Gun camera filming, groundpounder style
June 19, 2007|
Submitted by Chris Schmidt
Ever wanted to film all those raids and patrols you do with your squad without having to juggle that damn digital camera/camcorder? Too scared to even bring your camera out on mission for fear it will get fouled up by all the dust/sand/water? The SC-X210L is the perfect recording device for those downrange that want to get that 1st person perspective or want to film from crazy angles.
The compact size of the camera itself is great (it fits into a standard-issue frag grenade pouch) but that's not the best part. That would be the remote camera extension that comes included. The extension connects to the camera and can be attached to damn near anything. I've mounted it onto my helmet for some wicked room-clearing and firefight footage. If you do it just right, you can get it so your weapon will be in the shot as you shoulder it.
Another great thing is the footage is saved onto a solid-state hard drive in MPEG4 format. That means you can shake the hell out of it and it will still work, no tapes or sensitive guts inside to get messed up. It's also water resistant, as it was originally designed for extreme sports like white water rafting, snowboarding and skydiving.
The camera itself is capable of 10x optical zoom. It has 1GB internal memory and takes SD cards up to 2GB. It comes with a dual-voltage battery charger. It takes stills, can be used as a voice recorder and holds and plays MP3s.
Cons are as follows; low-light recording is pretty crappy, and there's no night vision mode like larger camcorders offer. Battery life is only about an hour and spare batts are tough to find, even on the internet (though it is possible.) The remote camera does not offer any zoom.
What you have to remember this camera isn't made to capture high def images, it's made to take video where other cameras won't dare to go. So far I've mounted this camera on: My M4, The .50 cal on my M1114, behind the windshield of M1114, on the turret of my M1114, on top of the turret of my M1A2 tank, the side of my kevlar, the top of my Kevlar, my shoulder (not recommended.) You get the idea. If you can shell out the $400, this motorized tanker highly recommends this item for your next tour.


Great Camera. Will agree extension for smaller camera will fit nicely on ach, or on your m4 with the small arms adaptor that comes with you pvs 14 bag
Posted by: DURANGO 63 | June 19, 2007 at 03:31 PM
Do you post your videos anywhere? I'd love to check them out.
Posted by: Chris Metcalf | June 19, 2007 at 10:56 PM
I was going to ask the same as Chris Metcalf.
Liveleak.org is a great location to post any footage publically.
Posted by: d3v | June 20, 2007 at 06:01 AM
Wow. Wish i had that back in OIF II instead of the crappy disposable cameras i was using..sent in through everyone's care packages. Looking back on it, it would have been well worth the money to get good footage.
Posted by: Tom Newell | June 21, 2007 at 07:54 PM
Another decent option might be the ATC2K Waterproof Action Camera. It may not be a complete replacement for your camcorder but it'll capture video in some very rugged conditions.
http://www2.oregonscientific.com/shop/product.asp?cid=8&scid=107&pid=709
Posted by: Simon | June 28, 2007 at 07:19 AM
Anyone tried the Hero? Seems to be close (without the remote head), but the price is around $150
Posted by: Gary Joyce | July 04, 2007 at 06:50 AM
can you use it under water and to what depth.
Posted by: Bob Wanish | July 04, 2007 at 07:11 AM
Or..... just grab an RCA plug lipstick camera, about $60, and connect it to any Handycam.
A 3/4 inch Lipstick camera mounts perfectly in a picatinny scope mount on the front rails.
Check out:
spytech.com
helmetcam.com
Jonescam.com
Posted by: PAPATANGO | July 04, 2007 at 07:25 AM
I don't believe what I'm seeing here! Soliciting a front line soldier to be interested in filming a video than doing his job with squad. What 'park' is this unit operating in?
Posted by: john rich carpenter | July 04, 2007 at 08:06 AM
This kind of idea is good - especially now that some troops are being held accountable for their actions. With on the spot camera footage, you would go a long way in backing up testimony on combat incidents.
Posted by: JCitizen | July 04, 2007 at 08:24 AM
I think Carpenter doesn't realise the cameras are attached to your armour, equipment or helmet. They are not hand held and don't interfere with operations.
Posted by: d3v | July 04, 2007 at 09:34 AM
When I first saw your illustration, I thought that it was just like my new SVP model HDDV-1800 that I got on Ebay for $75. A far cry from $400.
Posted by: Nick Filimon | July 04, 2007 at 09:39 AM
I have an ATC 2000, its made to be beat on. Made by Oregon Scientific in Tigard, Orgeon, but can be purchased through multiple different stores. It is water-resistant, records at 30fps, and has an expandable memory slot. I put a 2GB card and it will record for 1.5 hours. The microphone is internal so if you want good sound you have to take the rear cap off that protects it from water. The great thing is that it runs on 2 AA batteries.
Posted by: Jon Van Horn | July 04, 2007 at 05:29 PM
"If you do it just right, you can get it so your weapon will be in the shot as you shoulder it."
Is this just trying to turn war into a big video game? What happened to pride of the professional military.
Posted by: Shirley Eadline | July 05, 2007 at 07:34 AM
There are always two ways to look at something: pros & cons. A "self-mounted" camera can be invaluable to someone wanting to verify his/her actions; filming a "scene" could possibly be utilized for a soldier's benefit (therapy dealing with memories); also, cameras don't lie, some humans do.
I would send a camera to any soldier, even if it meant only that he/she knew I cared about them! I pray for the safety of our troops and the innocent civilians. Hartlady
Posted by: BH | July 05, 2007 at 07:51 AM
Shirley...
These are professionals. Professionals review such things as after action reports, photo's, video's, etc...in an effort to avoid the same mistakes again. We learn from our mistakes and we protect ourselves by this learning process. Even Law Enforcement now uses video to track and protect our troopers.
Soon, we will have such video's, which have been shot since WWI, in our historical archives. Indeed, Military.com posts many links to video's and films from the past. This is one more aspect of our continuing need to document and learn. Imagine having actual squad tactic video's in basic training, where those who will probably never use them, can in the ONE time of their career see how effective these tactics are. In WWII, as our troops attacked the hedge rows, I wish we had video's of their tactics. Now lost to history, those tactics could be really useful to our troops in both current theaters of operation.
Posted by: Chuck Johnson | July 05, 2007 at 08:32 AM
If the troops on D-Day had had cameras like these there would have been a huge amount of valuable info of unimaginable benefit to our commanders, then and in the future. Imagine if our boys in the Revolution had had them. A hundred years from now these films will be some of the most cherished of our nation.
Posted by: KitCox | July 05, 2007 at 09:59 AM
I am also using the Samsung SC-X210L, but for recording my "action pistol" and 3 gun matches.
I have posted some of them to the web here:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=posercam
Posted by: chills | July 05, 2007 at 02:47 PM
The only reason that combat video taping was not done earlier was the cameras were either unavailible or too bulky. Now we have the technology so we can ensure that events and operations can be properly recorded. For those who are repulsed by the idea, just remember the loss when combat footage was not captured at the expense of history. For example, the landings at Normandy on D-Day had very little footage because most was destroyed or damaged by seawater while still in the cameras, and the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima was caught by a personal hand-held movie camera because ALL the official footage was screwed up during tranfer and development. I would appreciate any operators that have used video in combat to drop me a line and let me know what they used that works and didn't work.
Posted by: Andre' M. Dall'au | July 06, 2007 at 04:42 AM
Plus like Gun Camera footage it could be a godsent to collect intelligence. Like that Haji that was acting so suspicious but you never notice during patrol.
Posted by: El Coqui | July 06, 2007 at 06:10 AM
I could see a major use for just such a camera. After action reports - many times details are missed and camera's like this can help bring up very important details that might have been missed. "Like what was the trigger for an ambush". In addition those films make excellent on the site training tools to teach the "new guy" what happesn and what to look for.
Posted by: Chuck | July 06, 2007 at 07:20 AM
You need a camera to "prove" you legally shot the haji now days.
Posted by: Terry | July 06, 2007 at 09:28 AM
Because I do not view your local and tit sucking syndicate news speak-easys, I applaused input from my little brothers and sisters in the field who are performing two functions. Since the main stream news liberal-tines/Soddomies will lift the heads of our enemies, then let us view their anatomy dissection as form of public cleansing through the eyes of a SC-X210L; yet, as it mounted on where-ever possible.-Death Waits In The Dark! NIGHTSTALKERS DON'T QUIT!
Posted by: Michael L. Mosely-1SG (RET) | July 06, 2007 at 12:24 PM
It seems that everyone has a camera nowadays, its best now to also have your own.
Try this one out for size www.advancedtaccam.com
It’s a “hardened” version of the OS ATC 2000 that mounts on a RIS rail system or a weaver mount. Kind of a “black box” for a rifle.
Posted by: Tim Ellwood | July 25, 2007 at 01:41 PM