Just wanted to mention that I used the Elgato RCA conversion method because that's what was available to me at the time. I've since been able to piece together the right cables and adapters to successfully transfer footage via FireWire, so I'm hoping to make a follow up on my main channel that shows some comparisons 👍
There was this great app in mac that was discontinued in 2013, called JES Deinterlacer. It could take the interlaced footage and convert it to 59.94 and preserve the edges of non-moving parts of the frame. Great tool that can only run in old macs.
That video would look so much better if you used the FireWire instead of the analog converter… can you make a new video showing the quality difference?
I thought that the colour and compression artefacts in the XL1 footage looked bad. It's not the camera, it's the analogue capture that is doing it. Avoiding that will make the cameras as good as a DVD.
yeah this is a terrible video, DV never looked that bad, and it actually has less (much much less) compression artifacts than DVD, granted it has 4:1:1 color compression but considering that it had no blocky or PB frames, they were all I frames, it was a much better tradeoff than having 4:2:0 with blocky noise
This, these devices should be able to give you full 480i but the capture method is really stepping the quality down, most of those budget "video" converters are nothing but composite anyway and not using any S video component. finding firewire today thats compatible with modern equipment is like finding a needle in a haystack though.
@@DJErnVideos I'm pretty sure there are PCI-E FireWire adopters. But laptop peasants probably aren't capable of adding expansion cards to a PCI-e slot.
Worked with these cameras for years shooting live events. I figured out an awesome hack: instead of using those expensive full-size DVCAM tapes, you load a mini tape and then loop OUT of the FireWire port INTO a consumer handheld camcorder with FireWire. You can use the consumer camera as a "field recorder" deck (with an LCD screen too) and overlap the recordings - effectively "hot-swapping" the tapes as needed to cover the length of the event. Saved my butt many times filming long concerts and plays where there would be no opportunity to switch tapes.
It's crazy that even a budget, no-name smartphone can deliver better quality video than a full on television camera from 20 years ago...technology moves fast.
I'm pretty sure TV cameras are 2/3" sensors. So, like smaller than a 1" compact camera. So this is not a full frame camera, larger sensor video cameras existed at the time, but in camcorders, not news cameras with interchangeable lenses.
Der Vergleich ist blanker Unsinn. Das ist als würde man die Zange eines Letherman mit einer Rohrzange vergleichen. 😂😂😂😂 Jeder, der ernsthaft filmt weiß was ich meine.😉 Außerdem: vergleiche mal ein 20 Jahre altes Auto mit einem Tesla. Ich bin sicher dass man, wenn man alles manuell einstellt, den Fokus manuell zieht (wie heute mit jedem cine Objektiv auch!), den Weißabgleich präzise einstellt usw. absolut gute Ergebnisse liefern kann. 🙂
Having worked in television during the late 90's and early 2000's - this was VERY nostalgic. I am continuously blown away how good our current cameras are now. Look at your first shot on the Sony which is a prosumer camera, to the professional DVCam......its astonishing. Back in the day only a select few could access pro equipment - now we all carry 4k cameras in our pocket, and the differentiator is no longer access to gear but the ability to tell an effective story with the tools available. Great video!
I bought this camera in 1998 when I started my video production business . It’s a Sony DSR 300 and it was $12,000 new at B&H. Not 20k. Anyway I shot 2 seasons of a local television show about motor sports with it . Loved it
@@marcusdambergerthe Sony dvcam camera (dsr 300) yes it came with a lens as a package deal from B&H . The betacam broadcast cameras (BVP models ) yes they were like 30 grand
Those cameras were/are worth 20k because it „works perfectly fine“ after 20 years. They were built like tanks and even more important they where repairable. Edit: The tape loading sounds gave goose bumps from a nostalgic flash back. 😊
I lusted after cameras like that back in the day. Astounding how far imaging technology has come in such a short time. Just digitizing some old VHS-C and Hi8 videos this week. Oh, my...
@PeppaPig-ze3yc not that I am aware. Nostalgic: feeling happy and also slightly sad when you think about things that happened in the past: - Talking about our old family holidays has made me feel all nostalgic. - We'll take a nostalgic look at the musical hits of the 60s. Please let me know if I am wrong here.
Exactly! They were like workhorses. In fact, the same can be said about the SONY line of Digital8 camcorders. They are very sturdy and I actually have 2 that still works today. - James D Watkins artistic director of Phoenix Productions.
Very nice! I also work with those kinds of ENG cameras as a hobby, however I would definitely recommend you to digitize the tapes via FireWire! Digital to Analog conversion always comes with a huge Quality loss. Those "Video grabbers" are unfortinately total garbage :( When you convert the footage directly via a FireWire Cable from the camera to the PC you get the results without quality loss. The footage will look soooo much better! ;)
I don't miss these days but lots of nostalgia looking at this. Now anyone can make great looking videos. The barriers to entry back then were enormous; every great camera & lens was super expensive; editing systems were so $$$. The 5DMK2 really changed the game in so many ways.
People always say that as a good thing, while it is not. Before, making videos/movies/TV shows was something more of an art, witch has been totally dismantled now. The magic of an art form gets lost when it becomes available for anyone.
@@chaserivers4058 Oh man, I remeber Jaz drives! Like a thic floppy disk. We used Avid on "Super PCs" back then for my film class, it was apple pcs for video editing. When Avid Xpress came out that was the first time you could get Avid w a dongle for like $2k or something like that and was very basic in function. Rendering was soooo slow back then.
You don’t need any extra devices to transfer video to computer. DV is already digital so you can use FireWire port and just got digital files as they were shot. No extra analog/digital conversion needed this is make video VHS kind of quality.
@@dazwhit For a desktop computer you can buy a pci-e to firewire card: they are readily available. For a laptop it is more difficult: you may use a firewire expresscard adapter, but newer laptops don't even have an express card interface anymore. Firewire-2-USB seems technologically challenging (USB is packet based, FireWire is streaming), you won't hardly or not find any.
Yeah, I was kinda disappointed to see the extra conversion/quality loss that is inherent with taking this digital video, converting it to analog, and then back again. Would’ve been nice to use a higher quality deinterlacer on it as well. It’s actually surprising how good this footage could probably have looked, for being a 20 year old SD professional DVCAM deck.
When I started as a TV news camera operator in the early 1990s, the Sony Betacam BVW400 was the industry standard and then we moved to the Sony PDW-700 XDCAM digital system and then the Panasonic P2 card world in the 2000s. It was a national TV network and we blew through money like they were printing it upstairs. It's hard to believe that today's $400 camcorder can output image so much better than a $30,000 camcorder from the 20th century.
In Panama, at the tv station that i work, we still using the p2 cam, for live programs Hahahaha! we dont use it for record but we have it there for some specials ocassion, now! These cameras are HD 1080i, i suppoused are new one, than those, that u said!
I worked at rental house and in the ten years I was there the video cameras went from Betacam SD to PDW 700/F800 HD disk based cameras to PMW-500 HD SxS card and now the Z450 4k using the same cards. Each resolution generation has their own set of b4 mount lenses too. J Mount = Standard Def HJ = High Def CJ = 4k / Ultra High Def
Even today a $400 camera doesn’t compare to what’s used for professional purposes, even if the image “looks” the same. There’s a lot on a pro ENG camera that caters to the professional workflow, and that’s worth paying for if your income depends on it
Cameras today can certainly output better quality. However, in the wrong hands you just get crap. The old cameras were beasts and required technical and artistic skill to get the best out of them. They were very capable machines.
I worked on those cameras for years. I still miss the build of ENG cameras, and I wish these new cameras get back to that build. It was just so gradual, and modular to handle.
These cameras still look great on CRT monitors :) I remember almost pulling the trigger on the Canon GL2, but I instead got some photography gear. Appreciate the time capsule back to those times!
I shot a fair bit on the XM1, XL1, GLx etc cameras and still actually have an XH-A1 - aside from experience and learning to shoot with potatoes you didn't miss much lol. I vividly recall wanting to try to do a home run style throw with the things more than once, but of course didn't as they were rentals etc... You should buy one just to scratch that itch and marvel at how terrible recording to tape was... The picture quality is of course not what we have now, but tHe tApEs man, the whole process of getting it from the cam to an NLE digitally was a pain in the neck, and then editing was no dance on roses because of how slow PC's were.
Unfortunately Tom isn't doing the picture quality of these old cameras justice. The extreme compression artifacts in the footage are not created on tape but probably while capturing the footage. Also the (Mini)DV Tapes record audio and video digitally and this digital stream can be captured via Firewire without dataloss/without creating a new step of compression. And the main reason everyone remembers this footage looking way better on CRT is the fact that these cameras record natively interlaced which is handled by CRTs perfectly without any signal processing. When deinterlacing (Mini)DV footage in post you really need the original unaltered interlaced (Mini)DV footage and deinterlace it to 59.94p and not to 29.97p to retain the full temporal resolution.
8:38 It's cool when you're watching old episodes of COPS from the early 2000s, when the cameramen go indoors, they always take off the ND Filter and you can see the filters sliding out just like your example.
I bought myself a Sony camcorder from 1999 as a holiday camera this summer. Man, I love using it, the 10x optical zoom on this thing is a blast! For the best quality possible you should connect a MiniDV camcorder directly though the FireWire port or USB port on more modern camcorders. As MiniDV is already a digital format this will get you better results than running your footage through the analog output.
WOW, you missed all the fun. In the late 1960's while working at a TV station all we had was 16mm film. What a rush, travel to the news spot, shoot, travel back to the station, and develop the film and hope you got it right, edit it and off to the newsroom. However, I sure enjoy today's video equipment.
Love it! I went from XM2 Canon at work to an HV20 Canon HDV, Pana HMC141 then DVX200 but now on the mirrorless Z9 8K RAW beast ... that I use as a 1080p webcam. FML.
Basically "ENG" - electronic news gathering - was a "step forward" from using 16mm film cameras to capture "whatever it is that was happening outdoors at the time" and deemed newsworthy. However, 16 mm film - at least slow (in film speed), fine grain such film - did still outdo Digibeta, etc. in terms of exposure latitude and - probably - colour rendition. Much of the "combat" - on the Southern Vietnamese/American side - in the Vietnam War was captured on 16 mm cameras. Whatever the merits of 16mm film - "everything else being equal" - the practically "instantaneous" aspect of ENG was brought home to me when the BBC and ITV (in the UK) could relay "live footage" - beamed up by satellite - of the "Falklands War" in the early 1980s. Another notable instance of the usefulness of ENG (but again a less than happy episode in modern history) was capturing the attempted assassination of President Reagan. One didn't need to change "magazines/cassettes" as frequently with ENG or have the risk of a processing failure in the film lab.............
It’s amazing to see how far we’ve come, and how much lower the barrier has gotten to be able to create. You can buy a $200 used HD camera, like the first Canon Rebel T1i and film a full documentary or feature. It’s truly amazing what modern tech makes possible.
I am now 63 and when I started my career with the Indian official broadcaster Doordarshan, I was working with Image Orthicon cameras with a turret lens set up. I have travelled all the way from there till the GoPro today!!
I still appreciate the heft and precision of those old cameras. Zoom levers that can do really slow and smooth pull backs and professional lenses give a look that's not always easy to replicate on a modern camera or iphone, even if the pixel count or what have you doesn't compare. You can still make great and unique content with hardware like this!
There is nothing as pleasing to watch as someone who is truly passionate about something, and I can actually see passion in every detail of this video. What an entertaining content, man! Instantly subscribed.
Pretty sweet video. I broke out my 1990's Sony BVW 600D WS with a 18X Fujinon 1.6 SP Betacam. I'm still amazed that its imagery is like shooting 16mm film. I also broke out my pair of 2009 Panasonic P2 HD HPX with 19X f1.4 Fujinons. I'm having great fun with them.
I used to work with these or similar camera at a local TV station in 2002-2004 while studying. We never used the big tapes, because they were two expensive. But we used DVCAM recording, so that the audio would be locked to the video.
I was an early starter in video production when the first computer editing became available in the UK I jumped in. SVHS were the best early camera we could afford and VM studio was the only edit system that could control the SVHS decks and input graphics onto tape. Though a half GB of hard drive cost a whopping £400!! Soooooooooooo - Things moved fast after that. Finished up with DV cameras, Firewiring via tapedecks into the DV edit system where editing was real time and hard drives became dirt cheap! Steep learning curves, but a lot of fun and met some wonderful creative people on social and commercial projects! Thanks for the memories!!
Great video! I sure don't miss those big monsters. Imagine shooting football games with one of those beasts on your shoulder. My back had a flashback when you cut to the Sony ;) Great stuff :)
I work for a Japanese TV station, and the XDCAM (PXW-Z450/Z750) that supports 4K has inherited the basic switches and interfaces of the DVCAM. Even the base plate "VCT-14" from that time can be used for the latest models.
Loved the cameras, I ran media program for a Disability service with no budget. We were able to acquire 3 Sony DSP-250s for our studio we built. These cameras were $300 Aud each and over time they were fitted with teleprompters, monitors and shotgun mics which we didn't use too much in the studio. They were great, 720HD, just what was needed for the studio and connected via ethernet & adapters to a Magwell 6 input to usb external box. It all looked fairly professional in our studio plus a jib also and we had a lot of clients wanting to participate in the media program. Then came Covid, oh well. Learnt a lot from the gear though.
During that time frame, mid 90's +, analog SD TV, VHS rentals...an alternate to that Sony camera, and it's cost, was the Toshiba TSC-100 Hi8 pro camera (same design and features as the Sony), which our (where I worked) production company used to shoot a documentary, with footage shot around the world in some rather remote areas. The footage was then edited using the then latest tape decks, switching and effects units, including the legendary Toaster. It all came out looking great when viewed on a SD TV from VHS tape. When transferred to DVD years later, it still looked great..on old SD analog televisions.
I ended up debating a bit about putting it over there, but based on past experiences the bigger channel's audience isn't super interested in these kinds of videos. Totally fine with me! I'm happy to share them here with no pressure.
@@TOMBUCK2 not knowing who you are, on glance this looks on parr and as if it would fall right in line with your other channel's content also, make things first and foremost for yourself, not an algorithm ✌️
This took me back to when I attended the Art Institute of Dallas in 2001. We were fiending for the XL1s. Hell, I still want one now, for nostalgia's sake.
The XL1 was a completely unreachable camera back when i was in media school. We lended the cameras from the school but owning one for ourselves was far beyond our wallets reach :)
I went to Uni for media production starting in the late 2010s, and we still used cameras similar to your tv camera, although ours were one generation onward (recording to large memory cards instead of tapes). One advantage was that filming (for example) off the shoulder with a camera like that is WAAAAAY easier than the weird shoulder-rigs for modern mirrorless-cameras, especially stuff like an M4/3-camera.
I remember being obsessed with making a DSLR shoulder rig back in the day, but yeah, it's a massive pain compared to something as well designed as this.
@@TOMBUCK2The rig I got handed was basically H-shaped, two vertical grips at the front, the camera on the "crossbar" and two ends on my shoulders. The main problem was that the little Lumix-camera was just way too light.
This video is so good. I still have my Sony 537, 637 and D30 camera's that shot on Betacam SP, and also a Betacam SX dock, for my D30, that I have used for many years, filming for Dutch news, but also CNN, NBC and the German ZDF.
As long as u took care of that eng cam they'll last for long long time.. I still have the same eng cam as u and about 10 other Sony dxc eng cams that Ive upgraded over the years. From hi8 to xdcam docks on them. As well as the new Sony air line of new products. I can transmit 5g live from anywhere and as om recording my editor can pull video and edit in real-time as I record crazy stuff. I loved the dvcam format but nowadays I carry a Nintendo switch game holder full of PS2 cards and SD cards up the wazoo. Now I have a server set up in my office and all files are transmitted into my server for full time access. Great stuff Bud
Interesting program. One note. When you do a comparison of two cameras, you should show the same view as seen by each of them either side by side or in a sequence, one right after another, to give a viewer the opportunity to compare. Showing, as you repeated several times, completely different views from each camera created very weak possibility of comparing anything. Anyway, as I said, quite impressive collection of old cameras, and one can tell you proudly have the history in your hands. I think that quite a few of us keep some of these oldies, and once a while we get them in our hands, perhaps just out of nostalgia... Thanks for sharing.
These old school ENG cameras are great. There are still applications for them today. Its hard to believe, but some commercial TV stations are still SD. College and high school TV use them as well as local access TV. Broadcast journalism students also will train with these old cameras.
Another fun fact about the lenses used on the ENG bodies back in the day were either Canon and Fujinon. If you felt you needed extra features like a built-in 2x extender to increase your zoom focal length and/or extra wide field of view that would easily increase the cost of the lens. Sometimes costing 3 times more than the camera body it self. Unlike the big networks of the day that had those toys try selling that purchase request to a local news director and general manager of a television station. Then eventually compromising on some decent Century Optics attachment lens instead because the budget allowed for it. Those were the days.
Doesn't this camera record at a higher bitrate than what you're showing us? The footage looks horrendously compressed, surely there's a better way to transfer what I assume is a digital file, at least in the case of the MiniDV tapes.
@@TOMBUCK2 Please make sure to edit the video in 30fps to match the NTSC video these cameras out put. It will give it that "now" live look. Also, deinterlacing is another issue to deal with, not all deinterlacing options are equal in quality. Top notch video.
I recently scored a Sony PMW-EX3 Cinema camera on eBay for $365 (inc. tax and shipping)! It's a 2008/2009 model, so it is HD, and being a cinema camera, has a native 24 fps mode.
I had the XL1, it was a great camera. It had terrible focus breathing but I loved it. I had to download the footage by capturing it with a Canopus DV Raptor and the software was flaky as hell.
great video! I enjoyed every bit of it. and the passion you have. i think the elgato way of capture is degrading the quality a lot ... or it it youtube? can you try to get a proper digital capture method through a firewire? want to see that. the elgato seems not correcting the pixel aspect ratio too... (from the last video from canon XL1s) the de-interlacing here is also not great. i believe the footage should be way better... whats the model of this ENG camera by the way?
One of the things to talk about is the psychological effect the shoulder-mounted pro ENG camera gives. What I mean by that is, when I had one of these bad boys on my shoulder, it was like I had a passport into places nobody else could go. The size and complexity of it screams that you are legitimate credentialed "official" media, and people gave me huge respect any time I was carrying or using it, in a way the GL1 or other small consumer or prosumer cameras did not. Later on, one of the selling points of the new digital prosumer cameras was that you could use it to "blend in" and look like a citizen or tourist while getting usable broadcast footage, in places "official" or "professional" cameras were banned without permits, like national parks. So sometimes size matters:-)
Essas eram cameras expetaculares e que poucas pessoas tinham acesso, o que era complicado pra nós aqui no Brasil era justamente ter acesso a equipamento de qualidade, usavamos as pessimas VHS... depois as miniDV porém as bem amadoras porque as profissionais eram carissimas
1980's me handed a 4K Sony video camera - lens: check.. battery: check.. LCD display: check.. transport controls: check.. some sort of plug-in card for storing configuration info, 16/32 kilobytes probably.. tape.. oh wait.. where does the tape go?
I kinda miss the old ENG style bodies for doing doc stuff. I know you can't put them in all the places you can put a small camera or even like a BMPCC4k, and they are heavy but for shooting on the fly interviews and events it's just so much easier to use the rocker zoom and point at stuff using your whole body.
This is SO FUN! I am curious what gives it that 90s/20s vibe. Is it the camera and how it processes the images OR the tape (similar to how different film gives different looks). Or maybe both 🤷
Pretty sure its coming more from the sensor and the codecs since the tape is nothing more than a storage medium thats working with magnetic tape. It's not like film. We used a Mini DV camcorder from around 2010 for some scenes on a recent project and in the right conditions it looked really good. Almost nothing of that oldschool vibe was left since the sensor and codecs in that camera were way closer to modern days standard. Back in the late 90s/early 2000s you had low resolution, mostly CCD instead CMOS sensors, far less dynamic range, bad lowlight capabilities, and weak codecs. That's what makes the look in my eyes.
Oh, reminds me of the heady days of going on newsgathering trips for my former employer. Camera. Lights. Tapes. Batteries. Tripod. Cables. Microphones (assorted). Various spare parts, in case things go wrong. And then, if it was a news not a features deployment, also tape decks, monitors, lip mic, sometimes also a satellite terminal. And - if this was a hostile environment deployment - also flak jackets, MREs, helmets. On a big story, you'd also have radio kit with you: recorders, mics, analogue/ISDN convertor, audio cables, headphones. Finally, there were also our personal belongings, laptops, etc. In all, if we had less than 300kg of kit with us, we thought we were travelling light.
You could easily shoot a film with a 1980's Miami Vice'ish look. I was once a proud owner of the venerable Canon XL2. Canon was on to something with interchangeable lens. Tape based acquisition, wow, we really did that?
Sadly I have to disagree with you. I used to be a cameraman for BBC tv news and used that camera daily. I still own it. The quality you showed was terrible. It looked like a vhs copy. Not sure how you captured the footage from the Sony but you certainly did not get the best quality possible. We used dedicated sony dv cam recorder/players. Try and track one down and see the difference. You can also switch the recording to 16x9 instead of 4x3. Had I turned in the quality that you displayed from the camera I would have lost the contract.
People are too dismissal of old 2\3'' cameras. One of the best cameras I've ever used (and I've used almost anything currently in the market, from the Pocket 6K Pro to the Alexa Mini LF and Sony Venice) is the Sony BVW D600, a 2\3'' Betacam SP (that's an analog video format, for the uninitiated). The thing just sat on your shoulder, it wasn't too heavy or too light...it was just right. I still have to find something with the same simplicity and ergonomics. It also shot some impressive footage for its time (it was already outdated in most scenarios even in my day). I remember filming coverage for a TV magazine with the early morning sun shining through the woods once and watching it getting assembled on a tape-to-tape machine by the editor in a van: the footage was very filmic with a pastel-like texture (keep in mind I was using the PAL version). I remember thinking that, had it been shot (or converted) to progressive scan and with some extra crush on the blacks and some film grain simulation, I could've fooled several people into thinking it was 16mm.
That shot with the reporter microphone hits me with some hard nostalgia to so many old house hunting shows and the like mum would put on when I was a kid and she was doing some chores. Crazy.
I believe this type of camera not only has the i.LINK (FireWire) output, but also an SDI output. Although, with the DV/DVCAM format, the bit rate is fixed at 25MBits/sec. So, I am not really sure there would be any difference in the quality between the capture via i.LINK vs. SDI. Anyway, these were definitely the highest quality DV format cameras one could buy, with the large 2/3" 3-CCD imaging sensors. The low light image must have been really superior to an equivalent consumer DV camcorder. I personally like the look of the DSR-400 camera, which was the last iteration of high-end professional DV format camcorder.
Watching the video full-screen on a 27" 4K monitor at 2160p - such a fascinating thing to see. I shot a lot of stuff back then on 3CCD cameras and I remember the colors being vivid and the images sharp. Of course, we were watching them on 480 broadcast CRTs. It makes me wonder how much of what we see in this video is exacerbated because of the dramatic jump in resolution over the years and, if we were to watch this on a CRT, how would it look then? I'll keep on pondering that question because I no longer have any CRTs at home!
No offense to TOMBUCK but the video capture solution he was using resulted in massive quality drops. So that's why you may have been confused. The images coming from a camera like this would actually be pretty sharp and the color would be decent as well.
Just wanted to mention that I used the Elgato RCA conversion method because that's what was available to me at the time. I've since been able to piece together the right cables and adapters to successfully transfer footage via FireWire, so I'm hoping to make a follow up on my main channel that shows some comparisons 👍
There was this great app in mac that was discontinued in 2013, called JES Deinterlacer. It could take the interlaced footage and convert it to 59.94 and preserve the edges of non-moving parts of the frame. Great tool that can only run in old macs.
Being curious to ask. What is the Model name. I want to make something with it.
Was just gonna say the quality will be a lot better importing to your computer via FireWire rather than going in analog
That video would look so much better if you used the FireWire instead of the analog converter… can you make a new video showing the quality difference?
I thought that the colour and compression artefacts in the XL1 footage looked bad. It's not the camera, it's the analogue capture that is doing it. Avoiding that will make the cameras as good as a DVD.
yeah this is a terrible video, DV never looked that bad, and it actually has less (much much less) compression artifacts than DVD, granted it has 4:1:1 color compression but considering that it had no blocky or PB frames, they were all I frames, it was a much better tradeoff than having 4:2:0 with blocky noise
This, these devices should be able to give you full 480i but the capture method is really stepping the quality down, most of those budget "video" converters are nothing but composite anyway and not using any S video component. finding firewire today thats compatible with modern equipment is like finding a needle in a haystack though.
@@DJErnVideos I'm pretty sure there are PCI-E FireWire adopters. But laptop peasants probably aren't capable of adding expansion cards to a PCI-e slot.
Why even consider firewire if the chips allow for rgb quality out of those feeds with the right converter box
Worked with these cameras for years shooting live events. I figured out an awesome hack: instead of using those expensive full-size DVCAM tapes, you load a mini tape and then loop OUT of the FireWire port INTO a consumer handheld camcorder with FireWire. You can use the consumer camera as a "field recorder" deck (with an LCD screen too) and overlap the recordings - effectively "hot-swapping" the tapes as needed to cover the length of the event. Saved my butt many times filming long concerts and plays where there would be no opportunity to switch tapes.
This is super smart!
What is the model name of this camera?!
Great tip that's sadly not needed anymore. 😉
It's crazy that even a budget, no-name smartphone can deliver better quality video than a full on television camera from 20 years ago...technology moves fast.
The don't! Only the premium brands with high-quality sensors perduce good video and stills.
I'm pretty sure TV cameras are 2/3" sensors. So, like smaller than a 1" compact camera. So this is not a full frame camera, larger sensor video cameras existed at the time, but in camcorders, not news cameras with interchangeable lenses.
@@Claude_van ...that makes zero sense.Cars? Trains? Planes? Food prep? Medical technology?
maybe but this guy made a really poor digital transfer, i know that camera and can deliver a better image
Der Vergleich ist blanker Unsinn. Das ist als würde man die Zange eines Letherman mit einer Rohrzange vergleichen. 😂😂😂😂
Jeder, der ernsthaft filmt weiß was ich meine.😉
Außerdem: vergleiche mal ein 20 Jahre altes Auto mit einem Tesla.
Ich bin sicher dass man, wenn man alles manuell einstellt, den Fokus manuell zieht (wie heute mit jedem cine Objektiv auch!), den Weißabgleich präzise einstellt usw. absolut gute Ergebnisse liefern kann. 🙂
Having worked in television during the late 90's and early 2000's - this was VERY nostalgic. I am continuously blown away how good our current cameras are now. Look at your first shot on the Sony which is a prosumer camera, to the professional DVCam......its astonishing. Back in the day only a select few could access pro equipment - now we all carry 4k cameras in our pocket, and the differentiator is no longer access to gear but the ability to tell an effective story with the tools available. Great video!
I bought this camera in 1998 when I started my video production business . It’s a Sony DSR 300 and it was $12,000 new at B&H. Not 20k. Anyway I shot 2 seasons of a local television show about motor sports with it . Loved it
Sony 537 + betacam combo 30k USD (1996 dollars)
Did that include the lens cost? Lenses often costed nearly as much as the camera or similar to the camera depending on quality.
@@marcusdambergerthe Sony dvcam camera (dsr 300) yes it came with a lens as a package deal from B&H . The betacam broadcast cameras (BVP models ) yes they were like 30 grand
Those cameras were/are worth 20k because it „works perfectly fine“ after 20 years. They were built like tanks and even more important they where repairable. Edit: The tape loading sounds gave goose bumps from a nostalgic flash back. 😊
I lusted after cameras like that back in the day. Astounding how far imaging technology has come in such a short time. Just digitizing some old VHS-C and Hi8 videos this week. Oh, my...
@PeppaPig-ze3yc not that I am aware. Nostalgic: feeling happy and also slightly sad when you think about things that happened in the past:
- Talking about our old family holidays has made me feel all nostalgic.
- We'll take a nostalgic look at the musical hits of the 60s. Please let me know if I am wrong here.
Exactly! They were like workhorses. In fact, the same can be said about the SONY line of Digital8 camcorders. They are very sturdy and I actually have 2 that still works today. - James D Watkins artistic director of Phoenix Productions.
Very nice! I also work with those kinds of ENG cameras as a hobby, however I would definitely recommend you to digitize the tapes via FireWire! Digital to Analog conversion always comes with a huge Quality loss. Those "Video grabbers" are unfortinately total garbage :( When you convert the footage directly via a FireWire Cable from the camera to the PC you get the results without quality loss. The footage will look soooo much better! ;)
secondddd
WIndows XP computers with Firewire/iLink (all refer to the IEEE 1394 standard) are not that expensive, and WinDV can get the digital video
Stoik Capture is my recommendation for old-school-capture software -- works great for FireWire capture even in Windows 10 & 11
This!
@@lachlanlau Even Windows 7 PCs will work.
I don't miss these days but lots of nostalgia looking at this. Now anyone can make great looking videos. The barriers to entry back then were enormous; every great camera & lens was super expensive; editing systems were so $$$. The 5DMK2 really changed the game in so many ways.
People always say that as a good thing, while it is not. Before, making videos/movies/TV shows was something more of an art, witch has been totally dismantled now. The magic of an art form gets lost when it becomes available for anyone.
This is true, I got lucky and my school was upgrading editing equipment and I was able to buy the old AVID system… remember the jaz drives?
@@chaserivers4058 Oh man, I remeber Jaz drives! Like a thic floppy disk. We used Avid on "Super PCs" back then for my film class, it was apple pcs for video editing. When Avid Xpress came out that was the first time you could get Avid w a dongle for like $2k or something like that and was very basic in function. Rendering was soooo slow back then.
@@hellion9547Exactly! The MASSES will always dilute Earnest Progression. - James D Watkins artistic director of Phoenix Productions.
You don’t need any extra devices to transfer video to computer. DV is already digital so you can use FireWire port and just got digital files as they were shot. No extra analog/digital conversion needed this is make video VHS kind of quality.
Except computers don't have IEEE 1394 on them anymore.
@@dazwhit For a desktop computer you can buy a pci-e to firewire card: they are readily available. For a laptop it is more difficult: you may use a firewire expresscard adapter, but newer laptops don't even have an express card interface anymore. Firewire-2-USB seems technologically challenging (USB is packet based, FireWire is streaming), you won't hardly or not find any.
Yeah, I was kinda disappointed to see the extra conversion/quality loss that is inherent with taking this digital video, converting it to analog, and then back again. Would’ve been nice to use a higher quality deinterlacer on it as well. It’s actually surprising how good this footage could probably have looked, for being a 20 year old SD professional DVCAM deck.
I have an old FireWire to USB pinnacle studio external adapter. Works fine on a Windows 7 laptop.
@@DoubleMonoLR think I will get an old pro too
When I started as a TV news camera operator in the early 1990s, the Sony Betacam BVW400 was the industry standard and then we moved to the Sony PDW-700 XDCAM digital system and then the Panasonic P2 card world in the 2000s. It was a national TV network and we blew through money like they were printing it upstairs. It's hard to believe that today's $400 camcorder can output image so much better than a $30,000 camcorder from the 20th century.
In Panama, at the tv station that i work, we still using the p2 cam, for live programs Hahahaha! we dont use it for record but we have it there for some specials ocassion, now! These cameras are HD 1080i, i suppoused are new one, than those, that u said!
I worked at rental house and in the ten years I was there the video cameras went from Betacam SD to PDW 700/F800 HD disk based cameras to PMW-500 HD SxS card and now the Z450 4k using the same cards. Each resolution generation has their own set of b4 mount lenses too.
J Mount = Standard Def
HJ = High Def
CJ = 4k / Ultra High Def
Even today a $400 camera doesn’t compare to what’s used for professional purposes, even if the image “looks” the same. There’s a lot on a pro ENG camera that caters to the professional workflow, and that’s worth paying for if your income depends on it
Cameras today can certainly output better quality. However, in the wrong hands you just get crap. The old cameras were beasts and required technical and artistic skill to get the best out of them. They were very capable machines.
Embedded Audio over SDI was always a good feature with ENG cameras on the outputs.
I worked on those cameras for years. I still miss the build of ENG cameras, and I wish these new cameras get back to that build. It was just so gradual, and modular to handle.
These cameras still look great on CRT monitors :) I remember almost pulling the trigger on the Canon GL2, but I instead got some photography gear. Appreciate the time capsule back to those times!
I was able to find a very mint condition GL2 last year and it's been super fun!
I shot a fair bit on the XM1, XL1, GLx etc cameras and still actually have an XH-A1 - aside from experience and learning to shoot with potatoes you didn't miss much lol. I vividly recall wanting to try to do a home run style throw with the things more than once, but of course didn't as they were rentals etc... You should buy one just to scratch that itch and marvel at how terrible recording to tape was... The picture quality is of course not what we have now, but tHe tApEs man, the whole process of getting it from the cam to an NLE digitally was a pain in the neck, and then editing was no dance on roses because of how slow PC's were.
Unfortunately Tom isn't doing the picture quality of these old cameras justice. The extreme compression artifacts in the footage are not created on tape but probably while capturing the footage. Also the (Mini)DV Tapes record audio and video digitally and this digital stream can be captured via Firewire without dataloss/without creating a new step of compression. And the main reason everyone remembers this footage looking way better on CRT is the fact that these cameras record natively interlaced which is handled by CRTs perfectly without any signal processing. When deinterlacing (Mini)DV footage in post you really need the original unaltered interlaced (Mini)DV footage and deinterlace it to 59.94p and not to 29.97p to retain the full temporal resolution.
Nice! When i did a media education i made so much video’s with a DVCAM camera. They were panasonics but still brings back many memories
8:38 It's cool when you're watching old episodes of COPS from the early 2000s, when the cameramen go indoors, they always take off the ND Filter and you can see the filters sliding out just like your example.
Oh man that’s right! Such a nostalgia flashback haha
this is so cool to see. its like watching great tv shows like saved by the bell. I love this so much!
I bought myself a Sony camcorder from 1999 as a holiday camera this summer. Man, I love using it, the 10x optical zoom on this thing is a blast! For the best quality possible you should connect a MiniDV camcorder directly though the FireWire port or USB port on more modern camcorders. As MiniDV is already a digital format this will get you better results than running your footage through the analog output.
I had that exact one and LOVED it! Yours is in great shape!
I'm really lucky to have found such a mint condition one! I think it only had 400 hours on the heads.
WOW, you missed all the fun. In the late 1960's while working at a TV station all we had was 16mm film. What a rush, travel to the news spot, shoot, travel back to the station, and develop the film and hope you got it right, edit it and off to the newsroom. However, I sure enjoy today's video equipment.
Now that does sound like a rush!
Love it! I went from XM2 Canon at work to an HV20 Canon HDV, Pana HMC141 then DVX200 but now on the mirrorless Z9 8K RAW beast ... that I use as a 1080p webcam. FML.
Basically "ENG" - electronic news gathering - was a "step forward" from using 16mm film cameras to capture "whatever it is that was happening outdoors at the time" and deemed newsworthy. However, 16 mm film - at least slow (in film speed), fine grain such film - did still outdo Digibeta, etc. in terms of exposure latitude and - probably - colour rendition. Much of the "combat" - on the Southern Vietnamese/American side - in the Vietnam War was captured on 16 mm cameras. Whatever the merits of 16mm film - "everything else being equal" - the practically "instantaneous" aspect of ENG was brought home to me when the BBC and ITV (in the UK) could relay "live footage" - beamed up by satellite - of the "Falklands War" in the early 1980s. Another notable instance of the usefulness of ENG (but again a less than happy episode in modern history) was capturing the attempted assassination of President Reagan. One didn't need to change "magazines/cassettes" as frequently with ENG or have the risk of a processing failure in the film lab.............
It’s amazing to see how far we’ve come, and how much lower the barrier has gotten to be able to create. You can buy a $200 used HD camera, like the first Canon Rebel T1i and film a full documentary or feature. It’s truly amazing what modern tech makes possible.
I am now 63 and when I started my career with the Indian official broadcaster Doordarshan, I was working with Image Orthicon cameras with a turret lens set up. I have travelled all the way from there till the GoPro today!!
I still appreciate the heft and precision of those old cameras. Zoom levers that can do really slow and smooth pull backs and professional lenses give a look that's not always easy to replicate on a modern camera or iphone, even if the pixel count or what have you doesn't compare. You can still make great and unique content with hardware like this!
There is nothing as pleasing to watch as someone who is truly passionate about something, and I can actually see passion in every detail of this video. What an entertaining content, man! Instantly subscribed.
Wow, thank you!
That California looking place with the TV camera looks so nostalgic
Pretty sweet video. I broke out my 1990's Sony BVW 600D WS with a 18X Fujinon 1.6 SP Betacam. I'm still amazed that its imagery is like shooting 16mm film. I also broke out my pair of 2009 Panasonic P2 HD HPX with 19X f1.4 Fujinons. I'm having great fun with them.
How did I not know this channel existed?!
I am a horrifically bad marketer 😁
Thanks Tom. Great video.
I used to work with these or similar camera at a local TV station in 2002-2004 while studying. We never used the big tapes, because they were
two expensive. But we used DVCAM recording, so that the audio would be locked to the video.
I love this, considering acquiring a tube camera and trying out some filming!
I was an early starter in video production when the first computer editing became available in the UK I jumped in. SVHS were the best early camera we could afford and VM studio was the only edit system that could control the SVHS decks and input graphics onto tape. Though a half GB of hard drive cost a whopping £400!! Soooooooooooo - Things moved fast after that. Finished up with DV cameras, Firewiring via tapedecks into the DV edit system where editing was real time and hard drives became dirt cheap! Steep learning curves, but a lot of fun and met some wonderful creative people on social and commercial projects! Thanks for the memories!!
Great video! I sure don't miss those big monsters. Imagine shooting football games with one of those beasts on your shoulder. My back had a flashback when you cut to the Sony ;) Great stuff :)
This is brilliant, I love the different perspectives and comparisons between the different cameras. Now I need one!
I really love the image processing of that camera. I wish it was possible to have the exact same color effect but with 4k resolutions.
that tv camera is beautiful!
I work for a Japanese TV station, and the XDCAM (PXW-Z450/Z750) that supports 4K has inherited the basic switches and interfaces of the DVCAM.
Even the base plate "VCT-14" from that time can be used for the latest models.
Why oh why would you use s-video to import the video to you computer instead of firewire. No wonder it looks like crap.
Retro footage with modern edits 😂 I get it but I grew up seeing this type of video with different stylized edits. Super nostalgic, thank you!
Loved the cameras, I ran media program for a Disability service with no budget. We were able to acquire 3 Sony DSP-250s for our studio we built. These cameras were $300 Aud each and over time they were fitted with teleprompters, monitors and shotgun mics which we didn't use too much in the studio. They were great, 720HD, just what was needed for the studio and connected via ethernet & adapters to a Magwell 6 input to usb external box. It all looked fairly professional in our studio plus a jib also and we had a lot of clients wanting to participate in the media program. Then came Covid, oh well. Learnt a lot from the gear though.
During that time frame, mid 90's +, analog SD TV, VHS rentals...an alternate to that Sony camera, and it's cost, was the Toshiba TSC-100 Hi8 pro camera (same design and features as the Sony), which our (where I worked) production company used to shoot a documentary, with footage shot around the world in some rather remote areas. The footage was then edited using the then latest tape decks, switching and effects units, including the legendary Toaster. It all came out looking great when viewed on a SD TV from VHS tape. When transferred to DVD years later, it still looked great..on old SD analog televisions.
Dang I’m kinda sad your full audience won’t see this!!! I think this video would totally work on main channel!!
I ended up debating a bit about putting it over there, but based on past experiences the bigger channel's audience isn't super interested in these kinds of videos. Totally fine with me! I'm happy to share them here with no pressure.
@@TOMBUCK2 not knowing who you are, on glance this looks on parr and as if it would fall right in line with your other channel's content
also, make things first and foremost for yourself, not an algorithm ✌️
This took me back to when I attended the Art Institute of Dallas in 2001. We were fiending for the XL1s. Hell, I still want one now, for nostalgia's sake.
The XL1 was a completely unreachable camera back when i was in media school. We lended the cameras from the school but owning one for ourselves was far beyond our wallets reach :)
@@eriksnel6461 facts!
9:10 Gave me a Feeling of Nostalgia. I want this camera now
I went to Uni for media production starting in the late 2010s, and we still used cameras similar to your tv camera, although ours were one generation onward (recording to large memory cards instead of tapes). One advantage was that filming (for example) off the shoulder with a camera like that is WAAAAAY easier than the weird shoulder-rigs for modern mirrorless-cameras, especially stuff like an M4/3-camera.
I remember being obsessed with making a DSLR shoulder rig back in the day, but yeah, it's a massive pain compared to something as well designed as this.
@@TOMBUCK2The rig I got handed was basically H-shaped, two vertical grips at the front, the camera on the "crossbar" and two ends on my shoulders. The main problem was that the little Lumix-camera was just way too light.
This video is so good.
I still have my Sony 537, 637 and D30 camera's that shot on Betacam SP, and also a Betacam SX dock, for my D30, that I have used for many years, filming for Dutch news, but also CNN, NBC and the German ZDF.
Thank you!
Always want to try an old camera to do this. Looks like fun.
So much fun! And they're pretty widely available too.
this looks so fun, it looks like those mid 2000s tv shows like impratical jokers or pimp my ride
As long as u took care of that eng cam they'll last for long long time.. I still have the same eng cam as u and about 10 other Sony dxc eng cams that Ive upgraded over the years. From hi8 to xdcam docks on them. As well as the new Sony air line of new products. I can transmit 5g live from anywhere and as om recording my editor can pull video and edit in real-time as I record crazy stuff. I loved the dvcam format but nowadays I carry a Nintendo switch game holder full of PS2 cards and SD cards up the wazoo. Now I have a server set up in my office and all files are transmitted into my server for full time access. Great stuff Bud
Interesting program. One note. When you do a comparison of two cameras, you should show the same view as seen by each of them either side by side or in a sequence, one right after another, to give a viewer the opportunity to compare. Showing, as you repeated several times, completely different views from each camera created very weak possibility of comparing anything. Anyway, as I said, quite impressive collection of old cameras, and one can tell you proudly have the history in your hands. I think that quite a few of us keep some of these oldies, and once a while we get them in our hands, perhaps just out of nostalgia... Thanks for sharing.
Doesn’t just look retro. I think it looks better. The imperfections make the frame look more poetic. In a way, the images look less digital.
Watched this while eating lunch! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
These old school ENG cameras are great. There are still applications for them today. Its hard to believe, but some commercial TV stations are still SD. College and high school TV use them as well as local access TV. Broadcast journalism students also will train with these old cameras.
Another fun fact about the lenses used on the ENG bodies back in the day were either Canon and Fujinon. If you felt you needed extra features like a built-in 2x extender to increase your zoom focal length and/or extra wide field of view that would easily increase the cost of the lens. Sometimes costing 3 times more than the camera body it self. Unlike the big networks of the day that had those toys try selling that purchase request to a local news director and general manager of a television station. Then eventually compromising on some decent Century Optics attachment lens instead because the budget allowed for it. Those were the days.
Doesn't this camera record at a higher bitrate than what you're showing us? The footage looks horrendously compressed, surely there's a better way to transfer what I assume is a digital file, at least in the case of the MiniDV tapes.
You can transfer the original digital file over FireWire but for some reason he used some crappy analog capture device at a low bitrate
Got some NYPD Blue vibe from the montage at the end there with the handheld and fast moving footage 😄
I should’ve added a darker/blue color grade for that gritty cop feel!
Sad that you couldnt show the cameras full quality using a firewire cable
I finally have an adapter, so I'm hoping to do a sort of update.
@@TOMBUCK2 yesss do it
@@TOMBUCK2 Please make sure to edit the video in 30fps to match the NTSC video these cameras out put. It will give it that "now" live look. Also, deinterlacing is another issue to deal with, not all deinterlacing options are equal in quality. Top notch video.
I think broadcast quality and crt tvs really did some work because it never looked this pixelated haha
I had the DSR500WS DVCAM which was a 16x9 version with an 18x Canon lens.
OG hd Panasonic Varicams are around 600 to 1k on ebay right now. That footage can look real good with some work in post.
i still use two of those bags with the Panasonic NDI enabled cameras we use now.
That outdoor footage gives a perfect early 2000s vibe.
That's was exactly 'my' first eng camera , 19y ago on a local tv station :)
Very interesting!
I enjoyed that footage a lot
I recently scored a Sony PMW-EX3 Cinema camera on eBay for $365 (inc. tax and shipping)! It's a 2008/2009 model, so it is HD, and being a cinema camera, has a native 24 fps mode.
Dang that’s awesome!
I had the XL1, it was a great camera. It had terrible focus breathing but I loved it.
I had to download the footage by capturing it with a Canopus DV Raptor and the software was flaky as hell.
great video! I enjoyed every bit of it. and the passion you have.
i think the elgato way of capture is degrading the quality a lot ... or it it youtube?
can you try to get a proper digital capture method through a firewire? want to see that. the elgato seems not correcting the pixel aspect ratio too... (from the last video from canon XL1s) the de-interlacing here is also not great. i believe the footage should be way better... whats the model of this ENG camera by the way?
FireWire would've been better for sure, but I didn't have the proper cables/adapters at the time.
Feels nostalgic idk why
I had to chuckle when I see the thumbnail because I have one of those cameras at the Public Access station I run.
fun fact you can get adapters for modern lense in the case of my sony which has some canon lenses that are 1k to 3k a pop still
One of the things to talk about is the psychological effect the shoulder-mounted pro ENG camera gives. What I mean by that is, when I had one of these bad boys on my shoulder, it was like I had a passport into places nobody else could go. The size and complexity of it screams that you are legitimate credentialed "official" media, and people gave me huge respect any time I was carrying or using it, in a way the GL1 or other small consumer or prosumer cameras did not. Later on, one of the selling points of the new digital prosumer cameras was that you could use it to "blend in" and look like a citizen or tourist while getting usable broadcast footage, in places "official" or "professional" cameras were banned without permits, like national parks. So sometimes size matters:-)
Essas eram cameras expetaculares e que poucas pessoas tinham acesso, o que era complicado pra nós aqui no Brasil era justamente ter acesso a equipamento de qualidade, usavamos as pessimas VHS... depois as miniDV porém as bem amadoras porque as profissionais eram carissimas
Shooting today on ENG camera is really fun. Once upon a time ENG camera was a dream of all storyteller 😄
Still a great dream to have too 👍
The DSR 500, fond memories :).
Man, old cameras really do feel like time travel.
1980's me handed a 4K Sony video camera - lens: check.. battery: check.. LCD display: check.. transport controls: check.. some sort of plug-in card for storing configuration info, 16/32 kilobytes probably.. tape.. oh wait.. where does the tape go?
I kinda miss the old ENG style bodies for doing doc stuff. I know you can't put them in all the places you can put a small camera or even like a BMPCC4k, and they are heavy but for shooting on the fly interviews and events it's just so much easier to use the rocker zoom and point at stuff using your whole body.
Looks like you got a 20 * Fuji lens woodlands for the pitcher catcher wide shot in baseball
DVcam was quite popular in ENG work but most larger TV stations went for Betacam.
I traveled a fair chunk of the world with one of these on my shoulder , sometimes running depending on the part of the world 😂
This is SO FUN! I am curious what gives it that 90s/20s vibe. Is it the camera and how it processes the images OR the tape (similar to how different film gives different looks). Or maybe both 🤷
I think it’s a combination of everything. Even the audio has a specific sound that I can’t quite explain. 🤔
Pretty sure its coming more from the sensor and the codecs since the tape is nothing more than a storage medium thats working with magnetic tape. It's not like film.
We used a Mini DV camcorder from around 2010 for some scenes on a recent project and in the right conditions it looked really good. Almost nothing of that oldschool vibe was left since the sensor and codecs in that camera were way closer to modern days standard.
Back in the late 90s/early 2000s you had low resolution, mostly CCD instead CMOS sensors, far less dynamic range, bad lowlight capabilities, and weak codecs. That's what makes the look in my eyes.
He’s giving a 90s vibe to this camera because of the transfer process. It should look much, much better.
@@ConflictMedia they say those old magnetic strips used to capture the energy in the room while being recorded
Oh, reminds me of the heady days of going on newsgathering trips for my former employer. Camera. Lights. Tapes. Batteries. Tripod. Cables. Microphones (assorted). Various spare parts, in case things go wrong.
And then, if it was a news not a features deployment, also tape decks, monitors, lip mic, sometimes also a satellite terminal.
And - if this was a hostile environment deployment - also flak jackets, MREs, helmets. On a big story, you'd also have radio kit with you: recorders, mics, analogue/ISDN convertor, audio cables, headphones.
Finally, there were also our personal belongings, laptops, etc.
In all, if we had less than 300kg of kit with us, we thought we were travelling light.
Good and informative video - what was the model number of the 20 year-old Sony video camera please?
You could easily shoot a film with a 1980's Miami Vice'ish look. I was once a proud owner of the venerable Canon XL2. Canon was on to something with interchangeable lens. Tape based acquisition, wow, we really did that?
Sadly I have to disagree with you. I used to be a cameraman for BBC tv news and used that camera daily. I still own it. The quality you showed was terrible. It looked like a vhs copy. Not sure how you captured the footage from the Sony but you certainly did not get the best quality possible. We used dedicated sony dv cam recorder/players. Try and track one down and see the difference. You can also switch the recording to 16x9 instead of 4x3. Had I turned in the quality that you displayed from the camera I would have lost the contract.
He used an analog Elgato capture device which is one of the worst ways to copy footage from a digital camera
@@Pasi123 I realise that now. It is an amateur device that can not get the full bandwidth of the signal so it was an unfair test
Yeah running the sensors directly into broadcast converters will result in a very different image
bro please make a video lens of cine on fullframe cameras
I bought a Panasonic AG-DVC7 that’s mini DV only and it’s pretty nice
People are too dismissal of old 2\3'' cameras. One of the best cameras I've ever used (and I've used almost anything currently in the market, from the Pocket 6K Pro to the Alexa Mini LF and Sony Venice) is the Sony BVW D600, a 2\3'' Betacam SP (that's an analog video format, for the uninitiated). The thing just sat on your shoulder, it wasn't too heavy or too light...it was just right. I still have to find something with the same simplicity and ergonomics. It also shot some impressive footage for its time (it was already outdated in most scenarios even in my day). I remember filming coverage for a TV magazine with the early morning sun shining through the woods once and watching it getting assembled on a tape-to-tape machine by the editor in a van: the footage was very filmic with a pastel-like texture (keep in mind I was using the PAL version). I remember thinking that, had it been shot (or converted) to progressive scan and with some extra crush on the blacks and some film grain simulation, I could've fooled several people into thinking it was 16mm.
i work with sony 537 betacam and 637 betacam, amazing cameras
Awesome video! I'm interested in the tripod mount that you used. Which one specifically is that? Thank you!
I just found one on Amazon: geni.us/L2LM
I think a place like B&H might have more "industry standard" ones.
Tell tale sign: Terrible dynamic range, crushing those highlights!
That shot with the reporter microphone hits me with some hard nostalgia to so many old house hunting shows and the like mum would put on when I was a kid and she was doing some chores. Crazy.
Haha, those were everyone's background noise 😁
me encanto !!!
Damn, I mean it looks bad compared to newer ones but for what it is that big Sony hunk looks amazing!
It's awesome and crazy these things are now so affordable. And it's output even upscaled well to 720p.
I believe this type of camera not only has the i.LINK (FireWire) output, but also an SDI output. Although, with the DV/DVCAM format, the bit rate is fixed at 25MBits/sec. So, I am not really sure there would be any difference in the quality between the capture via i.LINK vs. SDI. Anyway, these were definitely the highest quality DV format cameras one could buy, with the large 2/3" 3-CCD imaging sensors. The low light image must have been really superior to an equivalent consumer DV camcorder. I personally like the look of the DSR-400 camera, which was the last iteration of high-end professional DV format camcorder.
3 CCD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Watching the video full-screen on a 27" 4K monitor at 2160p - such a fascinating thing to see. I shot a lot of stuff back then on 3CCD cameras and I remember the colors being vivid and the images sharp. Of course, we were watching them on 480 broadcast CRTs. It makes me wonder how much of what we see in this video is exacerbated because of the dramatic jump in resolution over the years and, if we were to watch this on a CRT, how would it look then? I'll keep on pondering that question because I no longer have any CRTs at home!
I remember when it was my absolute dream to own a 3CCD camera. I thought that was the best it could ever get!
No offense to TOMBUCK but the video capture solution he was using resulted in massive quality drops. So that's why you may have been confused. The images coming from a camera like this would actually be pretty sharp and the color would be decent as well.
28 Days Later was shot on the Canon XL-1!