Why do broadcasting camera's have such weak specs for the price?

[RTX 3070 I7 11800h]

Hello, I was watching Potato Jet when I got recommended a video of some guy reviewing a Canon XF705. Ofc I watched it and YIKES 10k (AUD) I though better have some good specs. 1 inch sensor? 4k 50? 1080 120? a A7s3 can do better then that and its a fraction of the weight and half the price. Why dont they use a fixed lens apsc camera? Better low light. Because they get used in the dark and I saw this in all broadcasting cameras. Some broadcast cameras have the same sensor size that is in my Gopro.

[mariushm]

You pay for the lens and you pay for the quality of the sensor ( size of pixels inside that sensor, accuracy, if it's backlit or not etc)  and other features like SDI / network /  (raw, uncompressed) outputs, remote controls, etc etc 

 

The gopro may squeeze 4K resolution pixels in 1 inch, the pro camera only packs 2K resolution worth pixels in the same size. 

 

Go look at reviews for high end cameras on LinusTechTips and see the difference in quality between those cameras and your gopro 

 

I remember being impressed by this video and the shots in it : 

 

 

 

There's also a playlist here you can check ; 

 

 

[RTX 3070 I7 11800h]

15 minutes ago, mariushm said:

You pay for the lens and you pay for the quality of the sensor ( size of pixels inside that sensor, accuracy, if it's backlit or not etc)  and other features like SDI / network /  (raw, uncompressed) outputs, remote controls, etc etc 

 

The gopro may squeeze 4K resolution pixels in 1 inch, the pro camera only packs 2K resolution worth pixels in the same size. 

 

Go look at reviews for high end cameras on LinusTechTips and see the difference in quality between those cameras and your gopro 

 

I remember being impressed by this video and the shots in it : 

 

 

 

There's also a playlist here you can check ; 

 

 

The footage from the broadcast Marshall camera looks exactly the same as my gopro. What am I supposed to say.

[porina]

In terms of composition, for exactly the same image the bigger sensor will need smaller aperture in the optics so light collection remains the same. If you collect more light from using a bigger aperture, the image is not the same (less depth of field). Bigger sensors might typically be used for cinematic, less important for something like documentary. Roughly speaking APS-C is comparable in size to the video used on 35mm film. 

 

Lens quality may differ.

 

Ergonomics differ. If all you want to do is take video, the Sony A series would need a lot of extra stuff to mess around with to get it remotely usable. It is a huge difference between a camera designed for video, to a still camera that can be used for video.

 

"Pro features" may be included but not in consumer models.

 

As a parallel, I use to be active in astrophotography. If you look at only sensor size and pixel count, you might think why would anyone pay many thousands for something a high end mobile phone might compete with? Because it is optimised for the job. You have more control over the data output as well as physical design choices to lower noise.

 

Edit: + Designing a lens to cover a bigger sensor will make it more complex, expensive and heavy (assuming a comparable quality). 

[RTX 3070 I7 11800h]

1 minute ago, porina said:

In terms of composition, for exactly the same image the bigger sensor will need smaller aperture in the optics so light collection remains the same. If you collect more light from using a bigger aperture, the image is not the same (less depth of field). Bigger sensors might typically be used for cinematic, less important for something like documentary. Roughly speaking APS-C is comparable in size to the video used on 35mm film. 

 

Lens quality may differ.

 

Ergonomics differ. If all you want to do is take video, the Sony A series would need a lot of extra stuff to mess around with to get it remotely usable. It is a huge difference between a camera designed for video, to a still camera that can be used for video.

 

"Pro features" may be included but not in consumer models.

 

As a parallel, I use to be active in astrophotography. If you look at only sensor size and pixel count, you might think why would anyone pay many thousands for something a high end mobile phone might compete with? Because it is optimised for the job. You have more control over the data output as well as physical design choices to lower noise.

So your saying basically the bigger professional broadcast camcorders are ment for someone to walk around town and easily adjust features while being quick

and its optimised for that.

[porina]

2 minutes ago, RTX 2070 Max-Q said:

So your saying basically the bigger professional broadcast camcorders are ment for someone to walk around town and easily adjust features while being quick

and its optimised for that.

Video is not an area I consider myself a expert in, but as a generalisation yes. Look at the Canon you linked. It is pretty much ready to go. Make sure you have good empty storage in it and a full battery and you're ready. Maybe you want better sound or video backup, and there may be options for that if needed.

 

If you had a Sony A7, do you really want to hold it out in front of you while you use it? Not the most comfortable. I've tried that with Canon DSLRs and it isn't a great experience. You can mount it onto various rigs, bit like those you see Brandon in at times, which helps but it is additional cost and complexity.

 

Use the best tool for the job. They have different strengths and weaknesses. 

 

I haven't even looked at some handy pro features like timecode support, assuming it might be present. Helps to sync different sources which are a pain otherwise.

[Orbital_Aurora]

Broadcast cameras will have broadcast specific features, be more reliable and most of all, are meant to be bought by companies. The pricing model for professional gear is not the same as for consumer / prosumer gear

[Zodiark1593]

Theres a few technical reasons for broadcast cameras to use smaller sensors. 
 

A smaller sensor leads to smaller lenses for a given field of view. This is important for scenarios that rapidly change, such as a broadcast environment. Camcorders also tend to offer parfocal lenses so as to not lose focus during zooming, a much more expensive feature on larger lenses, as well as built in ND filters.  
 

For video capture, smaller sensors also offer faster readout speeds, reducing rolling shutter. Further, the smaller sensor uses relatively low power, and is easier to cool in extended shooting sessions. 

[RTX 3070 I7 11800h]

On 7/6/2021 at 8:25 AM, Zodiark1593 said:

Theres a few technical reasons for broadcast cameras to use smaller sensors. 
 

A smaller sensor leads to smaller lenses for a given field of view. This is important for scenarios that rapidly change, such as a broadcast environment. Camcorders also tend to offer parfocal lenses so as to not lose focus during zooming, a much more expensive feature on larger lenses, as well as built in ND filters.  
 

For video capture, smaller sensors also offer faster readout speeds, reducing rolling shutter. Further, the smaller sensor uses relatively low power, and is easier to cool in extended shooting sessions. 

So there are reasons.

[kasugatei]

In the broadcast situation you want something reliable and something that can be operated without much fuss.

Basically, on the field when they record something they don't have much time to do a montage before eg. evening news so they want material that requires minimum processing. Those cameras are made to provide the best possible chance of getting a perfect video because you will not have another chance to get that "money shot". Even so, that Canon camcorder, although nice camera is just an entry level model IMHO. The ones that I've seen being used in big TV houses are usually Sony or Ikegami when we speak about portable models. For studio usage I've seen other ones as well including beast made by Hitachi which enables 8K resolution at 120fps used for filming sports events. In that case the lens was made by Canon. I had a chance to play with it a bit and it was super easy and smooth to do some basic operations even for me and I am not a cameraman.

 

Speaking about lenses, broadcast lenses are motorized because, as I said before, you don't want any fuss when operating camera. Also all that fine mechanic components must be reliable which is additionally increasing the cost. 

 

Finally, there is also question of connectivity. SDI is still the standard for cameras to transport the video in realtime. All professional switching equipment, encoders etc. are SDI based so for broadcast SDI connection is still a must.

 

[Distinctly Average]

On 7/7/2021 at 7:01 AM, RTX 2070 Max-Q said:

So there are reasons.

Add in features like the quality of the viewfinder, XLR audio jacks and the processing to match, battery life, overall build quality. Build quality especially in the case of some of the Canon kt. If you are slap bang in -50 temps on ellesmere island, or up some creek in the Amazon for 3 months then the last thing you want is for replacement kit to have to be dragged in. There are a butt ton of features that make them considerably more expensive. Then if you look at some brands they are expensive because that is what the market will pay. Look at those memory cards for RED cameras for instance.  

[CerealExperimentsLain]

On 7/5/2021 at 5:01 AM, RTX 2070 Max-Q said:

Hello, I was watching Potato Jet when I got recommended a video of some guy reviewing a Canon XF705. Ofc I watched it and YIKES 10k (AUD) I though better have some good specs. 1 inch sensor? 4k 50? 1080 120? a A7s3 can do better then that and its a fraction of the weight and half the price. Why dont they use a fixed lens apsc camera? Better low light. Because they get used in the dark and I saw this in all broadcasting cameras. Some broadcast cameras have the same sensor size that is in my Gopro.

Because the camera is designed for run and gun professional work.  You can plug it into a Genlock, you can sync it time code generator, you can plug XLR microphones directly into it, plug it in for SDI output.  This is a camera that fits into professional broadcast situations while being light and small enough to run and gun in a hurricane or while embedded with troops in a combat zone while it's used by a single operator.  There's a lot more to 'broadcast' than 'resolution', and 'sensor size'.

[RTX 3070 I7 11800h]

3 hours ago, CerealExperimentsLain said:

Because the camera is designed for run and gun professional work.  You can plug it into a Genlock, you can sync it time code generator, you can plug XLR microphones directly into it, plug it in for SDI output.  This is a camera that fits into professional broadcast situations while being light and small enough to run and gun in a hurricane or while embedded with troops in a combat zone while it's used by a single operator.  There's a lot more to 'broadcast' than 'resolution', and 'sensor size'.

Okay.