On 25/6/04, John Francis, discombobulated, offered: >> Why _ever_ do those cameras weigh 25 lbs? >> You would think that with the advances in image recording technology in >> the past 10 years, they'd be able to shrink the size of those cameras >> considerably! > >At Portland last weekend I noticed a small remote camera perched on top >of the catch fencing. The camera body was about the size of a three-pack >of video tapes, and the lens assembly was around the size of a coke can. > >Closer inspection revealed this to be an HDTV camera. It was externally >powered (which is how I first spotted it), and had no record capability, >but I was still impressed by the small size as compared to a BetaCam.
As a remote camera, it will have had limited features compared to a jack- of-all-trades news camera. TV is all about horses for coarses... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________
