Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #4217
View in linear mode

Subject: "Why video in an SLR" Previous topic | Next topic
NeuroDoc Registered since 08th Jun 2007Tue 04-Jan-11 12:14 AM
75 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"Why video in an SLR"


Silverdale, WA, US
          

What is the current fixation among camera manufactures to add video to digital SLRs? Do they feel that consumers are demanding such features?

I currently have a D200, and would like to upgrade to a capable, digital SLR that gives me better low-light performance. If I had to upgrade today, I would love to have a D7000 without the video. I just don't need the video and don't like paying for a feature that in my opinion is just simply feature bloat.

What would the D7000 cost without video capability? <$1000? I'd buy in a heartbeat, but convincing my wife to let me spend more than a grand on a camera is difficult. Convincing her to let me buy a camera that also has video, when we already have a very high quality video camera is even harder.

Will I ever see the return of a DX digital SLR without video?


KariD200 | D70 | Nikkor 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 DX AF-S ED | Nikkor 105 f/2.8 AF-S IF-ED VR | Nikkor 50 f/1.8 D AF | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 LD AF | SB-600 | SB-800

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
RRRoger Silver Member
04th Jan 2011
1
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
KnightPhoto Gold Member
05th Jan 2011
2
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
sirraj Silver Member
05th Jan 2011
3
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
billD80 Silver Member
05th Jan 2011
4
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
intrepidnz
05th Jan 2011
5
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
PAStime Silver Member
06th Jan 2011
6
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
kentak Silver Member
06th Jan 2011
7
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
NeuroDoc
06th Jan 2011
8
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
Nicos Rex
06th Jan 2011
9
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
RRRoger Silver Member
06th Jan 2011
10
Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
PAStime Silver Member
06th Jan 2011
11
     Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
Tom Gresham
06th Jan 2011
12
          Reply message RE: Why video in an SLR
NeuroDoc
06th Jan 2011
13

RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter MemberTue 04-Jan-11 12:57 AM
3145 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0


Monterey Bay, US
          

I bought my D7000 because of the Video.
I would not have bought another DX camera otherwise.

And, I am not complaining about the price.
For my use as a backup EVENT camera to my D3 the D7000 works a lot better than the more expensive D300s.
The landscape pictures are excellent and it is light and compact for travel or hiking.
There are a lot of features on the D7000 that I will never use,
but I do not think the camera would be cheaper without them.
Why? Because this camera targets such a large pool of buyers.
The production volume brings down the price.
When Nikon makes more profit, they always spend more on development.
Then, we all benefit.


Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006Wed 05-Jan-11 07:20 PM
4216 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 1


Alberta, CA
          

>I bought my D7000 because of the Video.
>I would not have bought another DX camera otherwise.
>
>And, I am not complaining about the price.
>For my use as a backup EVENT camera to my D3 the D7000 works a
>lot better than the more expensive D300s.
>The landscape pictures are excellent and it is light and
>compact for travel or hiking.
>There are a lot of features on the D7000 that I will never
>use,
>but I do not think the camera would be cheaper without them.
>Why? Because this camera targets such a large pool of buyers.
>The production volume brings down the price.
>When Nikon makes more profit, they always spend more on
>development.
>Then, we all benefit.
>
>
>

Well put RRRoger, I agree with these points. And via other postings RRRoger and I are on record for attempting a lot of stuff with the video capability of the D7000. Actually RRRoger is ahead of me in that he has already ordered a shoulder mount rig and I am seriously considering one. My tripod-based shooting is excellent but my monopod-based stuff has too much side-to-side motion, so a sholder-mount should be excellent to solve shooting situations where the tripod cannot come out to play. Both of us are using external mics and I must say sound capture is excellent given the D7000 48 kHz/16-bit recording capability via the external mic feed-in.

The competitive pressures on Nikon to match other DSLR manufacturers in the capture of moving puctures are so intense that it is fair to expect ALL future Nikon DX DSLRs will be retaining live-view and motion picture capture.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

sirraj Silver Member Nikonian since 29th Oct 2005Wed 05-Jan-11 07:51 PM
194 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0


Minneapolis, US
          

I have absolutely no interest in shooting video. I have owned a D90 and now a D7000 and I have never shot a single movie, probably never will. But I doubt it adds much to the overall cost of the camera. It takes nothing away from the D7000's ability to take still photos, it's something you can completely ignore.

Sirraj

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Wed 05-Jan-11 08:19 PM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

>I currently have a D200, and would like to upgrade to a
>capable, digital SLR that gives me better low-light
>performance. If I had to upgrade today, I would love to have a
>D7000 without the video.

Perhaps you bought your D200 used. When I bought my D200 a few years ago it was a good deal more than I just paid for the D7000.

I haven't used the video aspect at all (doesn't mean I won't).

The D7000 is WAY more camera than the D200 and any other DX camera Nikon has ever made. It's prickly sharp, GREAT color tones, GREAT low-light.

So, you could just forget that it has video (which I don't think DSLRs do as well as regular video cameras anyway).

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

intrepidnz Registered since 18th Nov 2004Wed 05-Jan-11 08:49 PM
233 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0


NZ
          

I didn't think I would ever use video!! I avoided all cameras that had video in them.

Then the D7000 came along and the picture taking part convinced me to upgrade.

And then I tried the video!! And now I have prepared a DVD using video I took of the house and me (just been through an illness where I had 8 hrs of surgery and radiation treatment) so I could send it to my family showing them how I was doing.

Video has its place, as I found out and I found it exciting and engaging! I am now a happy two-camp camper!!

Never say never!!

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

PAStime Silver Member Nikonian since 10th Feb 2009Thu 06-Jan-11 12:30 AM
2669 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0
Thu 06-Jan-11 12:31 AM by PAStime

Kingston, CA
          

Hello,

Three thoughts:

1. I doubt video adds a lot of incremental cost to a DSLR, especially if you consider LiveView to be a useful still photography feature (I do for precise focusing macro and otherwise).

2. There is a large community of DSLR video enthusiasts.

3. There are probably some features that you like on a camera that others don't like paying for.

I don't use video much on my DSLR but it has come in handy on the odd occasion and produced some family memories I like to watch.

Cheers,
Peter

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

kentak Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd Jul 2010Thu 06-Jan-11 03:02 AM
918 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

What? A phone that also takes stills, video, plays music, does email, surfs the web, balances my checkbook, plays games, and is a full featured GPS navigator? That's crazy. Who would want such a thing?

Just kidding with you.

Like you, I will probably use the video feature of my D90 little. Perhaps we worried that compromises were made on the still image side capabilities to provide affordable video features. That is probably a groundless fear, even more so with the latest batch of DSLRs.

It would seem to be a logical confluence of related technologies. The quality of the video features are getting or will be getting to the point where few amateur videographers will need a dedicated video camera. Why carry two pieces of expensive gear when one will do both tasks?

Also, I think young people are much more into the video as a part of their "digital lifestlye" due to having the video features of mobile phones, iPods, and the like from a relatively early age. Those that gravitate towards serious photography will likely see the video features as desirable, even required to be considered.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

NeuroDoc Registered since 08th Jun 2007Thu 06-Jan-11 03:46 AM
75 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 0


Silverdale, WA, US
          

Wow, I'm surprised that you all think that the cost of adding video is negligible. I would have thought that it added a $100-200 to the unit price. I guess not.

Thanks for your opinions.

And for the record, I still use a cell phone that does nothing other than make and receive calls.


KariD200 | D70 | Nikkor 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 DX AF-S ED | Nikkor 105 f/2.8 AF-S IF-ED VR | Nikkor 50 f/1.8 D AF | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 LD AF | SB-600 | SB-800

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Nicos Rex Registered since 06th Dec 2010Thu 06-Jan-11 09:12 AM
7 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 8


GB
          

>Wow, I'm surprised that you all think that the cost of adding
>video is negligible. I would have thought that it added a
>$100-200 to the unit price. I guess not.
>
>Thanks for your opinions.
>
>And for the record, I still use a cell phone that does nothing
>other than make and receive calls.


Rightly or wrongly the camera makers believe that there are a significant and growing number of people who want video enabled DSLRs. The cost to them of providing this is I'm sure not negligible but it pales into insignificance compared to the cost of having 2 separate models in the range one with and one without video. 2 lots of R&D, 2 lots of design, 2 lots of packaging and marketing, 2 different assembly lines, 2 lots of inventory and so on and so forth to the point that you would probably end up paying more for your video-disabled camera than you would for the D7k.

Hey, why stop at 2 models, let's have a third one without live view.

Even better let's have bespoke cameras. But just consider the cost of a Saville Row tailored suit compared to one bought "off the peg"!

FWIW I think that the D7k is worth every penny I spent on it for the features and benefits I will use, and that takes account of the fact that I will rarely, if ever, use the video capability.

For the record, I have an iPhone4 and I find the non-telephony related features far more useful than the mundane making and receiving of calls when I am out and about (which I think is amongst the most socially intrusive and unpleasant phenomena of recent years)

To each their own

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter MemberThu 06-Jan-11 09:22 AM
3145 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 8


Monterey Bay, US
          

>Wow, I'm surprised that you all think that the cost of adding
>video is negligible. I would have thought that it added a
>$100-200 to the unit price. I guess not.
>
>Thanks for your opinions.
>
Quote<

There is lots of free Picture editing and free Video software.
For under $75 you can buy Sony Vegas Studio

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Vegas-Movie-Studio-Platinum/dp/B003L4ZQKQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1294308653&sr=8-2

I not only have a cell phone only for calls but have not even activated the message function + I only turn it on when I make a call.


Steve,
The camera brace seems to small for me and I have not had time to mess with adjusting it.

I just got a Cavision 6x (Loupe)viewfinder for my D7000 LiveView screen.
I had to make some modifications to get the 5D2 model to fit,
but it works great for video and stills.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
PAStime Silver Member Nikonian since 10th Feb 2009Thu 06-Jan-11 11:54 AM
2669 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 8


Kingston, CA
          

>Wow, I'm surprised that you all think that the cost of adding
>video is negligible. I would have thought that it added a
>$100-200 to the unit price. I guess not.

Well Kari although I do have an electronic engineering background I am only guessing. But if you consider that the sensor has to be made such that it can stream a live video feed for LiveView purposes, and the camera has on-board microprocessor(s) sufficiently powerful to process raw images at high frames per second for still photography, I could see it to be a relatively simple matter of some additional software to channel the video feed through an MPEG or equivalent encorder and writing it to the memory card.

Video users are complaining about the noise generated by the AF motor in the lens so perhaps some R&D money will be going into making those quieter.

Cheers,
Peter

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Tom Gresham Registered since 08th Dec 2005Thu 06-Jan-11 01:17 PM
85 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 11
Thu 06-Jan-11 01:26 PM by Tom Gresham

US
          

I bought my D7000 exclusively for video.

I've shot Nikons since 1970, and I have a D200 and a D700 for stills (along with a dozen or more lenses).

The day after I bought the D7000 (the first day it was available) I was shooting a television series with it. We use it extensively for the "B-roll" (or cutaways) for one of the TV shows we do, and we've shot a couple of commercials (running nationally) with it.

We have several HD video cameras, but the DSLR has a look (primarily due to the shallow depth of field) that is difficult to get with standard video cameras.

This commercial was shot entirely with DSLRs. The parts at the shooting range were done with the D7000, and the studio portion was done with a Canon 7D.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixmur2jXFjM

In the following clip, you can compare an HD video camera with the video from the D7000. Note that at about time code :57, you can actually see the bullets bouncing off the steel target in the video from the D7000. The cuts which have shallower depth of field (very noticeable) are from the Nikon. The rest are shot with a Sony video camera.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1qmQJXHtxQ

Most of that was shot with the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. At timecode 1:21, the tight shot of the pistols was with the 16mm fisheye.

Why video in an SLR? Because the images are stunning, and much better than you can get with almost any video camera which costs less than $25,000. (Note, it helps to have top-quality lenses.)

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
NeuroDoc Registered since 08th Jun 2007Thu 06-Jan-11 03:28 PM
75 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#13. "RE: Why video in an SLR"
In response to Reply # 12


Silverdale, WA, US
          

Thanks Tom. You've got me rethinking my thinking about video in a dSLR.


KariD200 | D70 | Nikkor 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 DX AF-S ED | Nikkor 105 f/2.8 AF-S IF-ED VR | Nikkor 50 f/1.8 D AF | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 LD AF | SB-600 | SB-800

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #4217 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.