p.7 #2 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Teats on a boar, a boat in the desert, congressmen....all come to mind.
Dedicated HD video cameras are cheap, and the sensors are designed not to overheat. Win win
p.7 #6 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
jerrykur wrote:
For a more balanced responses you post the question in this forum, http://www.cinema5d.com/
thanks for the link just had a look great forum
p.7 #8 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
AJSJones wrote:
Only 57,000 posts on the large sensor DSLR sub-forum. Must be a passing fad
I genuinley dont understand why some people are so anti its there if you want to use it if not dont
Its helps sell DSLR cameras so must be a good thing surely
p.7 #9 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
LCPete wrote:
I genuinley dont understand why some people are so anti its there if you want to use it if not dont
Its helps sell DSLR cameras so must be a good thing surely
Me too - I wonder how many of the folks who are "so anti video" are also "anti LiveView"?
p.7 #12 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Logically speaking video is only thing they could easily stick inside SLR popularity Camcorders and any other types of video recording devices are not moving as well as SLR and lenses. Tons of people working in Canon video also would like to stay at their jobs and Canon would always prefer to get returns from their investments in dead slow moving video. Another factor is PS owners who would like to buy SLR but also would like to make videos of their ugly dogs, cats and babies but not just photos
^^^ This is how we got video, but no I don't need it and will never use it. My iphone 4s takes amazing videos, but I use it one time too ...
p.7 #13 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
LCPete wrote:
I genuinley dont understand why some people are so anti its there if you want to use it if not dont
Its helps sell DSLR cameras so must be a good thing surely
I don't think we are anti of video, we just don't think it is something we would like to do or take. If you are dancing tango you will not exactly would like to dance disco too Besides photographers for years are asking for many other important for us items and instead we are getting video ....
p.7 #14 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
Breitling65 wrote:
I don't think we are anti of video, we just don't think it is something we would like to do or take. If you are dancing tango you will not exactly would like to dance disco too Besides photographers for years are asking for many other important for us items and instead we are getting video ....
What do you mean by 'instead'? Do you know that camera makers are adding video at the expense of developing other features? You can't buy an SLR without video now, it is a standard feature going forward. A camera without video would now be a niche product and would likely cost more.
p.7 #15 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
jctriguy wrote:
What do you mean by 'instead'? Do you know that camera makers are adding video at the expense of developing other features? You can't buy an SLR without video now, it is a standard feature going forward. A camera without video would now be a niche product and would likely cost more.
Agreed. Like it or not video is here to stay. And we benefit from it in the better live view support. Also, I don't think the engineering effort to support video has any impact on other features like sensor development for more MPs or higher dynamic range. Video capture/display is considerably downstream.
p.7 #16 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
And the solution to continuous focusing video DSLR will likely lead to advanced still photography AF accuracy. Really, the technologies go hand in hand.
p.7 #17 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
As I said earlier in this post, video is very important to me and I see it as a valuable tool and part of my marketable skill set. I understand it's not for everyone, however a lot of folks in this forum seem to be pretty myopic about their gear. The DSLR market is much larger than just the fanboys (myself included) here. I may be wrong, but it appears that folks who actually make their living in photography are in the minority on this forum. (this is just an observation and not meant as a slight)
There is a whole new market for HD video in DSLRs that never existed before the 5DmkII. For as many people on this forum who decry video in their cameras, there are as many film makers who purchase the DSLRs for video alone and seldom use the still features. It's a money maker for Canon and I see that as a good thing for us, the end user.
The quality of the video coming from the Canon DSLRs (and to a lesser extent, Nikon too) is revolutionary at it's price point. Before the 5DmkII, the cinematic quality was only approached by cameras that cost tens of thousands of dollars. It's not perfect, but a $3k camera that produces video of that quality is revolutionary and makes quality film making accessable to the masses. The Canon system is the industry standard in the independent film market. That's a huge new market for Canon. The DSLR is not a camcorder, it's a tool that takes a bit of skill to use correctly. I think that is why so many amateurs and old school still photographers feel disappointed by it. It does not have a green easy button the same way the point and shoot cameras do.
I don't see high end DSLRs such as the 5DmkIII being any cheaper or better if they dropped the video feature. By making a camera that caters to both still and video markets they're able to offer us a camera at a lower cost by doubling their market. Win win.
For years as a photojournalist I only shot in JPEG because I was filing on extreme deadlines in a real hurry and RAW was not part of my workflow. Just because I never utilized the higher quality of RAW files doesn't mean I wouldn't want that feature in my camera. And I doubt it would have made the camera any cheaper either.
p.7 #19 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
jctriguy wrote:
What do you mean by 'instead'? Do you know that camera makers are adding video at the expense of developing other features? You can't buy an SLR without video now, it is a standard feature going forward. A camera without video would now be a niche product and would likely cost more.
one after another or same time who cares? we are waiting for IS inside 24-70L for example or some good firmware options. Instead we are getting updates for video no one cares about. that is why I said instead.
p.7 #20 · How important is video in a DSLR to you ?
a lot of folks in this forum seem to be pretty myopic about their gear.
folks who actually make their living in photography are in the minority on this forum.
You're spot on with both points. This forum, DPR and POTN are filled with amateurs (probably greater than 95%) who spend more time whining about their equipment than actually trying to make great images.
The quality of the video coming from the Canon DSLRs (and to a lesser extent, Nikon too) is revolutionary at it's price point.
Right again. Canon (and other DSLR makers) have revolutionized the ability to capture good quality video by opening up that capability to those who couldn't afford a high-end video camera. The video field will never be the same because of the DSLR video revolution, and those who continue to complain about it are nothing but a pack of Luddites (just an observation, not meant as a slight...).
Camcorders and any other types of video recording devices are not moving as well as SLR and lenses. Tons of people working in Canon video also would like to stay at their jobs and Canon would always prefer to get returns from their investments in dead slow moving video. Another factor is PS owners who would like to buy SLR but also would like to make videos of their ugly dogs, cats and babies but not just photos