Do people take one-man-band reporters seriously?

I had an interesting discussion the other day with an acquaintance who runs a video production house in Orlando. We were discussing the sort of gear I had verses the gear he had.

One of the most interesting points he made was that he deploys larger cameras for no other reason than to keep clients happy when his crew turns up on a shoot. The perception seems to be that the more equipment you have, and the bulkier it is, the more of a real professional you are.

This got me thinking about whether the appearance of a small camera may make a videographer look like less of a professional and more of a hobbyist.

I know from my years of experience covering news events, that TV shooters tend to look at videographers with small camcorders as a pesky waste of riser space - sort of irritating amateurs getting in the way of the shot they have expertly framed using their gigantic betacams. Indeed, many of the small cameras I have seen in use at events are the same models I have seen tourists using at Disney World. This may give the impression that they are unable to take broadcast quality shots.

But the small camera is absolutely critical to solo TV reporters. One of the local news channels in my area sends its reporters out on their own with very big, old-school cameras. This is just daft. By the time you come to shoot your standup, you're hot and sweaty from carrying the massive thing. How are you supposed to run around gathering a story while lugging such a weight around? Small, lightweight cameras are a critical part of being able to work as a one-man-band successfully.