noise, which can help improve "sharpness." BUT the larger sensor will also produce a shallower depth of field, which means less of the image along the Z-axis will be in focus, therefore causing a loss in sharpness.
I went on set and saw one of these Massive cameras, just being in its presence is god like and puts any consumer junk to shame, just the way the thing towers over someone is enough to give chills.
great info, the sad (or good depending on your context) thing is broadcast is now sharing viewership with digital online media like youtube and small phone device, broadcast won't disappear but the consumers base and how it is consumed has all changed since the 90s and early 2000's.
I accidentally bumped into the video, but I'm glad I watched it! I had hardly a clue of the range of these cameras and all their requirements. Thank you, I've learned something today :)
Nice! This might be a good video for film schools, production companies and tv stations, explaining that you don't try to find out the wheel when it is about quality, speed and storytelling. So you don't warp yourself in a frustrating configuration of some ultrabyte kind of thing and just use a decent tool that already exists. It is probably cheaper too! In those days people were so scared about the prices that they bought this Canon XL1, a body you could not lean on your shoulder and therefore had to be carried in front of your face to see the viewfinder, so you could not use any finger to adjust the lens or whatever. This kind of designer drama also overcame Sony with the EX3. I once bought a second hand EX3 and thought immediately: this sucks. Years later I ended up with this FX7 with a cheap lens in the desert of Jordanie, in a jeep steering through the hot sand bumping and bumping so I couldn't make any proper shot, not even a wide total. Another guy with a telephone on the same bumpy ride made the most beautiful pictures. Long story short: good cameras for reporters are big and expensive. New modern tools could be good too. But everything inbetween from the last twenty years can't compete. In the ninetees I filmed with the Ikegami HL95 (in 2003 I had 4 of them) Nowadays I film a lot with the Sony AX33, a 4K handycam. The 4K option makes it possible to zoom afterwards. That's the replacement of the incredible expensive wide angle Canon Lens (with optical bending correction) 36.000 gulden in 1997. While still doing reports, I don't miss the big gear. So it is not about the money (a second hand AX33 you can get voor 300 euro) but about your satisfaction in storytelling. And to come back on WHY good gear is so expensive: yes indeed if you are in a system interlocked and you can get video feedback in your viewfinder from the OB van... This brings me to another aspect of the high costs of proper technologies. Professional gear has a depreciation period of only a few years. So all products had to me renewed every four years or so. This was to prevent costs of repair, but overall, failure of functionality. How often do you see a live tv show and one of the lightbulbs in the ceiling is finishing its lifetime? Never! So the industry standard in film and television is: it should not blow your production. In the ninetees companys like Ikegami (and presumably others but these companies affected me with this problem) used electronic parts which after years start leaking (chemicals) and damaged the circuit boards, making the expensive product useless. In those days we had to throw away the most expensive Betacam tape editing machines because their videoheads replacement became more expensive than buying a second hand machine. But that is another different story.
I hear you, I remember throwing out 2 Betacam SP playback machines that cost about $15k (second hand)! It cost a fortune to have the heads replaced and then years of library footage on Beta tapes became redundant.
Just bought my newest sony replacement. 38k plus accesories. Could have bought a Jaguar convertible for god sakes. But hey it can broadcast with cellular so i dont have to goto the studio ever again to dtop off footage. Nice vid
Hello Grant from Tauranga. As a keen casual amatuer I often see the debate as to why smartphones are good enough compared to mirrlorless cameras. I have alway swondered why tv cameras are so big. You see those big remote cameras filming a news reader So now, thanks to your video I know. I also remember seeing zooms on movies being incredibly long comapared to my slr or dslr or mirrorless.
Not all of these cameras even are camcorders. Some are triaxial-connector-only; not dockable; some are camcorders only and not dockable, and some can be docked either as a triax camera (no recorder) or a recorder (no triax), and some may have both at the same time (but not in the tape days, if I remember right).
Guess what? I started my career working in a TV studio in 1982 in India on Image Orthicon cameras. It had different lenses mounted on a turret and the cameraman had to choose the right lens instantly and do the framing adjustments dollying in or out!! My journey still continues now using even the GoPros!!
I couldn't resist buying DVCAMs.. DSR 300 and DSR 570 ws cheap... Way outdated... but I just had to.. I must be crazy... I was lucky one came complete with 3 XLR MICS 2 wireless + receiver, shotgun and giant flight case.. DIY battery pack - 8 Li - ion 18650s ripped from Aldi power packs...
I just got a used Sony f900r. It is complex to figure out. I love the colour and the detail is close to 4k when you set it up properly with a nice lens.
This is why I like camcorders, especially these shoulder mount broadcast type. They are purpose built for video, with all the adjustments you'll need on the fly available with the push of a button or twist of a knob/ring. Especially those parfocal lenses with the constant aperture. I don't understand why DSLRs are so popular in video when even a hand held camcorder is more suited for the job.
I professionally shoot news on mirrorless, here's why: Price (were a small outlet who don't have money for separate photo and video cameras) - Size (I can carry all I need for a three camera interview in one trip as a solo shooter) - Large sensors (Depth of field and light sensitivity). We're a digital outlet that ride the line between content creators and ENG, and have found they work for us. But there are times where I'd kill for an ENG camera. We're going to get an FX6 soon that will hopefully solve many of the problems inherent with mirrorless (overheating in extreme conditions, lack of XLR input, Lack of internal ND) while still retaining the full frame properties we love.
@@FitsTube Ah, so it boils down mostly to the budget's need for an all-rounder, for photo _and_ video, with size perks for solo portability. Not to mention the low light performance of a larger sensor. Thanks for the insights.
Price. In order to have the same sensor size, image quality and removable lens you have to pay 10x for a camcorder than for a mirrorless, and unless you do a live show or an event - this is well worth the inconvenience of having to setup your rig 10 minutes longer, or switch the lens instead of zooming. Also they are smaller which makes them better for vlogs, cause you can take it everywhere without having to plan for shooting in advance.
But... DSLRs _are_ actually camcorders. And some cameras like these are dockable/modular and some aren't. So historically the ones of these with permanent triaxial connectors were actually NOT camcorders... because they had so much circuitry in them that they had no room for a tape deck. There may be some now that are camcorders because they just have a flash slot. But then back in the tape years, dockable/modular cameras of this shape would ether have a triax back, not docked as a camcorder; or a tape deck back, so then docked as a camcorder. So it's actually not as simple as I think you believe it is.
I use the non shoulder pro camcorders all the time, sometimes ill get a shoulder pad for em. But its a nice way to have all the same features, but it be lighter, however those JVC cameras that are like half size shoulder cams are also a super light option for ENG shooting. Love me my b4 lenses tho.
@6:40 regarding viewfinders, (not a pro, or even an amateur video shooter) I have never seen a viewfinder for the left eye. My right eye is not really good and the 4-5 times I touched a video camera, I was always put off by the viewfinder... Are there any left eye viewfinders around?
It uses tapes, has 4:2:2 anti-aliasing free recording, 12 stops of dynamic range, has functionalities for multiple crew members, and it hooks up on live cable TV instead of stored on a digital SD card. Done saved about 10 minutes of explaining.
Two things I wanted to know about these large professional cameras, first how long the battery lasts and how big memory they have, in other words, how long can you videotape without breaks.
For my old Eng Cam (Which is very voltage tolerant on external voltages..) I made a box that takes 2 sets parallel of 4 in series li ion 18650s, and I expect at least an hour from that...
Interesting info. I've never understood why all portable video recording equipment is dark-colored, or even black. Don't manufacturers know it will become very hot in direct sunlight? Why wouldn't they make them white?
Hello Grant, this is a really great video. I am thinking of shooting a short film with a 80s vibe. For which I was thinking about using a VHS type camera. But then film festivals ask for a HD quality film. What would be your advice. Is there a way to HD quality videos using old VHS or other cameras?
Hey Grant ! How's your back ? Mine is ruined by shouldering big cameras. I now need to use my custom designed (By me) SONY DSC RX 100 MK V rig with a beachtek mic/line matching pre-amp/transformer/mixing box plugged into the line in of my Atomos Ninja V recording monitor. My setup allows me to circumvent the lack of external microphone input on the RX 100 MK V, by running one into the external recording monitor instead, and it works really well. I also use a Z-CAM E2C MFT cube with my Atomos and I shoot 4K DCI @ true 24.00p in 12 Bit ProRes RAW and ProRes RAW HQ. The Z-Cam footage looks really clean. Both these rigs can be held in one hand without too much rear, lower back strain over a day's work 👍However, I miss the stand and deliver consistency you get with big shoulder broadcast cameras which shoot non-subsampled video codecs @ 4:2:2 color space in 10 bit precision, and have all controls at your finger tips. The RX 100 is a great camera, but only an 8 Bit processing and recording one. You do get uncompressed 4:2:2 out of it when using the external micro HDMI output however (But still in 8 Bit unfortunately). The E2C is able to do 12 bit RAW out, which is wonderful, and ProRes RAW is 4:4:4 color space 😃. The Z-CAM cube camera is hardly what anyone would refer to as an ergonomically effective camera to use in an all day shoot. I'm looking at the URSA Mini Pro 12K which is a camera designed along the lines of a standard shoulder broadcast type camera, and can take all the lenses you have described, but shoots in a RAW processing video codec with uncompressed audio up to 12K resolution. I'm a bit torn because I know it will strain my back to use, but I will try it with one of those new handling vest rigs which is supposed to re-distribute the weight of your camera to your lower hips and back from a wearable boom which sits above your head that you hang your camera from. (??) Big cameras have a definate advantage over many of these new hybrid style ones, in that they ballance easier in hand hold shooting situations, and their focus and audio and exposre controls are always sitting at your finger tips.
I too miss the big cameras and their ergonomics for shooting and yes my hips more than my back have suffered from their weight over the years. These newer smaller cameras are definitely easier on the body but I often find the compromise is usability in terms of small fiddly dials, small LCD monitors and hard to use focus controls.
Hi Mark, the Ursa 12K won't take the B4 adaptor nor can it be controlled by ccu in live broadcast. You might want to look at the Ursa Broadcast G2, which is the same body, comes with 4K B4 adaptor and can be a full sensor Super 35 6K camera with the included Canon EF mount or an optional PL mount. It has Prores and good H264/5 for news too, as well as the Braw. It's very versatile and incredible value ($5K with the viewfinder), coming too complete with full shoulder mount kit and IDX V-plate. I recently bought one since getting back into shooting and being used to the cameras and lenses Grant describes here. There's nothing quite like it anywhere near this price. There's an optional fibre back and studio Vf available too. I was on a waiting list for a Fujinon 4K B4 lens, and bought a cheap old Canon B4 J16 from eBay, to test out which is amazingly good, since I sold all my broadcast lenses years ago. I've decided now to go full sensor PLmount/cine lenses though.
Get yourself a job at a rental house and learn about all the kit you will get a better education and you won't have to pay for it. Jobs Like this don't require a 4 year course you will learn much more relevant things working on the job.
Hi - yes I would if I was doing a lot of reality shows. The reality show I talked about in this video I ended up getting production to hire me one for the shoot which was a life saver for my back!
"I don't get why people put on make-up. I'll just be my natural self!" _(Camera goliath stares into your soul through the pores in your skin.)_ "Can I please have 2kg of protective powder stat?"
Unless there have been some big changes in the last few years, my experience is that ENG cameras can easily be viewed as being behind the curve by today's standards. Their sensors are way too small and they tend not to perform well in low light... and yeah, they are big and heavy. Old habits die hard. They are definitely built to take a beating, and okay, that one lens is pretty much all you need, that much you can say for them... but no thanks.
Please don't hold a camera like that at the extremities of the lens and wave it up and down, you are giving me massive cringe. I know the kit we use is very well made but to put all that torque upon the lens, locking ring and interface that connects the lens to the camera body is not good practice. Yes probably no harm will come immediately but it isn't going to help the back end of the lens in the long run.
Have recently down-sized from broadcast TV camera to Canon Mirrorless - plus a myriad of gadgets to attempt to achieve the abilities of my broadcast camera. No chance. Small, fiddly - difficult to control - a total pain in the arse ! Worst decision of my life. Now involved in re-establishing Broadcast camera equipment !
I use one of these every day at work for the last 15 years. Love my Panasonic. My gear setup is worth about $105k, including a LIVEU unit.
Thanks for the contribution. I have been working with these "heavy and expensive" cameras and camcorders since 1980 and could have done my work on countless documentaries, television shows, sports, music and other live events with nothing less than these devices. Everything is where it belongs and you don't have to equip a DSLR with all sorts of accessories so that you can make all the important settings that a broadcast camera offers right from the start.
Fantastic video Grant, I hadn't seen TV cameras in-depth before with their features, that lens is insane.
ua-cam.com/video/RkTaMyatsTo/v-deo.html
That zoom and aperture is incredible. Great video Grant, your pro experience makes u stand out from all the other photo/video channels
Cheers
Absolutely. A 22x zoom lens that is f1.9 across the entire zoom range. Versus all the UA-camrs running around with a 24-70mm f2.8 lens, which is less than 3x zoom.
@@SparkFosterFilms although if they use larger sensor they'll have shallower depth of field and probably sharper picture. B4 lenses are full of compromises due to their zoom range and parafocality. None of these are bad qualities but just different use cases. A DSLR user will never need a parafocal zoom lens, a broadcaster will (almost) never need an ARRI master prime, and a cinema DP will rarely need super fast autofocus. Yet all of the very different types of lenses and cameras are useful in their own field.
@@hbp_ It's "parfocal" not "parafocal" and it's one of the most sought after features of professional zoom lenses. A DSLR user would benefit greatly from a parfocal lens, but most can't afford them.
There is no correlation between sensor size and image sharpness. "Sharpness" is determined by the optics and the resolution of the sensor. Larger sensors are not inherently sharper than smaller sensors. All other things being equal, a larger sensor will produce a brighter image than a smaller sensor, due to having more surface area for light to make contact with. This enables the user to shoot at a lower ISO rating for reduced noise, which can help improve "sharpness." BUT the larger sensor will also produce a shallower depth of field, which means less of the image along the Z-axis will be in focus, therefore causing a loss in sharpness.
@@SparkFosterFilms I knew I had that typo somewhere. Stroke me one night 😁
I went on set and saw one of these Massive cameras, just being in its presence is god like and puts any consumer junk to shame, just the way the thing towers over someone is enough to give chills.
great info, the sad (or good depending on your context) thing is broadcast is now sharing viewership with digital online media like youtube and small phone device, broadcast won't disappear but the consumers base and how it is consumed has all changed since the 90s and early 2000's.
Wow, camera lenses are more expensive than my Mazda3 sedan. Crazy.
I accidentally bumped into the video, but I'm glad I watched it! I had hardly a clue of the range of these cameras and all their requirements. Thank you, I've learned something today :)
Thanks for this Grant, I get fed up with telling people why my eng camera is better than their DSLR lol
Nice! This might be a good video for film schools, production companies and tv stations, explaining that you don't try to find out the wheel when it is about quality, speed and storytelling. So you don't warp yourself in a frustrating configuration of some ultrabyte kind of thing and just use a decent tool that already exists. It is probably cheaper too! In those days people were so scared about the prices that they bought this Canon XL1, a body you could not lean on your shoulder and therefore had to be carried in front of your face to see the viewfinder, so you could not use any finger to adjust the lens or whatever. This kind of designer drama also overcame Sony with the EX3. I once bought a second hand EX3 and thought immediately: this sucks. Years later I ended up with this FX7 with a cheap lens in the desert of Jordanie, in a jeep steering through the hot sand bumping and bumping so I couldn't make any proper shot, not even a wide total. Another guy with a telephone on the same bumpy ride made the most beautiful pictures. Long story short: good cameras for reporters are big and expensive. New modern tools could be good too. But everything inbetween from the last twenty years can't compete. In the ninetees I filmed with the Ikegami HL95 (in 2003 I had 4 of them) Nowadays I film a lot with the Sony AX33, a 4K handycam. The 4K option makes it possible to zoom afterwards. That's the replacement of the incredible expensive wide angle Canon Lens (with optical bending correction) 36.000 gulden in 1997. While still doing reports, I don't miss the big gear. So it is not about the money (a second hand AX33 you can get voor 300 euro) but about your satisfaction in storytelling. And to come back on WHY good gear is so expensive: yes indeed if you are in a system interlocked and you can get video feedback in your viewfinder from the OB van... This brings me to another aspect of the high costs of proper technologies. Professional gear has a depreciation period of only a few years. So all products had to me renewed every four years or so. This was to prevent costs of repair, but overall, failure of functionality. How often do you see a live tv show and one of the lightbulbs in the ceiling is finishing its lifetime? Never! So the industry standard in film and television is: it should not blow your production. In the ninetees companys like Ikegami (and presumably others but these companies affected me with this problem) used electronic parts which after years start leaking (chemicals) and damaged the circuit boards, making the expensive product useless. In those days we had to throw away the most expensive Betacam tape editing machines because their videoheads replacement became more expensive than buying a second hand machine. But that is another different story.
I hear you, I remember throwing out 2 Betacam SP playback machines that cost about $15k (second hand)! It cost a fortune to have the heads replaced and then years of library footage on Beta tapes became redundant.
Just bought my newest sony replacement. 38k plus accesories. Could have bought a Jaguar convertible for god sakes. But hey it can broadcast with cellular so i dont have to goto the studio ever again to dtop off footage. Nice vid
Hello Grant from Tauranga.
As a keen casual amatuer I often see the debate as to why smartphones are good enough compared to mirrlorless cameras. I have alway swondered why tv cameras are so big.
You see those big remote cameras filming a news reader
So now, thanks to your video I know.
I also remember seeing zooms on movies being incredibly long comapared to my slr or dslr or mirrorless.
Answers the question well. Thank you!
Thanks Grant, I found this video so interesting.
I’m honored and lucky to have come across your channel
7:40 Yes the controls look very similar to my Sony DVW 790WSP DigiBeta camcorder.
Interesting about these cameras. I wish one day I could play with one of those broadcast camcorders.
Not all of these cameras even are camcorders. Some are triaxial-connector-only; not dockable; some are camcorders only and not dockable, and some can be docked either as a triax camera (no recorder) or a recorder (no triax), and some may have both at the same time (but not in the tape days, if I remember right).
Many thanks for sharing Grant; great explanation of "another world" regards the equipment needed to achieve those results!
Thanks for your videos. I have watched a few now and am a sub. Please keep making them as you are naturally very good and clear.
I always wondered why , thanks again Grant !
Guess what? I started my career working in a TV studio in 1982 in India on Image Orthicon cameras. It had different lenses mounted on a turret and the cameraman had to choose the right lens instantly and do the framing adjustments dollying in or out!! My journey still continues now using even the GoPros!!
Love my JVC GY-HM700 series cams. I use Fujinon lenses and they perform so well!
I couldn't resist buying DVCAMs.. DSR 300 and DSR 570 ws cheap... Way outdated... but I just had to.. I must be crazy... I was lucky one came complete with 3 XLR MICS 2 wireless + receiver, shotgun and giant flight case.. DIY battery pack - 8 Li - ion 18650s ripped from Aldi power packs...
I just got a used Sony f900r. It is complex to figure out. I love the colour and the detail is close to 4k when you set it up properly with a nice lens.
You can get an SDTV news camera fairly cheap used. The sort used for local TV news.
a year on - different world! thank you for sharing.
This is why I like camcorders, especially these shoulder mount broadcast type. They are purpose built for video, with all the adjustments you'll need on the fly available with the push of a button or twist of a knob/ring. Especially those parfocal lenses with the constant aperture. I don't understand why DSLRs are so popular in video when even a hand held camcorder is more suited for the job.
I professionally shoot news on mirrorless, here's why: Price (were a small outlet who don't have money for separate photo and video cameras) - Size (I can carry all I need for a three camera interview in one trip as a solo shooter) - Large sensors (Depth of field and light sensitivity). We're a digital outlet that ride the line between content creators and ENG, and have found they work for us. But there are times where I'd kill for an ENG camera. We're going to get an FX6 soon that will hopefully solve many of the problems inherent with mirrorless (overheating in extreme conditions, lack of XLR input, Lack of internal ND) while still retaining the full frame properties we love.
@@FitsTube Ah, so it boils down mostly to the budget's need for an all-rounder, for photo _and_ video, with size perks for solo portability. Not to mention the low light performance of a larger sensor. Thanks for the insights.
Price. In order to have the same sensor size, image quality and removable lens you have to pay 10x for a camcorder than for a mirrorless, and unless you do a live show or an event - this is well worth the inconvenience of having to setup your rig 10 minutes longer, or switch the lens instead of zooming. Also they are smaller which makes them better for vlogs, cause you can take it everywhere without having to plan for shooting in advance.
But... DSLRs _are_ actually camcorders. And some cameras like these are dockable/modular and some aren't. So historically the ones of these with permanent triaxial connectors were actually NOT camcorders... because they had so much circuitry in them that they had no room for a tape deck. There may be some now that are camcorders because they just have a flash slot. But then back in the tape years, dockable/modular cameras of this shape would ether have a triax back, not docked as a camcorder; or a tape deck back, so then docked as a camcorder. So it's actually not as simple as I think you believe it is.
I use the non shoulder pro camcorders all the time, sometimes ill get a shoulder pad for em. But its a nice way to have all the same features, but it be lighter, however those JVC cameras that are like half size shoulder cams are also a super light option for ENG shooting. Love me my b4 lenses tho.
Thank you for this video Grant. I learned a lot!
I have just subscribed. Thank You for this great video. Best regards. Kai
Great video! I'm a broadcast cameraman as well! Cheers from the states!
Parabéns pelo vídeo. Eu particularmente adoro essas câmeras grande de ombro.
@6:40 regarding viewfinders, (not a pro, or even an amateur video shooter) I have never seen a viewfinder for the left eye.
My right eye is not really good and the 4-5 times I touched a video camera, I was always put off by the viewfinder...
Are there any left eye viewfinders around?
It uses tapes, has 4:2:2 anti-aliasing free recording, 12 stops of dynamic range, has functionalities for multiple crew members, and it hooks up on live cable TV instead of stored on a digital SD card. Done saved about 10 minutes of explaining.
wow when i heard the price my jaw dropped. anyways, fantastic video Grant! You got a new subscriber!
Cheers
Two things I wanted to know about these large professional cameras, first how long the battery lasts and how big memory they have, in other words, how long can you videotape without breaks.
For my old Eng Cam (Which is very voltage tolerant on external voltages..) I made a box that takes 2 sets parallel of 4 in series li ion 18650s, and I expect at least an hour from that...
great video. thanks for the explanation!
Interesting info. I've never understood why all portable video recording equipment is dark-colored, or even black. Don't manufacturers know it will become very hot in direct sunlight? Why wouldn't they make them white?
Hello Grant, this is a really great video. I am thinking of shooting a short film with a 80s vibe. For which I was thinking about using a VHS type camera. But then film festivals ask for a HD quality film. What would be your advice. Is there a way to HD quality videos using old VHS or other cameras?
You can upsacle your footage to HD or 4k in resolve if you need to deliver your footage in HD or 4k.
If you're gonna shoot a film, you will need a FILM camera.
@@wakkowarner8810, 4K *IS* HD. There are more than one level of HD.
@@HelloKittyFanMan I thought that HD was 1080p
@@wakkowarner8810: It IS. Have you never heard of a nifty little thing called a _category?_
Hey Grant ! How's your back ? Mine is ruined by shouldering big cameras. I now need to use my custom designed (By me) SONY DSC RX 100 MK V rig with a beachtek mic/line matching pre-amp/transformer/mixing box plugged into the line in of my Atomos Ninja V recording monitor. My setup allows me to circumvent the lack of external microphone input on the RX 100 MK V, by running one into the external recording monitor instead, and it works really well. I also use a Z-CAM E2C MFT cube with my Atomos and I shoot 4K DCI @ true 24.00p in 12 Bit ProRes RAW and ProRes RAW HQ. The Z-Cam footage looks really clean. Both these rigs can be held in one hand without too much rear, lower back strain over a day's work 👍However, I miss the stand and deliver consistency you get with big shoulder broadcast cameras which shoot non-subsampled video codecs @ 4:2:2 color space in 10 bit precision, and have all controls at your finger tips. The RX 100 is a great camera, but only an 8 Bit processing and recording one. You do get uncompressed 4:2:2 out of it when using the external micro HDMI output however (But still in 8 Bit unfortunately). The E2C is able to do 12 bit RAW out, which is wonderful, and ProRes RAW is 4:4:4 color space 😃. The Z-CAM cube camera is hardly what anyone would refer to as an ergonomically effective camera to use in an all day shoot. I'm looking at the URSA Mini Pro 12K which is a camera designed along the lines of a standard shoulder broadcast type camera, and can take all the lenses you have described, but shoots in a RAW processing video codec with uncompressed audio up to 12K resolution. I'm a bit torn because I know it will strain my back to use, but I will try it with one of those new handling vest rigs which is supposed to re-distribute the weight of your camera to your lower hips and back from a wearable boom which sits above your head that you hang your camera from. (??) Big cameras have a definate advantage over many of these new hybrid style ones, in that they ballance easier in hand hold shooting situations, and their focus and audio and exposre controls are always sitting at your finger tips.
I too miss the big cameras and their ergonomics for shooting and yes my hips more than my back have suffered from their weight over the years. These newer smaller cameras are definitely easier on the body but I often find the compromise is usability in terms of small fiddly dials, small LCD monitors and hard to use focus controls.
Hi Mark, the Ursa 12K won't take the B4 adaptor nor can it be controlled by ccu in live broadcast. You might want to look at the Ursa Broadcast G2, which is the same body, comes with 4K B4 adaptor and can be a full sensor Super 35 6K camera with the included Canon EF mount or an optional PL mount. It has Prores and good H264/5 for news too, as well as the Braw. It's very versatile and incredible value ($5K with the viewfinder), coming too complete with full shoulder mount kit and IDX V-plate. I recently bought one since getting back into shooting and being used to the cameras and lenses Grant describes here. There's nothing quite like it anywhere near this price. There's an optional fibre back and studio Vf available too. I was on a waiting list for a Fujinon 4K B4 lens, and bought a cheap old Canon B4 J16 from eBay, to test out which is amazingly good, since I sold all my broadcast lenses years ago. I've decided now to go full sensor PLmount/cine lenses though.
Tinha essas dúvidas nos anos 80... Hoje... Bom, ninguém mais assiste TV... Talvez baixe muito o preço...
What would you recommend someone who wants to be a broadcasting cameraman but doesnt want to follow a fulltime 4yr education for it, is it possible?
Get yourself a job at a rental house and learn about all the kit you will get a better education and you won't have to pay for it.
Jobs Like this don't require a 4 year course you will learn much more relevant things working on the job.
Thanks Grant, would you invest in an easy-rig for things like reality tv shows that require handheld?
Hi - yes I would if I was doing a lot of reality shows. The reality show I talked about in this video I ended up getting production to hire me one for the shoot which was a life saver for my back!
Angie, you only ever have one back during your life! Look after it
Thanks Grant.
Great job!
I love this Big Camera...What a price this???
hey can you do a walkthrough on how you did your rod support?
Maybe except for the last point I just can't see how they justify camera rig costing over USD40K. This was very informative though. Thank much.
Good one Grant! Thx
شكرا على الترجمة❤
sir total budget
"I don't get why people put on make-up. I'll just be my natural self!"
_(Camera goliath stares into your soul through the pores in your skin.)_
"Can I please have 2kg of protective powder stat?"
I love the par focal zoom lens. I own a DSLR and I would love to get a lens like that for my camera.
Did you just paraphrase the title from a 2019 video of another youtuber?😂😂😂
Hello sir from India my name is Sudhakar cameraman sar presently shooting professional camera which
Any videos on mounting these lenses on dslr
Nice shot of the director scratching his ass. I knew they did nothing.
finally real stuff. not these clowns around.
我使用这种巨大的摄影机二十多年，现在早就不用这个了。毕竟科技发展，这样的机器各方面的指标都被碾压，注定被时代所抛弃。
Professional camera - shoots 1080i. Professional camera operator - does not care to deinterlace :-))
Unless there have been some big changes in the last few years, my experience is that ENG cameras can easily be viewed as being behind the curve by today's standards. Their sensors are way too small and they tend not to perform well in low light... and yeah, they are big and heavy. Old habits die hard. They are definitely built to take a beating, and okay, that one lens is pretty much all you need, that much you can say for them... but no thanks.
Ads
Please don't hold a camera like that at the extremities of the lens and wave it up and down, you are giving me massive cringe.
I know the kit we use is very well made but to put all that torque upon the lens, locking ring and interface that connects the lens to the camera body is not good practice.
Yes probably no harm will come immediately but it isn't going to help the back end of the lens in the long run.
My iPhone can do all of that.
Background music doesn’t suit you at all. Might wanna get some scratchy phonographs instead.
Have recently down-sized from broadcast TV camera to Canon Mirrorless - plus a myriad of gadgets to attempt to achieve the abilities of my broadcast camera. No chance. Small, fiddly - difficult to control - a total pain in the arse ! Worst decision of my life. Now involved in re-establishing Broadcast camera equipment !