Video on DSLR?

TomBell1@onetel.com · 04-30-2009, 03:17 PM

Well perversely I would like a video facility precisely because I hate visdeo .. Have young kids. Probably need to take video of kids from time to time ... dont care if it is very good ... ... ...then I am covered !!!

Stefan Carey · 04-30-2009, 03:56 PM

Some users will be surprised how often they will use it. I have a compilation of snippets which are the only video record of our children's teenage years. Priceless. Nothing can match the sounds of a child's or partner's laughter.

Pentax has to compete with what the bulk of the market wants, which is something that has been said many, many times. I am not convinced the bulk of the market visits this or other forums, ie the sales that will ensure Pentax greater market success come from mass consumption, less so the technically minded.

falconeye · 04-30-2009, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by Venturi

My phone is a phone, not a pager, not a camera, not a pda, not a browser.

it is a ... phone, it is a ... wide screen iPod, it is a ... web browser.
... phone, ... wide screen iPod, ... web browser.
... phone, ... wide screen iPod, ... web browser.

His Steveness

IsaacSteiner · 04-30-2009, 05:07 PM

I think that DSLR's should be photo specific. Let camcorders do the work when it comes to filming. I think any "serious" DSLR camera should not have a video capability..

Those are my thoughts.

-Isaac

**Rondec** · 05-01-2009, 04:30 AM

The question really is implementation. The way I would tolerate low def video on a DSLR is if I could use it hand held with auto focus. From what I have seen, video on DSLRs is kind of clunky and tends to do well on a tripod with static subjects. This is the opposite of what I would want. I would use it to grab video of my kids when they are running around doing something crazy and I don't happen to have my camcorder handy. If I have to tell them to slow down, go grab a tripod, etc. It suddenly becomes worthless to me.

distudio · 05-01-2009, 04:37 AM

Originally posted by emr

In the heat of the K-7 discussion, many posters have commented that they don't need or even want video capability on their DSLR. On the other hand, many others see video properties as a significant or even deciding factor in selecting a new camera. The video properties can also bee seen as a useless gimmick or perhaps even a change in the camera shooting paradigm.

So what do you think? (I know that no matter what and how many options I choose, they will not be suitable for all

)

It's an absolute waste on me, if I had any kind of want to shoot video I'd buy a video camera. If it compromises the still photo functionality of the camera or drives up the cost it's a pretty poor decision in my view. Another nail....

reeftool · 05-01-2009, 08:49 PM

There is a whole generation of new photographers coming along who are used to having a video feature on their point and shoots. The camera makers are trying to lure them to move up to DSLR's. I believe it is mainly a marketing feature that the camera makers believe they need. I have never used the video feature on my P&S although I have used it as a webcam. When I want video I use my camcorder. If this poll was being run on a college student site I would expect that most would consider video an important option which I suspect that the marketing depts. have already done.
I wouldn't object to having a video feature on my next camera. I probably wouldn't use it. My concern is that too much emphasis may go into video on future models and no real improvements or upgrades will go into the rest of the camera like more accurate metering, faster auto focus, etc. Adding video would be no reason for me to upgrade to another camera body.

falconeye · 05-02-2009, 02:16 AM

Originally posted by reeftool

My concern is that too much emphasis may go into video on future models and no real improvements or upgrades will go into the rest of the camera like more accurate metering, faster auto focus, etc.

Well, I share your concern.

However, it could just turn out that the opposite is true, also.

Because the videomania forces progress in the areas of LiveView, non pumping and snap-on contrast AF, and possibly an EVF jumping in when the mirror blacks out (doesn't Pentax have a patent for this?

.

A snap-on contrast AF and metering from live histogram zones are exactly real improvements like more accurate metering, faster or more accurate auto focus etc.

**monochrome** · 05-02-2009, 03:04 AM

I didn't vote.

Video has no use for me TODAY - but who knows about ten years from now.

Right now allocation of scarce R&D resources to video, rather than to other features I personally want such as a larger, brighter viewfinder or faster lenses is disappointing.

But ten years ago I thought allocating R&D resources to digital imaging was disappointing.

Try to look out to 2019 and realize that Pentax has to start somewhere, generate some revenue, and reinvest the revenue in improving the technology to get from her to there.

asdf · 05-02-2009, 03:33 AM

Originally posted by TomBell1@onetel.com

Well perversely I would like a video facility precisely because I hate visdeo .. Have young kids. Probably need to take video of kids from time to time ... dont care if it is very good ... ... ...then I am covered !!!

Putting video on a Pentax DSLR is a sure way to sell more SDM lenses...because video comes with audio.

rvannatta · 05-02-2009, 08:04 AM

To me the video makes sense. Many of my photos are taken to augment my website. I want qualitly photos, but in many instances a short video clip would be just ducky. The K7 is on my 'buy list for this reason. I"ve got a K10 now.

Marc Sabatella · 05-02-2009, 11:52 AM

Although I said I'd prefer a camera without it, because then my money goes toward IQ and features I care about, I actually do hope Pentax puts out models with video. Because the market probably demands it, and Pentax needs all the customers they can get. If adding video helps Pentax attract/keep enough customers to stay afloat so they can keep making new cameras and new lenses, I'm happy.

Chris Stearns · 05-03-2009, 12:15 PM

I went through five years of film school and did videography for a few years after that. I sold my video camera and sound gear last year to focus solely on still photography. I wont go into the reasons here, but I will say that the filmmaker side of me salivates at the prospect of shooting 24p HD video through a 50mm 1.4. The shallow depth of field would be amazing.

I've seen some great videos shot with the nikon d90, but there are severe issues with image quality (ie "squiggle vision") that make me not so attracted to it. In both the nikon and the canon (50d?) video seems like it was thrown in as an afterthought that could generate a few more sales.

Somebody also mentioned that with video comes sound. This is huge. Now you have to think about external mics and possibly even a whole separate recorder to handle sound, not to mention headphones, cables, etc.

It could open up a few opportunities for the working photographer. You could make professional looking commercials with a little work and talent. You could also supplement a wedding album with a dvd of some highlight clips for a little extra.

I guess I'm not really for it or against it. But deep down I really just want my still camera to be a still camera.

Venturi · 05-03-2009, 01:58 PM

See Chris, I can totally understand the desire to be able to use "our" lenses with video; 35mm/APS-C cameras are 3:2 format and that isn't very far off from 16:9 so the lenses' optical design should work pretty darn good.

And ... if Pentax were to launch a VIDEO CAMERA (HDD, Tape or CF/SD cards I don't care) that accepted K-mount glass??? Holy Hannah I would be all over it!

But I really, really don't want them cramming the electronics for sound and video processing into my still camera.

RioRico · 05-06-2009, 09:11 AM

No vote. I've used a camcorder for stills. I've shot video clips on PNS (I keep one set aside just for that). I don't yearn for a K7D w/ video, but I wouldn't spurn it either. Will this push development of bigger faster SD cards? (There's a 16GB card in my K20D right now.) Will Pentax join an FPS arms race? My vote will be, "Whatever keeps Pentax in business". Oh boy, 1000 FPS thru a Peleng 8/2.8...

View Poll Results: Video on a DSLR?
Video is just a marketing gimmick with no proper use	30	27.52%
Video is a useful feature but not a major factor	52	47.71%
Video is a must today, my next DSLR will have it	22	20.18%
Properly done video would be great, but we're not going to see that on a DSLR	5	4.59%
Voters: 109. You may not vote on this poll

04-30-2009, 03:56 PM	#17
Stefan Carey Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 190	Some users will be surprised how often they will use it. I have a compilation of snippets which are the only video record of our children's teenage years. Priceless. Nothing can match the sounds of a child's or partner's laughter. Pentax has to compete with what the bulk of the market wants, which is something that has been said many, many times. I am not convinced the bulk of the market visits this or other forums, ie the sales that will ensure Pentax greater market success come from mass consumption, less so the technically minded. Last edited by Stefan Carey; 04-30-2009 at 03:56 PM. Reason: edit

05-01-2009, 04:37 AM	#21
distudio Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 450	Originally posted by emr In the heat of the K-7 discussion, many posters have commented that they don't need or even want video capability on their DSLR. On the other hand, many others see video properties as a significant or even deciding factor in selecting a new camera. The video properties can also bee seen as a useless gimmick or perhaps even a change in the camera shooting paradigm. So what do you think? (I know that no matter what and how many options I choose, they will not be suitable for all ) It's an absolute waste on me, if I had any kind of want to shoot video I'd buy a video camera. If it compromises the still photo functionality of the camera or drives up the cost it's a pretty poor decision in my view. Another nail.... Last edited by distudio; 05-01-2009 at 10:10 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DSLR video advice	robbiec	Video Recording and Processing	27	10-06-2010 07:12 AM
Which DSLR or EVIL the best for video?	emr	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	03-20-2010 06:57 AM
Shooting Video With An DSLR	Nowhere Matt	Video Recording and Processing	3	02-14-2010 08:38 PM
CES 2010 Predictions (DSLR video)	jogiba	Video Recording and Processing	2	01-01-2010 01:38 PM
Unforseen disadvantage of Dslr with video	barondla	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	05-10-2009 08:54 AM

04-30-2009, 03:17 PM	#16
TomBell1@onetel.com New Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Devon UK Posts: 2	Well perversely I would like a video facility precisely because I hate visdeo .. Have young kids. Probably need to take video of kids from time to time ... dont care if it is very good ... ... ...then I am covered !!!

04-30-2009, 04:24 PM	#18
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Venturi My phone is a phone, not a pager, not a camera, not a pda, not a browser. it is a ... phone, it is a ... wide screen iPod, it is a ... web browser. ... phone, ... wide screen iPod, ... web browser. ... phone, ... wide screen iPod, ... web browser. His Steveness

04-30-2009, 05:07 PM	#19
IsaacSteiner Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Stouffville, ON, Canada Posts: 181	I think that DSLR's should be photo specific. Let camcorders do the work when it comes to filming. I think any "serious" DSLR camera should not have a video capability.. Those are my thoughts. -Isaac

05-01-2009, 04:30 AM	#20
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	The question really is implementation. The way I would tolerate low def video on a DSLR is if I could use it hand held with auto focus. From what I have seen, video on DSLRs is kind of clunky and tends to do well on a tripod with static subjects. This is the opposite of what I would want. I would use it to grab video of my kids when they are running around doing something crazy and I don't happen to have my camcorder handy. If I have to tell them to slow down, go grab a tripod, etc. It suddenly becomes worthless to me.

05-01-2009, 08:49 PM	#22
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,554	There is a whole generation of new photographers coming along who are used to having a video feature on their point and shoots. The camera makers are trying to lure them to move up to DSLR's. I believe it is mainly a marketing feature that the camera makers believe they need. I have never used the video feature on my P&S although I have used it as a webcam. When I want video I use my camcorder. If this poll was being run on a college student site I would expect that most would consider video an important option which I suspect that the marketing depts. have already done. I wouldn't object to having a video feature on my next camera. I probably wouldn't use it. My concern is that too much emphasis may go into video on future models and no real improvements or upgrades will go into the rest of the camera like more accurate metering, faster auto focus, etc. Adding video would be no reason for me to upgrade to another camera body.

05-02-2009, 02:16 AM	#23
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by reeftool My concern is that too much emphasis may go into video on future models and no real improvements or upgrades will go into the rest of the camera like more accurate metering, faster auto focus, etc. Well, I share your concern. However, it could just turn out that the opposite is true, also. Because the videomania forces progress in the areas of LiveView, non pumping and snap-on contrast AF, and possibly an EVF jumping in when the mirror blacks out (doesn't Pentax have a patent for this? . A snap-on contrast AF and metering from live histogram zones are exactly real improvements like more accurate metering, faster or more accurate auto focus etc.

05-02-2009, 03:04 AM	#24
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	I didn't vote. Video has no use for me TODAY - but who knows about ten years from now. Right now allocation of scarce R&D resources to video, rather than to other features I personally want such as a larger, brighter viewfinder or faster lenses is disappointing. But ten years ago I thought allocating R&D resources to digital imaging was disappointing. Try to look out to 2019 and realize that Pentax has to start somewhere, generate some revenue, and reinvest the revenue in improving the technology to get from her to there.

05-02-2009, 03:33 AM	#25
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	Originally posted by TomBell1@onetel.com Well perversely I would like a video facility precisely because I hate visdeo .. Have young kids. Probably need to take video of kids from time to time ... dont care if it is very good ... ... ...then I am covered !!! Putting video on a Pentax DSLR is a sure way to sell more SDM lenses...because video comes with audio.

05-02-2009, 08:04 AM	#26
rvannatta Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Apiary, Oregon Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,181	To me the video makes sense. Many of my photos are taken to augment my website. I want qualitly photos, but in many instances a short video clip would be just ducky. The K7 is on my 'buy list for this reason. I"ve got a K10 now.

05-02-2009, 11:52 AM	#27
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Although I said I'd prefer a camera without it, because then my money goes toward IQ and features I care about, I actually do hope Pentax puts out models with video. Because the market probably demands it, and Pentax needs all the customers they can get. If adding video helps Pentax attract/keep enough customers to stay afloat so they can keep making new cameras and new lenses, I'm happy.

05-03-2009, 12:15 PM	#28
Chris Stearns Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Southern Illinois Photos: Albums Posts: 58	I went through five years of film school and did videography for a few years after that. I sold my video camera and sound gear last year to focus solely on still photography. I wont go into the reasons here, but I will say that the filmmaker side of me salivates at the prospect of shooting 24p HD video through a 50mm 1.4. The shallow depth of field would be amazing. I've seen some great videos shot with the nikon d90, but there are severe issues with image quality (ie "squiggle vision") that make me not so attracted to it. In both the nikon and the canon (50d?) video seems like it was thrown in as an afterthought that could generate a few more sales. Somebody also mentioned that with video comes sound. This is huge. Now you have to think about external mics and possibly even a whole separate recorder to handle sound, not to mention headphones, cables, etc. It could open up a few opportunities for the working photographer. You could make professional looking commercials with a little work and talent. You could also supplement a wedding album with a dvd of some highlight clips for a little extra. I guess I'm not really for it or against it. But deep down I really just want my still camera to be a still camera.

05-03-2009, 01:58 PM	#29
Venturi Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Tulsa, OK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,636	See Chris, I can totally understand the desire to be able to use "our" lenses with video; 35mm/APS-C cameras are 3:2 format and that isn't very far off from 16:9 so the lenses' optical design should work pretty darn good. And ... if Pentax were to launch a VIDEO CAMERA (HDD, Tape or CF/SD cards I don't care) that accepted K-mount glass??? Holy Hannah I would be all over it! But I really, really don't want them cramming the electronics for sound and video processing into my still camera.

05-06-2009, 09:11 AM	#30
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	No vote. I've used a camcorder for stills. I've shot video clips on PNS (I keep one set aside just for that). I don't yearn for a K7D w/ video, but I wouldn't spurn it either. Will this push development of bigger faster SD cards? (There's a 16GB card in my K20D right now.) Will Pentax join an FPS arms race? My vote will be, "Whatever keeps Pentax in business". Oh boy, 1000 FPS thru a Peleng 8/2.8...