1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poll - Will video capability be an important consideration when buying your next camera?

Discussion in 'Weekly Poll' started by Chrissie_Lay, Jan 10, 2017.

  1. Chrissie_Lay

    Chrissie_Lay AP Editor's PA

    Will video capability be an important consideration when buying your next camera? Take part and cast your vote on this week's poll

  2. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    What next camera? The ones I have already seem fine for the forseable future
    ChrisNewman and Roger Hicks like this.
  3. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    It was a consideration when I bought my X-T1. I did think about one of the Sony A7 versions but in the end decided I couldn't justify £2k+.

    TBH film-making has gone on the back burner for me, else I would have gone for possibly an A7sII. The GH5 looks interesting but the micro 4/3 sensor is too small for other considerations.
  4. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    No - though I might be more inclined toward a camera that doesn't than one that does...
    PeatSmoke likes this.
  5. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    no.... I have no serious interest in Video/film.
    Trannifan likes this.
  6. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Trannifan likes this.
  7. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    I answered No, I don't want video at all, but perhaps that should've been "Yes, that will be an important consideration, I don't want video at all" - though really, it's not that an important consideration, more a mild preference. Having controls / buttons / switches dedicated to video when some other still photography function is buried in a menu is potentially annoying.
    PeatSmoke and Roger Hicks like this.
  8. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Only if buying a videocamera. I don't see the point myself in having video on a stills camera.
  9. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    1. Because they can.
    2. Because everyone else does - the commercial version of 'keeping up with the Joneses'.
    Roger Hicks likes this.
  10. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    Where does a digital stills camera end and a digital cine camera start? There are Canon DSLRs that can hit 14 fps raw, which is edging towards cine frame rates. My now ancient Blackmagic Digital Cine Camera shoots 25 fps cine-DNG raw, though only 2.5k resolution (At 1000 mbps!). Looking at the back of most CSC / DSLR cameras with cine functionality, about the only dedicated cine button is the start / stop.

    Given that a digital camera is essentially a computer with a sensor it costs little or nothing to add cine functions, which originally evolved out of the pre-existing live-view. Perhaps that should go too?
  11. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    Did not the first 35mm camera use cine film - with a doubled frame size?. Perhaps the still camera is just returning home as it adopts video.
  12. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    Yep, Oskar Barnak's ur-Leica was just that, and I think the 50mm "standard" lens was also of cine origin.
  13. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    Except, judging by the lack of interest in video currently shown by the poll, in terms of customer satisfaction and product usability...

    Invalid argument... After all most of the early film and plate cameras used a form of live view, the digital version is simply it's modern equivalent and therefore has a place.
  14. Andy Westlake

    Andy Westlake AP Staff

    So there are a couple of things I'm curious about here, especially given that camera manufacturers continually stress to us the importance of having a good video mode for products to sell well:

    1) Does anyone find the addition of video to be a serious problem in terms of product usability? On most cameras its impact is limited to a red record button that's usually re-assignable, and perhaps a video position on the mode dial or live view mode switch. Granted certain cameras have had terribly-positioned record buttons in the past (the Sony NEX-7 springs to mind).

    2) If you had a choice of two near-identical cameras, with the only difference being that one didn't have a video mode and re-assigned those few controls to stills-shooting functions, which would you buy? (Let's assume for now, rightly or wrongly, that video makes little difference to the price.)
    Wheelu likes this.
  15. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    The only camera that I have with video is my Fuji x30 I have tried it a couple of times and it works well enough.
    However it played no part in my decision to buy the camera. In fact I would have much preferred separate afl and ael buttons.
    Unfortunately you can not assign a button to split these functions, as it would need a firmware update to do so.
  16. Roger_Provins

    Roger_Provins Well-Known Member

    I'd buy the one without video
  17. Snorri

    Snorri Well-Known Member

  18. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    1. Not really an issue, I've not accidentally recorded video (yet).
    2. Depends. If it were a stripped back, simple camera (like the recent Leica without the screen) then I'd pass on the video. If it were a jack of all trades I wanted, I'd take the video. It isn't down to ideology, rather the question of "do I need it on this camera for what I use it for?"

    Edit to add - the assumption is the next camera will be digital. It very well may not be.
  19. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    I would not now buy a digital camera without good cine function. The spec of the GH5 is very attractive appart from the sensor size.
  20. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    Put it this way - I have had video capability for about 7 years and have used it occasionally only typically to film a granddaughters performance in an orchestral concert. So it is not a factor even if I was buying a camera but other's mileage may well differ and it does not get in my way.

Share This Page