Do you want Video in your stills camera

Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
19
Location
Boston Lincolnshire
Why are Nikon incorporating the ability to shoot video into a lot of their stills cameras? I shoot photos and don’t want or need the added ability to shoot video with what is essentially a stills camera. I have noticed that with this introduction of the ability to shoot video, some features have been removed from the stills shooting side of the camera. One example is often the AF motor is no longer built into the camera body when it includes video shooting abilities. I do occasionally take a small HD movie camera that fits neatly into my back pocket, I really don’t want it incorporated into my stills camera when it often forsakes some of the stills taking abilities.
I would very much welcome you views on this as to why Nikon feel the need to do this. Lastly is there a Nikon still on the market that is capable of giving excellent results without the inclusion of video mode.
 
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
7,403
Location
Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
It's because you can achieve cinema-cam DOF in HD with your existing Nikon glass for a fraction of the cost of an Arri, Panavision, etc. setup.

I'm not sure where you are getting your information about internal AF motors being removed when video is included in a body? IIRC, that's only in the lower end bodies.

Sean
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,761
Location
Durham, NC
It's because you can achieve cinema-cam DOF in HD with your existing Nikon glass for a fraction of the cost of an Arri, Panavision, etc. setup.

I'm not sure where you are getting your information about internal AF motors being removed when video is included in a body? IIRC, that's only in the lower end bodies.

Sean
I agree. Entry level camera bodies (like the D40) didn't have an AF motor, and no video back then.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
19
Location
Boston Lincolnshire
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
I read an artical in a couple of monthly photo mags that I subscribe to each month. I noticed that a few subscribers were asking very similar questions.
I am greatful for all of your replies and your welcome info is duly taken on board.
Many thanks guys.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
12,515
Location
Hamilton , New Zealand
Lastly is there a Nikon still on the market that is capable of giving excellent results without the inclusion of video mode.
I'm not sure why you can't just pick any camera you like, having the ability to shoot video doesn't mean you have to use video? Every new camera that has been released with video has had better image quality than its predecessors.
I'f you're going to insist on not having a camera that does video you will only be looking at used cameras.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
1,828
Location
Rural Virginia
There can be a benefit to stills-only shooters. My D4 has a Silent Mode for stills that utilizes the electronic shutter of the video capability. When set to Silent Mode the D4 makes absolutely no sound when the shutter button is pressed. I have to chimp to reassure myself that I am actually capturing images. Great for photographing activities where the camera sound would be a distraction or a live performance that is being recorded.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
202
Location
Brandon, FL
I have absolutely no need for video. I would much rather have advanced still features. I'm tired of everything in the world trying to be one size fits all. If I want to shoot video I'll buy a video camera. I had a pretty nice Sony video camera once and I used it about four times. I gave it to my niece.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
7,261
Location
Baton Rouge, La.
I have absolutely no need for video. I would much rather have advanced still features. I'm tired of everything in the world trying to be one size fits all. If I want to shoot video I'll buy a video camera. I had a pretty nice Sony video camera once and I used it about four times. I gave it to my niece.

Amen. I have a vid cam and have used it a few times, but on my DLSR's it is just an added expense.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,210
Location
Ohio USA
I don't need video, I too bought a video camera & gave it away. If I could buy a non-video equipped new DSLR I would. Although having it there is not a problem for me. It doesn't get used. Can't see camera makers making more models to please us non-video photog's.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
2,014
Location
vancouver, canada
since I shoot both video and stills, having one camera to carry is better. for the professional filmmaker the DSLR Video is a hit because of 2 words:

BIG CHIP

Having a big chip video camera under $80K is priceless.

cheers,
alexis
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
950
Location
Middletown, NY
Its nice to have from time to time. There are times when the sound being recorded is as important as the image. I suppose instead you could just have someone with a recent cell phone record the video. Most record 1080p anyway now. Overall though, I wouldn't miss it too much if it was removed from my camera.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
608
Location
Spain
Love having the option of video on the same camera. I have a d5100 and the video is far better and easier to use than any of the video cameras I have had before.
If you don`t want video then buy a brownie, don`t stand in the way of progress. :)
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
19
Location
Boston Lincolnshire
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #18
I have absolutely no need for video. I would much rather have advanced still features. I'm tired of everything in the world trying to be one size fits all. If I want to shoot video I'll buy a video camera. I had a pretty nice Sony video camera once and I used it about four times. I gave it to my niece.
I am with you on this one mate.:smile:
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
1,828
Location
Rural Virginia
I photographed my wife's 50 year high school reunion recently. Also took my camcorder (Panasonic TM700K) to video some of the presentations and remarks. Lighting was dim, but my D4 was perfectly happy. The camcorder - not so much. Video quality was barely usable. Hindsight being 20 - 20 I should have used my D4 for the video as well.:redface:
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
4,553
Do you want Video in your stills camera
I don't care actually. I have only one DLSR capable of shooting video (D3s), but believe me or not, I haven't even tried. I have no interest, no skills nor the time to shoot and edit video.

I have occasionally shot a minute or two of video with my small compact camera (Leica D-Lux 4) but never bothered to download the footage to computer to edit or even to watch. Not my cup of tea.

But the video capability in D3s does not bother me either, so I am firmly in the "who cares" camp.

By the way, have you noticed that since at least 3 billion people are carrying 24/7 a video camera (smart phone) with them, all UFO's, aliens, Loch Ness monsters, ghosts and Bigfoot have de facto been proven to be non-existent. :biggrin: (joking ofc)
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom