Interesting bit of Nikon geekery

Forums Forums News Articles and Info Interesting bit of Nikon geekery

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
  • #1999

    about their first electronic (analog, not digital) still camera:


    very interesting. i have a panasonic color video camera that mated with an RCA VHS potable tape deck. it has a bunch of video controls, an option to add text, etc and i bought the camera in ’86. bought the VHS tape player/deck in ’85. these were state of the art for their time and yet it would be two years before a semi decent still camera came out. and only in b/w. and for $20K as opposed to my total investment of roughly $1000 for the camera and deck.

    having no idea what the technical difficulties were it’s hard to understand this discrepancy.

    and it surprises me that so few of these are still around.

    anyway thanks for the link.


    It seems they made so few because it actually cost them a lot more than $20K to make. I think the biggest issue was probably image quality – it had (barely) good enough images to use for newspaper reproduction, which I don’t think would be the case for stills extracted from a VHS camera back then.

    I do wonder if those lenses would cover, say, micro 4/3rds. A 10-40mm F1.4 would be quite something….


    My but that was a long article.:shock: Took me most of an hour to work my way through, thoroughly. Well worth the time, too.

    Something to look out for on e-Bay–what a find! 😛

    //Of course I wouldn’t bid on it myself. I’m a Canon man. 😉


    Standard NTSC video is 648×486 interlaced (or 314928 bare pixels at 156464 pixels per frame) while the QV-1000C was apparently doing 380000 pixels per frame, noninterlaced, recording to a floppy disc instead of a streaming tape.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.