From personal experience...... most of my video clip doen't go beyond 3min. In fact, a good 80% hardly goes to 2min15sec..... For video, it is editing of many short clip together that makes the whole video interesting..... :thumbsup:
Is movie mode in a dslr important to you?
- Thread starter zj2000
- Start date
- Status
From personal experience...... most of my video clip doen't go beyond 3min. In fact, a good 80% hardly goes to 2min15sec..... For video, it is editing of many short clip together that makes the whole video interesting..... :thumbsup:
Even though I'm a Canon user, I would think asking Canon users if movie mode is important = asking 8 year old virgin boys if sex is important to them.
After all, if no one has tasted how good the fruits taste, so how can they say if it's important?
Of course, I shan't point out the 180 degree changes in attitudes regarding live view, as well as sensor cleaning; you know, classic cases of sour grapes.
After all, if no one has tasted how good the fruits taste, so how can they say if it's important?
Of course, I shan't point out the 180 degree changes in attitudes regarding live view, as well as sensor cleaning; you know, classic cases of sour grapes.
Over the years, i have 2 video cameras. I hardly use the film camera (because it was bulky and the thought of using firewire to pull out the media from film to bytes is a bit like pulling out teeth. What is worse was that the digital video is 13GB an hour, which severely affects workflow and was mainly beyond the capability of most consumer computers at that time.
Now I have a 1 year old HDD videocam. The quality sucks but at least in terms of workflow, things are easier. It is just drag and drop in terms of pulling out the MPEG2 files onto the computer. I do not do any edits of the video as the workflow for video remains crazy.
I still use my videocam when photography cannot tell the whole story. If there is a performance, video (with sound) can tell a fuller picture. For capturing the moment, photography still remains (for me) an easier workflow to manage.
Choosing the camera and capturing the media is only half the work, the back end workflow for a dSLR-video workflow remains a concern for normal consumers like me. Until then, still photography is an easier option.
Now I have a 1 year old HDD videocam. The quality sucks but at least in terms of workflow, things are easier. It is just drag and drop in terms of pulling out the MPEG2 files onto the computer. I do not do any edits of the video as the workflow for video remains crazy.
I still use my videocam when photography cannot tell the whole story. If there is a performance, video (with sound) can tell a fuller picture. For capturing the moment, photography still remains (for me) an easier workflow to manage.
Choosing the camera and capturing the media is only half the work, the back end workflow for a dSLR-video workflow remains a concern for normal consumers like me. Until then, still photography is an easier option.
So next time people won't be just asking if there are build in Photoshop functions in DSLR, they will ask for Final Cut Pro as well.. ;p
bro, can manual focus during video considered not too bad liao.
for compact cameras, most of them cannot zoom during the video, that kinda sucks. AF all well and good but i rather MF and have the option to zoom.
best part is can have super zoom lens for video :devil:
btw, i don't own a D90
, and don't intend to get one eitherAn interesting feature that's good to have but I won't say its an important feature I look for when shopping for a dslr. (hoping for better noise control, dynamic range and details retention at high iso instead)
At least that's what I think now, maybe after trying out a very well implemented video mode in the future I might feel differently.
At least that's what I think now, maybe after trying out a very well implemented video mode in the future I might feel differently.
Hahaha..... if comes with the Camera without a need to pay extra..... why not ??!!:angel:
Best if Canon comes out with a Camera that have an X-Ray mode.....:devil::lovegrin:
Last edited:
I think what Nikon did was a good innovation, was a video guy before and I think what Nikon did was a great effort, the video quality is not of low resolution, they actually go for 720P. Of course you might feel mono sound sucks and etc, but in most video event, you need to have alot of audio accessories (Mic, Audio Controller and etc), a fully "armour videographer looks more like a universal soldier than a video operator inorder to achieve great sound effects. Thus mono sound not exactly a minus point. Thumbs up for Nikon but Canon does not actually need to follow. I am a canon user myself and intends to stick to it. It's very much like when Live View was implemented on DSLR, alot of people like it and also alot of people find it stupid. I still see alot of photographer looks thru the viewfinder.... despite their system have live view.
Last edited:
LifeInMacro
Senior Member
To answer the question, my view is that Movie in DSLR is NOT important. If I need it I might as well get a dedicated movie camera that's best it its class.
I think it'll be dangerous waters to thread for DSLR manufacturers to incorporate movie function. Yes, of course technically it is possible. To squeeze such features into a DSLR, it also means that something has to be compromised; and maybe to the extent that the "stability" of the firm ware might be an issue. Like in all things, I'm sure the manufacturers will sort it out in face of competition and when technology improves.
Also, I think it is also silly to be all things to everyone...
Maybe, maybe one day (...my crystal ball says that give or take 5 years time...) DSLRs will be equipped with not just movie mode, but with mp3 player, voice recording function, wi-fi connection, GPS features, direct Internet upload to networking sites,...etc! LoL
Whether it is "Wow" or "yuckky" it's really got to do with what consumers want at the end of the day with a DSLR...As for me, I'll just stick to the plain old still photography thingy and learn to shoot before I can "fly".
I think it'll be dangerous waters to thread for DSLR manufacturers to incorporate movie function. Yes, of course technically it is possible. To squeeze such features into a DSLR, it also means that something has to be compromised; and maybe to the extent that the "stability" of the firm ware might be an issue. Like in all things, I'm sure the manufacturers will sort it out in face of competition and when technology improves.
Also, I think it is also silly to be all things to everyone...
Maybe, maybe one day (...my crystal ball says that give or take 5 years time...) DSLRs will be equipped with not just movie mode, but with mp3 player, voice recording function, wi-fi connection, GPS features, direct Internet upload to networking sites,...etc! LoL
Whether it is "Wow" or "yuckky" it's really got to do with what consumers want at the end of the day with a DSLR...As for me, I'll just stick to the plain old still photography thingy and learn to shoot before I can "fly".
Headshotzx
Senior Member
Well said. I can't agree more.
Interesting..... But what if Both are at the same price ?? :think:
Example - Most Canon Lower-end DSLR sells at retail price of $1499.... IF 500D with Movie Mode was to be sold at the same price ($1499).... Would people who wants a DSLR not buy it and demand Canon comes out a Non Movie Mode 500D?? :bsmilie:
The problem of the matter is that non of us have a choice in what is included into the Camera..... Nikon have gain ahead of Canon with this new D90. Canon inorder not to be left behind would have no choice but to follow suit..... Like it or not..... most likely Canon will be coming out with Movie Mode in their future DSLR.... unless Nikon fail badly with D90 (which I doubt...:sweat
Think about it this way.....
Film to Digital = Old Bird complaint Digital Not as good.....
Dust Reduction System = Only Oly DSLR have it in the beginning.... now everyone have it.
Live View = Only Oly DSLR have it in the beginning.... now everyone have it.
D lighting = Nikon uses this... but 50D now have it too (under the Name - Auto lighting optimizer).
Again.... I believe we have little control over what we want or don't want Canon or other DSLR maker to include into their next DSLR.....:sweat:
It is an oversight , since they are competing with Nikon.
I guess this only matters to newcomers to DSLRs.
If someone has invested on lenses, I doubt the movie function will make him/her to jump ship.
If I am new, however, I would pick D90 over 50D, because of the additional functionality.
Those coming from PnS or Prosumer cameras will want a movie feature, as they are used to it.
, since they are competing with Nikon.I guess this only matters to newcomers to DSLRs.
If someone has invested on lenses, I doubt the movie function will make him/her to jump ship.
If I am new, however, I would pick D90 over 50D, because of the additional functionality.
Those coming from PnS or Prosumer cameras will want a movie feature, as they are used to it.
Last edited:
Why would you need to compromise the picture quality?!?
My guess is D90 would be lighter by a few tens of grams without the movie mode.
It is an oversight
I guess this only matters to newcomers to DSLRs.
If someone has invested on lenses, I doubt the movie function will make him/her to jump ship.
If I am new, however, I would pick D90 over 50D, because of the additional functionality.
Those coming from PnS or Prosumer cameras will want a movie feature, as they are used to it.
Yup..... that is why Canon & Sony.... plus all the Rest, would have not choice but to follow. Because market share is so important to those Camera maker. And Canon would HATE to lose the number 1 spot to Nikon :sweat:
ahbian
Senior Member
I agree with much of what you are saying, we might not have a choice what canon chooses to produce, but we should remember that we have a choice on what we need to buy from them.
I wouldn't demand a non-movie mode for 500D, I simply wouldn't buy it to replace my older camera. All factors being the same (which is unlikely to be the case in real life), I don't consider a movie mode as a significant upgrade.
You, Me.... and most long time DSLR user wouldn't have demanded Canon to make a DSLR with Movie Mode....
But Camera maker are not going to risks being consider 'behind' their competitor just because we don't 'demand' it.... look at all those years of 'Mega Pixel War'..... If Canon comes out with a 5MP camera.... Nikon would answer with a 6MP version.
When the 6MP D40 came out..... Canon 10MP 400D was consider by some as the better camera.... which force Nikon to answered back within a few months with the 10MP D40x...... There's no real difference between D40 & D40x..... except the jump in Mega Pixel.
With Nikon coming out with the D90 with Movie Mode.... and Canon's 50D without...... Which camera do you think New User without any affiliation to either brand would now chose..... :devil:
I for one won't choose D90 just b'coz it got the Movie Mode, I would consider the price and photo quality coz currently I wanna compare the price for Canon EOS 50D and Nikon D90 from Asia countries
For me it's like having a cellphone with a lot of features in it but clanky voice calls.
Having a DSLR cuts you from the rest of the crowd, as not everybody knows how to
operate it effectively and it requires serious thoughts about youre shots.
It is made for photography.
Why have a video on it? Get a sony.
Having a DSLR cuts you from the rest of the crowd, as not everybody knows how to
operate it effectively and it requires serious thoughts about youre shots.
It is made for photography.
Why have a video on it? Get a sony.
- Status
Similar threads
