p.2 #4 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Typical response in a still photography forum. I'd assume this question comes up every few months. Currently, you can't buy a high end dslr that doesn't shot video so you really don't have an option anymore. If you need it, use it and if you don't, don't.
I have a 7d and have never used the video. Most of what I need can be done with an iPad or a very basic camcorder with AF.
p.2 #5 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Nope, don't care about video. I do understand how some might find it useful.
My hope is that Canon continue to remember that these are still cameras first and video cameras second. I'm always worried that at some point video enhancements will impact still features/quality/ability/useability.
p.2 #6 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
EB-1 wrote:
It is of zero use to me. I wish the R&D money were allocated to better sensors or something else.
EBH
I'm just thinking aloud here but,
could the R&D that's gone into the video aspect of the DSLR actually have improved sensor tech for stills ?
Im thinking about keeping sensors cooler than was needed before Video? a cooler sensor should mean less noise correct?
Also I very much doubt we would have gone down the path of Live view if video wasnt the ultimate goal. which in turn means we would have stayed with smaller lower res rear screens than we have now.
And the video side of things probably helped in the development of the STM lenses and Hybrid sensors.
p.2 #7 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Ben Horne wrote:
Still and video require completely different thinking processes, and this is difficult for most still photographers to adapt to.
I completely agree that still and video require completely different thinking processes. And they also require a completely different set of skills with regard to taking the video and processing the video.
I have neither the interest or the energy to learn and develop those sets of skills. I figure that my skills level at working with video is never likely to get past a "point and shoot" level, and, if I'm going to take crappy video, I can do it just as easily (actually more easily) with my phone or with a camcorder that costs a couple of hundred dollars.
To me, the "magic" of still has always been in being able to create the feeling that I have captured a single instant in time and knowing that that single instant will never occur again.
Further, another part of the appeal of a still photograph to me is that I can frame it and hang it on the wall, and, once that is done, I (and others) can enjoy looking at it over and over again every time I pass by the photograph and with little extra effort on my part. With video, I am much less likely to enjoy viewing it often because, before watching it, I am required to make the conscious effort to pull it up on a screen and to sit down and view it.
On the other hand, I have no issue with Canon and other manufacturers putting video capability in their cameras. For those who want to use it, that is great. For me, it is a feature that will remain unused.
p.2 #9 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
I don't care much about video--haven't used it in my 5D2 after 3 years--but most other shooters do care and sales would dry up if it wasn't offered. I look at it like other features I don't use much--flash, AI servo, Tv mode, etc.--it ain't hurting anything and many other photogs need these features. Canon tries to please as many people as possible with each design and always includes way more features and ways of doing the same thing than anybody needs. If I had a choice--and never will--I'd trade video for ECF. Hate that damn joystick and loved using ECF in my A2E, Elan 7E and EOS 3.
p.2 #11 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
O% use for me also. I wish Canon would give us as good a camera as possible without the Video. Let people purchase and pay for video that want it and sell those who don't a better still camera for the same money or less.
p.2 #13 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
I shoot stills predominantly, but on one occasion when shooting a jazz session, I broke into video for about 1 hour and the clients loved the results. I am going to open my mind and challenge myself to add video to my package.
p.2 #14 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
I'm with Harry (chez) on this. If a client asks me if I can shoot a video in addition to still photos, I want to say yes, at least for the simple stuff.
p.2 #15 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
I have used video a few time on my 5Ds. It is interesting and fun. Unfortunately to get professional quality video requires a lot of dedication to the craft. Maybe even more so than still photography. Also to do it right needs an investment in additional gear (fluid heads, track systems, external sounds systems, video editing SW, etc.) I do not have.
p.2 #16 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Its very important to me. the video quality is awesome, and it means I have to carry one less thing with me on vacation. But I have young kids, the primary subject of my videos.
p.2 #17 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
dsr1 wrote:
O% use for me also. I wish Canon would give us as good a camera as possible without the Video. Let people purchase and pay for video that want it and sell those who don't a better still camera for the same money or less.
Selling fewer cameras would mean the price increases for both it won't decrease. They have already separated the high end pro video into the c100/300/500 and 1Dc, I think the 'still' cameras will stay as they are with some video features but not all of the highly specialized video features (xlr inputs, etc)
p.2 #18 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
stanj wrote:
Not unless it has AF.
Yea same here. I basically want a higher image quality camcorder which is why I tend to use the video capabilities of the NEX and m4/3 over the ones in the DSLRs I own.
p.2 #19 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
The 5D3 is the first camera I own which has video built in. Did it impact my buying decision? Yes, to a certain extent.
Does having video functionality make it a better or worse camera? That is totally dependent on the person using the camera and their needs. For me, it's a nice-to-have feature. The 5D3 for me is primarily a still camera, with video (of sorts) thrown in. With a 2 year old at home, it means that I can capture moments in a different format. I do not mind the lack of AF, or the changes in the settings to accommodate video (twice the shutter speed as compared to the frame rate etc), and make usable home video content in HD for my family to enjoy.
It's my belief that Canon has more or less reached the limitations of their sensor (and newer technology could potentially have been patented by competitors), since they are now trying to eke out the maximum from their sensors, as opposed to being in a Megapixel race when the digital revolution started. Thus, incorporating video might have made sense to them, to make their products appeal to a larger user base and extend the usability of their current technology. I do not think that they had diverted R&D funds/efforts from other needs to develop video, at least not in a scale to adversely impact such efforts. An organization as big as Canon, surely has a lot of irons in the R&D fire, and I believe that we will see the results of that in the next few years, in terms of better sensor and camera technologies from Canon.
In the end, I think that the camera has become more versatile, and cheaper, due to the incorporation of video, and appreciate the fact that I can still use my 5D3 to take video if the situation so demands.
Of course, these are purely my opinions and YMMV...
p.2 #20 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
The responses are pretty much what I expected. Do Canon and Nikon think people who are ready to drop $3000 to $7000 on a DSLR really think that video matters that much to them ? Entry level SLR folks and P&S people probably care more about it as they're more family snapshot oriented. No offense, I just think that generally holds true but YMMV. A few of the pros mentioned that clients sometimes request it, as I mentioned wedding photogs had use for it in my original post.
I have to believe it raises the price of the camera to include video, I'd only be guessing at how much, but it must be something and I wouldn't be surprised if it were a couple hundred bucks or more on a high end camera.
I've often wished the camera builders would make things like this optional so the people that wanted it could have it and those that don't won't have to pay for something they don't want or need. I suppose that would complicate things for them a bit but they already make several different bodies as it is, why would it be any different than that ?
Good Luck
