Why not Nikon keep the new D700 without Video function ?

At least there is one professional grade camera which is purely for still picture without Video function. The saving can used to install a better grade sensor. I am sure that is most of us want (?)

What say you ? Do you wish to have video function in the upcoming new replacement for D700 ?

I am thinking to get a second D700 as this probably is the last DSLR which has no video function. I like the fact that D700 is purely a still camera, it's going to be a classic

--I don't care about a video and will like to see dual CF crad slots in D800 and new battery that will be slimer so baody can get integrated vertical grip but it will be about 15-20% smaller than a D3 body. Other thing WHY can't we have option to have diferent AF systems to pick from like cars one can get 4 cyl 6cyl or even 8 cyl engine with in same body. Why do thay always stop using olde AF I will much better like my D700 if it had CAM2000 or upgrate of it like 9 AF points but more light sensative say CAM2500 .They can sale lesser body with 2-3 different AF systems at 3 different price points. WHY NOT.
Mironv
http://mironv.smugmug.com/

I hope Nikon include video, not because I would ever use it but because they might then include a swivelling screen for live view.
--
Rens

There are optimists and there are realists

Because video is one of the things that helps drive the DSLR market. There are some who crave it. Me, I don't care.

I took the old D90 to a picnic in the summer because I rarely use it and thought it needed a workout. Some funny things happened there, and I said oh, if I could only have gotten it on video. Stupid me. I forgot the camera had it. Now I'm more cognizant of the functions and use the D90 for a party cam.

My own personal wish is a Digital FM in full frame ;-) Nice and simple, basic metering, autofocus available, and a histogram, no other bells and whistles.

They will still want to compete with the 5D MK II. I wish they would have come out with a D700s that has the D3s sensor with video capabilities....oh well.

I don't want video in my still camera. At least the pro version. IMHO it adds to the cost for something I don't use and don't plan on using and holds back development of better sensors targeted for still photos. If I were going to get into video, I'd get a video camera that was designed for video. The (very) few videos I do take are done just fine with my little $100 P&S.

At the same time I have to recognize that Nikon has to sell a lot of cameras and that it appears that I'm in the minority in my desires. I expect that the next generation of Nikon camera bodies will have video in spite of my objections. Just because most people want to do video. It's popular right now. Even though video in DSLR's is rudimentary and low resolution. Even though it's limited in frame rate, so you have much less flexibility than a video camera would. The ONLY advantage I can see in DSLR video is the large sensor. Even there, the sensor isn't used to its full resolution. The advantage is the DOF you can get. IMHO, it's a secondary advantage.

After all, my D3 has a lot of features that I don't use now. I don't use the horizon indicator. I don't use multiple exposures. I think I used the interval timer once a couple years ago, but I don't remember what I did with it. Of course these features are relatively minor and don't add significantly to the cost of the camera. Video is different. It affects the sensor, which has to be designed to handle continuous readout for long periods of time.

If Nikon (or any other DSLR manufacturer) were really committed to increasing the quality of still cameras and getting into video, they'd produce two different bodies. One with video, and one with only still capability. I'd guess that there'd be a market for the still camera with improved performance. But that would increase Nikon's cost for each camera, since the market for either type would be reduced.

And given Nikon's historical supply problems, both types of camera would be in very short supply.

I really have to agree with you Dwight. Look at the time and effort that Nikon put into the video function for the D7000 only to have issues with the video that from what i have read on DPReview and other forums have given the D7K a bad reputation and Nikon a lot of grief to fix.

What I would really like Nikon to do, is give me a digital version of my old F3HP. Minimum of geegaws, interchangeable back (swap sensors) and interchangeable finders - i.e. waist level, action/sport and normal pentaprism. Raw only and I can live with manual focus, center weighted/spot metering and manual exposure controls - including ISO - Todays adjustable high ISO's is a major improvement over film.
--
Conrad
---------------------------------------------------
Show Low, Arizona

You know...I've never had an FX Nikon, but just ordered the D700 from B&H. As long as I have the chance to buy an FX without the video, I went for it now.

I have the D80 and the D300. The D90 and the D300S will never be purchased by me and you're probably right, they'll surely put a video in the new D700, so now the D700 will be here Friday. I have no problem getting along fine with the D80 and the D300, without the video. The D700 will be fine too.

If I wanted video, I'd buy it. I don't like being forced to buy a DSLR with video when I have no use for it. I still have a Canon S2IS that takes good videos with stereo mics/sound, zoom while shooting, etc. and used it maybe twice since new. I have no use for it.

Just don't use it then, some say. Where's my choice to buy a newer cam with or without video? I have no problem with anyone wanting video on their DSLR cams...just give me the choice to buy the same cam without the video.

If I went to buy a new car and had no choice but buy a model that was a convertible, I'll shop for a different or an older model... but the salesman said, well, just don't use it then...please.

--
dave

Video is there because it is already there by default, its free almost.

To think you have a classic is like thinking your first dual core superscalar CPU is a classic worth something.

Moore's law progress and leaves everything in the past old and outdated. You can argue if the new features really add to your experience but that is progress buddy!

J195 said:

At least there is one professional grade camera which is purely for still picture without Video function. The saving can used to install a better grade sensor. I am sure that is most of us want (?)

What say you ? Do you wish to have video function in the upcoming new replacement for D700 ?

I am thinking to get a second D700 as this probably is the last DSLR which has no video function. I like the fact that D700 is purely a still camera, it's going to be a classic

Click to expand...

I agree that almost everything needed for video recording is there already, so it's a no brainer - but only a percieved need driven by marketing.

I guess if Canon included a mobile phone and Bluetooth on the 5D MkIII there would be people asking why Nikon hasn't done it.

I don't like putting video capability into my DSLR. The one and only purpose of a DSLR is for taking excellent still pics. But nowadays people like to have everything being put together to serve as an all-purpose walk-around portable device. To serve the market (and to make more money), manufacturers will continue to add more and more features (those that you can or can't imagine) into DSLRs.

I don't think there is any disadvantage in having video capture in a camera. It is just a matter of electronics - the ability of a video-enabled DSLR to take still pictures is intact.

I have D700. Should I have the vide support I might occasionally use it. But I wouldn't upgrade my camera just because of that.

Sony makes that camera its the A850 and with 24.6 mpix.. dont get me wrong Nikons are awesome but my A850 is also amazing and simple.... and cheap
--
cecil

videos on DSLRs will be there..on newer models that will come out....
video capability on DSLRs is almost free..just a software thinng..
videos in DSLRs will make a camera more attractive to buyers of all levels...

do you really think your no video option will be heard by any camera manufacturer?

even the pro bodies now are starting to have videos..the D3s for example..

..photojournalists need them in their reportage too..as a supplement (so I heard)..

if you don't want videos on the next update of a D700... buy the D700 or any other DSLR without video..

just my 2 cents..

--
http://www.johnparas11.zenfolio.com

DSLRs are not practical for shooting video, the form factor just makes it awkward, but in the youtube age, everyone wants to shoot "candid" video, so manufacturers include it.

yes true-- that's why there are new adapters-- loupes for the lcd..and thingy majigs to make the DSLRs hold like traditional video cameras..

SiPat said:

DSLRs are not practical for shooting video, the form factor just makes it awkward, but in the youtube age, everyone wants to shoot "candid" video, so manufacturers include it.

Click to expand...

--
http://www.johnparas11.zenfolio.com

Because it is mainly a matter of firmware.
So I do not care about this function.
I dont plan to take video with my DSLRs.
If it will be there I will simply ignore it.

--
FabioMassimo

Nikon was not able to make a video function for D700 at that time. I did not see any Nikon brand camcorder in the market. That could be a good explanation.

After playing with 5 DSLRs and 4 camcorders (3 HDs) I think it is a great move that DSLR can record video. Canon has its capability, so does Sony and Panasonic etc., because these companies are already camcorder makers.

The recording sensor of traditional camcorder is much smaller than the DSLR sensor, even cropped. Same situation as iMAX.

Already there are Profession camcorders based on sensor used in DSLR. I played with Sony one and was quite impressed. Of course there is long way to go.

If I have that device in the future, I do not need DSLR any more.

J195 said:

At least there is one professional grade camera which is purely for still picture without Video function. The saving can used to install a better grade sensor. I am sure that is most of us want (?)

What say you ? Do you wish to have video function in the upcoming new replacement for D700 ?

I am thinking to get a second D700 as this probably is the last DSLR which has no video function. I like the fact that D700 is purely a still camera, it's going to be a classic

Click to expand...

I like how people compare cameras to new cars.. a new car goes for what 10k 20k? depending on what it is? Why don’t you just spend out on a D3 or whatever, I think from a logical point of view if Nikon will keep a video free cam it will be in the top ones.

That aside anyone have any clue when the next D700 will appear, any slight idea at all? lol

I need the D700 with its full frame sensor but really want to get into the filming parts as well with out spending out on another body just for that.

I just hope it doesn’t get to many more pixels added thus likely more noise reduction added as well reducing quality of colours. It will be a pain waiting for the next D700 only to end up getting the D700 lol!

I have a D700 and will upgrade only if video is included. I won't use the videofunction often, but that is also the reason why I don't want an extra gadget (camcorder) to drag around just in case.
So video, better iso and maybe 16-18 mp will be perfect for me!