What defines a 'professional' camera?

David W. Jones · March 12th, 2009, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Er, *could* last (past tense). I would say *can* no longer. Beta SP has been dead for awhile, and the days of an acquisition system lasting ten years in a broadcast market are done and over with. At the rapid pace of format development recently, I don't think any current acquisition format will be viable for a full decade with the exceptions of HDCAM and DVCPRO HD (neither of which has much beyond five years left, in my opinion).

In my neck of the woods there are still a couple of places that want Beta sp, or DVD.
But the majority of the commercials I produce are transfered directly to the TV station via ftp site for download. None of the TV stations in my market air local commercials in HD, or even produce local programming in HD.

Philip Younger · March 12th, 2009, 03:37 PM

Well, as the o/p I'd like to say thanks to everyone for their input.

Yes, I am fully aware that in a nutshell it is more about the cameraman's ability than the equipment used, I guess I should have asked what was the difference on a technical level. I now release that different broadcasters require different spec

Bill Pryor · March 18th, 2009, 12:46 PM

My experience with broadcast (TV spots) is that you give them a tape (or download) in whatever format they require and that all the video and audio signals are broadcast legal. As to what defines a professional camera, I think those items are the same as they've always been: total manual control over audio and video, ability to white balance, to turn off gain and shutter controls, ability to record separate audio channels--ie., all the things that all the 1/3" and some 1/4" cameras now do quite well.

The last hurdle, in my opinion, was the lens. Up until Sony came out with the Z1 (and Canon with the XL H1 and XH series, Panasonic with the HVX and JVC with it's 100 series) it was not possible to follow focus or do repeatable focus shifts with the electronic lenses. Now it's not a problem--just set your in focus and your out focus and shift at will. The only difference between these lenses and manual ones is that with these electronic lenses on the 1/3" chip cameras now (JVC has manual lens) you read your distances in the viewfinder or LCD instead of with white marks on the lens. They actually have an advantage over manual lenses in that you can follow focus by yourself in many cases without the need for an assistant.

About the only thing these cameras do not do that the bigger chip cameras do is provide a color temperature reading in the viewfinder. There's no logical reason they don't, and it would be an easy thing for the manufacturers to provide. The problem is solved in my case with my old Gossen color temperature meter left over from my film days, but I'd rather be able to get a readout in the viewfinder. Oh, there is one more--underscan in the viewfinder. Some do that and some don't.

March 12th, 2009, 03:37 PM	#32
Philip Younger Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Warwickshire Posts: 207	Well, as the o/p I'd like to say thanks to everyone for their input. Yes, I am fully aware that in a nutshell it is more about the cameraman's ability than the equipment used, I guess I should have asked what was the difference on a technical level. I now release that different broadcasters require different spec

March 18th, 2009, 12:46 PM	#33
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	My experience with broadcast (TV spots) is that you give them a tape (or download) in whatever format they require and that all the video and audio signals are broadcast legal. As to what defines a professional camera, I think those items are the same as they've always been: total manual control over audio and video, ability to white balance, to turn off gain and shutter controls, ability to record separate audio channels--ie., all the things that all the 1/3" and some 1/4" cameras now do quite well. The last hurdle, in my opinion, was the lens. Up until Sony came out with the Z1 (and Canon with the XL H1 and XH series, Panasonic with the HVX and JVC with it's 100 series) it was not possible to follow focus or do repeatable focus shifts with the electronic lenses. Now it's not a problem--just set your in focus and your out focus and shift at will. The only difference between these lenses and manual ones is that with these electronic lenses on the 1/3" chip cameras now (JVC has manual lens) you read your distances in the viewfinder or LCD instead of with white marks on the lens. They actually have an advantage over manual lenses in that you can follow focus by yourself in many cases without the need for an assistant. About the only thing these cameras do not do that the bigger chip cameras do is provide a color temperature reading in the viewfinder. There's no logical reason they don't, and it would be an easy thing for the manufacturers to provide. The problem is solved in my case with my old Gossen color temperature meter left over from my film days, but I'd rather be able to get a readout in the viewfinder. Oh, there is one more--underscan in the viewfinder. Some do that and some don't.