Since I do both Video and Photo as a business. This new DSLR with video are a godsend. There are so much possibility now with these new DSLR. Interchangeable lens you can't find on a camcorder under $4,500. Almost film like effect with really nice bokeh. Awesome.
Gary Eckhardt wrote:
Seems like Canon (and Nikon also) are putting all of their development money into the video side of DSLR's.
I don'y know about that. The 7D certainly sported a lot of new features beyond HD video, e.g., new AF array & modes, color sensitive metering, LCD overlay in VF, etc. I don't care about video nor have I used it, but I suspect most of the cost is software based and may be recouped across multiple models.
I think it's important to also think broader in terms of implications for DSLRs too. It's not like video is a direct print button that just takes up space and doesn't get used.
Much of what video does in DSLRs is software based, hence why the 5DII can receive new features via firmware. This is not likely to be driving up the costs of cameras because of the video features.
The other magic to make video happen in DSLRs is the sensor. A bad sensor will heat up during long exposures, exhibit distracting noise patterns, and create the dread "jello wobble" effect. Because of the interest in video and likely competition from other manufacturers, I think Canon has really stepped up their R&D in sensor technology to create more robust sensors that can shoot longer and with less noise than ever before. This is a development that will help everyone, not just the videographers.
We shouldn't look at video as this "extra" feature that is holding us back as photographers. In fact, it's quite the opposite. It creates newfound demand in large sensor cameras, advances research into better sensors, and generally adds value in a a subset of the cameras' features that was already building toward that end.
Gary Eckhardt wrote:
Seems like Canon (and Nikon also) are putting all of their development money into the video side of DSLR's. As a still photographer who doesn't care about the video enhancements, I feel that we are paying needlessly for the video enhancements. I think that I will stay with camera bodies that don't do video instead of paying extra for the video features. Anybody else feel this way?
BTW, I have a 5DMk2 and love it but I never use the video capability. I also have the 40D which is just fine without the video features! Maybe buy a 1D3?
I feel the same way about having to pay for 18 megapixels when I have never needed anything more than the 8 Mp of my 20D and MkIIn so far. But I wanted the features (AF, FPS, and high-ISO) of the 7D so I had to get the megapixels. I have very little interest in video but will give it a try in time. It is intriguing because some who are very experienced in video say the 5D and the 7D are very good for the price. My guess is that most of them haven't worked with glass as good as what we take as commonplace.
Canon & Nikon already have ppl for video. They only reshuffled them for DSLR. In Nikon's case they only had consumer video hence the low-end video on the D3S vs what the 1D4, 5D2 and 7D could do.
I'm sure Canon/Nikon will still sell DSLRs without video just don't expect as much choice as we enjoy now.
dhphoto wrote:
One side-effect of video I'd like to see are really good LCD viewfinders, possibly doing away with the mirror & prism altogether. You could have superimposed live histo's, very high frame rates and allsorts.
I'm never going to use a camera without an optical VF. There are a lot of "junk" features I'll tolerate paying extra for (within reason) to get the concurrent improvements in image quality and "real" functionality, but for me, the optical viewfinder is an absolute must-have. Hell, I might pay extra for a really great basic camera, which is why I bought my 5D "classic" in the first place. How about a stripped-down 1D4? I'd consider one of those to be the upgrade from my 1D2n that the 1D3 never was.
Video on d/SLR's open them up to the cinematography market, so Canon (and the other manufacturers) now sell their cameras to two markets, not just the still photography market! Look how popular the 5DMkII is with professional cinematographers and Canon had only designed it with basic video capture (no manual controls) but will all the demand, Canon added more features via firmware (probably the biggest feature upgrade via firmware Canon has ever done).
As others have said, adding video features to their cameras can't really be costing that much more, and most of the technology and R&D would have come from the development of live view technology anyway, the only new thing added is a microphone and a way to capture audio.
If you really don't want video/live view, but a Sony!
dolina wrote:
Canon & Nikon already have ppl for video. They only reshuffled them for DSLR. In Nikon's case they only had consumer video hence the low-end video on the D3S vs what the 1D4, 5D2 and 7D could do.
I'm sure Canon/Nikon will still sell DSLRs without video just don't expect as much choice as we enjoy now.
I think the trend will follow the P&S market. They'll all have video and here's why.
Consumer level: It's a big draw and the market will demand it so everyone will add it.
Pro/Pro-sumer level: Cost so much if it doesn't have good video like the 7D most will buy something that has it instead. All the manufacturers will eventually add video to avoid being left behind.
Find me a new P&S from the major manufacturers that doesn't come with some sort of video. It's pretty hard, I can't think of any. That will be the case with DSLR in the future.
gotak wrote:
I think the trend will follow the P&S market. They'll all have video and here's why.
Consumer level: It's a big draw and the market will demand it so everyone will add it.
Pro/Pro-sumer level: Cost so much if it doesn't have good video like the 7D most will buy something that has it instead. All the manufacturers will eventually add video to avoid being left behind.
Find me a new P&S from the major manufacturers that doesn't come with some sort of video. It's pretty hard, I can't think of any. That will be the case with DSLR in the future.
I think it'll be more like celphone market where in some phones have cameras while others dont.
As pointed out earlier some venues/events restrict the use of video recording devices. So there is a business case for not having video on some DSLR.
Though I think Canon & Nikon may end up extending the life of the non video DSLRs to service those customers.
dcains wrote:
I'm never going to use a camera without an optical VF. There are a lot of "junk" features I'll tolerate paying extra for (within reason) to get the concurrent improvements in image quality and "real" functionality, but for me, the optical viewfinder is an absolute must-have. Hell, I might pay extra for a really great basic camera, which is why I bought my 5D "classic" in the first place. How about a stripped-down 1D4? I'd consider one of those to be the upgrade from my 1D2n that the 1D3 never was.
I did say a REALLY GOOD electronic viewfinder. The ones around now are no substitute for a ground glass but that will change.
Then the possibilities are endless - zoom in the finder for precise focusing, high gain for low light focusing, pre-visualise exposure copmpensation and white balance, instant review in the finder meaning you wouldn't have to take your eye from the camera to review and lots more
The current setup of a prism , mirror & ground glass screen is surely due for an update. If video is to take off in dslr's I am sure looking at the back of the camera just won't do for many
Gary Eckhardt wrote:
Seems like Canon (and Nikon also) are putting all of their development money into the video side of DSLR's. As a still photographer who doesn't care about the video enhancements, I feel that we are paying needlessly for the video enhancements. I think that I will stay with camera bodies that don't do video instead of paying extra for the video features. Anybody else feel this way?
BTW, I have a 5DMk2 and love it but I never use the video capability. I also have the 40D which is just fine without the video features! Maybe buy a 1D3?
Same with me, I used two times but my level/IQ of video is same as I would use $200 camcorder It needs skills and tons of additional expensive hardware.
I think problems is different, just go to any electronic store around and check dust on huge selection of HD camcorders made by Canon/Sony/etc. Now compare it to the preorder lines for 5DmkII/7D/mkiV and you will understand their idea. They are trying to get video popularity back using SLR's!!! Not going to happen, still 80% of people don't care about video and it will die same way in 2-3 years. Yes, I prefer SLR without video and video related options.
I used to think up to very recently that I didn't want video in my DSLR, but I've changed my mind.
- Video is asked for more and more, if you do any commercial work it is a great bonus to be able to make at least shorter clips with high quality. It is a different art though, and personally I don't know if I want to aquire this second skill set, but if it's included I can at least dabble in it and supply something.
- Because of the large sensor in a DSLR, the performance you get with low light and shallow DOF is really amazing compared to your average video camera. I have documented some of my band's gigs using a MiniDV camera and the quality is so bad in low light it's barely useable. Compared to the DSLR video you need to spend a *lot* of money to get equivalent performance from a video camera, the prosumer ones typically have a tiny sensor which hurts DOF as well as noise. I can well see myself shooting some available light concert video clips, or some short wildlife/bird movies at the same time I take still images.
Learning how to do some video can be really rewarding and can add a lot of richness and appreciation of still taking. Doing video with the 5D II isn't really difficult and if you have a good working knowledge of how to manipulate light you've got a really powerful tool in your hands.
With that said, you're not really paying for the video on top of everything else. It's a selling point and canon also sells dedicated video cameras. Sure they're putting extra work into the video side of new still cameras but not at the cost of any other still feature they want to include in a camera.
Swearing off video as a blind point to not buying a camera really isn't that wise. Give it a serious and honest try and you might find something you enjoy.
It needs skills and tons of additional expensive hardware.