Printable View
I was reading the review of the Nikon D4s a few days ago and it got me wondering, how much all that top notch video functionality that I never intend to use, is actually costing me?
Do any of you who shoot wildlife ever use the video function?
Any idea how much cheaper my d800e for example would have been with no video function at all?
I would certainly buy the non-video option if manufacturers made a camera model without this feature
Let me know your thoughts on the matter
Thanks
The cost of adding video is minimal to the cost of the camera and you would not see any reduction in price from a similar camera model that did not have video due to the expense of having an extra production line. The only reason the 5D MKII had video was that that newspaper editors mentioned to Canon that it would be nice if their photographers could shot some short video while on assignment from there it just took off and open a new segment of camera buyers.
It's also tied in with Live View, although I don't know which came first, but LV is a very nice thing to have.
That is a feature I have not used enough of. The very few times I've used it I was happy I had it. Many times after a photo session I tell myself I should have also taken a video. IMO it is certainly a "nice to have" feature and I am OK with that included in recent DSLRs.
it depends, in cameras that have dedicated video ASIC for processing 4K video some of the cost is from high end video hardware. For cameras that only record compressed HD the cost of the video function is minimal.
recording a quality wildlife video is not a one person job, you need a crew just to record the audio using specialized equipment.
I think it's more of a novelty for most serious photographers.
I have used it a few times. Sometimes when a cooperative bird have gave me all the opportunity in the world to take a proper photo I goes to live view and record a couple of minutes of it, just so I can show to friends and family what I’m seeing through the camera when taking photos. It is a neat feature to have.
Hmmmm....not necessarily. http://vimeo.com/channels/taratanakaQuote:
Originally Posted by arash_hazeghi
She doesn't use professional audio equipment, but that isn't always necessary either.
I use the video often. Mostly to record interesting behavior that I cannot capture with photography. But this is not with an intention to create a feature. For that purpose the audio recording is ok. it picks the IS sound. For serious feature length shooting, you need entirely different set of accessories. Check out Tim Laman's (Nat Geo) website. He seems to use DSLR for video and photography. His set up - video fluid head and viewfinder loupe - I feel he does mostly solo recording.
The newer DSLR's with 60fps is interesting. I am experimenting on slowmotions. But it is mostly fun. Here is a DSLR video (shot in Mark IV at 1080x24p) at Costa Rica. The background noise is from the ocean.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM0DyHXD_Sg
