Who will make the Pentax K1000 of HD video cameras?

Brian Standing · May 21st, 2008, 10:42 AM

Or, if you prefer, the Bolex of the digital realm?

A no-nonsense, no frills, fully manual, inexpensive, well-built camera that yields consistently professional results and records on standard, inexpensive media?

The kind of camera you use as a student and never, ever get rid of because it's simple, basic, never becomes obsolete and produces beautiful images?

It might be Scarlet, (though I'd have been happier if Red released it with an interchangeable lens -- say a C-mount or a Nikon F- mount). Any other contenders?

Or, is this a market no one wants to touch?

Bill Koehler · May 22nd, 2008, 08:34 AM

It's a market no one wants to touch.

Fully manual...well built...consistently professional results...

Sounds like a pro camera to me. The consumer isn't interested in fully manual. That requires reading the owners manual. It also requires some amount of practice to become semi-proficient with the instrument. Witness the prevalence of 'Easy Mode' on cameras, still and moving. What the consumer wants is brain dead simplicity. And as Chris Hurd has pointed out, price is generally more about feature sets than anything else.

Given the rapid evolution of camera sensors & codecs, it is ALL becoming obsolete. And if it doesn't keep pace, it rapidly becomes a commodity product. There's little profit in a commodity product. Which is another reason the manufacturers keep cranking out new product. To stay ahead of the curve of becoming a commodity product.

You can look ahead to the next new thing with RED. But that just proves my point about it ALL becoming obsolete. How about looking behind? The Canon XH-A1 recording to miniDV tape? Or something from Sony? JVC? Panasonic? I'm agnostic. I'm just really impressed by the posted footage I've seen from that camera.

Andy Tejral · May 22nd, 2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Koehler

It's a market no one wants to touch.

I agree. The video realm has always been gee whiz, golly gee, lookee what I can do.

And, as a professional, is it something you really want? The new crop of cameras have a lot of cusomization of image properties--with film, you just change the brand and type of film. There really can be no comparison.

Brian Standing · May 22nd, 2008, 01:21 PM

Or, with video, you get the look you want in post-production, not in the camera. Isn't that Red's philosophy in a nutshell?

In which case, you just want the camera to deliver the cleanest possible image with no fuss or muss and no extraneous bells and whistles.

This is part of what I mean. Why pay for all the gamma, knee, white balance shift, etc.,etc. in a camera, when you can reproduce much of this in post, where you have much more control over the final image?

It seems someone should be making a camera that's bulletproof, simple, cheap and really, really, good.

May 21st, 2008, 10:42 AM	#1
Brian Standing Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 434	Who will make the Pentax K1000 of HD video cameras? Or, if you prefer, the Bolex of the digital realm? A no-nonsense, no frills, fully manual, inexpensive, well-built camera that yields consistently professional results and records on standard, inexpensive media? The kind of camera you use as a student and never, ever get rid of because it's simple, basic, never becomes obsolete and produces beautiful images? It might be Scarlet, (though I'd have been happier if Red released it with an interchangeable lens -- say a C-mount or a Nikon F- mount). Any other contenders? Or, is this a market no one wants to touch? __________________ http://www.prolefeedstudios.com/blog/ Documentary for the masses!

May 22nd, 2008, 01:21 PM	#4
Brian Standing Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 434	Or, with video, you get the look you want in post-production, not in the camera. Isn't that Red's philosophy in a nutshell? In which case, you just want the camera to deliver the cleanest possible image with no fuss or muss and no extraneous bells and whistles. This is part of what I mean. Why pay for all the gamma, knee, white balance shift, etc.,etc. in a camera, when you can reproduce much of this in post, where you have much more control over the final image? It seems someone should be making a camera that's bulletproof, simple, cheap and really, really, good. __________________ http://www.prolefeedstudios.com/blog/ Documentary for the masses!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 22nd, 2008, 08:34 AM	#2
Bill Koehler Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Alpharetta, GA, USA Posts: 182	It's a market no one wants to touch. Fully manual...well built...consistently professional results... Sounds like a pro camera to me. The consumer isn't interested in fully manual. That requires reading the owners manual. It also requires some amount of practice to become semi-proficient with the instrument. Witness the prevalence of 'Easy Mode' on cameras, still and moving. What the consumer wants is brain dead simplicity. And as Chris Hurd has pointed out, price is generally more about feature sets than anything else. Given the rapid evolution of camera sensors & codecs, it is ALL becoming obsolete. And if it doesn't keep pace, it rapidly becomes a commodity product. There's little profit in a commodity product. Which is another reason the manufacturers keep cranking out new product. To stay ahead of the curve of becoming a commodity product. You can look ahead to the next new thing with RED. But that just proves my point about it ALL becoming obsolete. How about looking behind? The Canon XH-A1 recording to miniDV tape? Or something from Sony? JVC? Panasonic? I'm agnostic. I'm just really impressed by the posted footage I've seen from that camera.