Quote:
Originally Posted by ARC Tech-109
Can't speak for those as I don't have anything from that line, I have the BVW-35 & BVW-50 portables, PVV3 which you pointed out would be considered modular and my desktop machines that are DVW-A500's and a BVW-22 for Betacam.
|
The BVW-3 camcorder is modular. The BVW-200/300/400 are not. See this video:
https://youtu.be/vnJlZDOyEhs?si=-mc5ncG-bmsCwmnO&t=169. Notice how the cassette is moved towards the head drum. You can also read Sony's whitepaper on the BVW-200/300/400, which mentions smaller head drum, M-loading and 15 mm savings in mechanism's height. Sony used the same approach for 8-mm camcorders. Also all MiniDV camcorders I've seen use similar lacing scheme. So, by the late 1980s Sony figured how to use M-loading to save space, while Panasonic copied older U-loading in a futile attempt to keep pace with Sony.