Reading mode: Light Dark

we the undersigned

Go to last post
Just buy an older camera without video. There are plenty of great pro cameras out there made before video was installed into DSLRs. There are even a few current production models to choose from.

Video is the wave of the future, and it probably won't be more than a decade before all cameras shoot video, from which stills are pulled. I predict video bursts with processed HDR/DR bracketing will be the norm.
 
There was a rumor that Canon was going to make a version of the 1DMKIV for those who shoot major sports because there was a rumor that the major sports leagues would start keeping them from entering the arena or stadiums with a camera able to take video when they didn't have a video pass.
If so, it would seem that Nikon would follow along.

Plug the button for LV and replace the firmware to disable video and display a screen that says NO VIDEO on command.
--

-> > "Oh, and since we're on the subject of advice, you may want to be a little leery of some of the advice you see on this, or any other, message board. If someone is giving you advice ......make a determination about how much weight you'll give that advice. You may find that sometimes there are 'serial-posters' on the internet that should read more and type less."
-Brian Blanco, Sarasota Florida

I include myself in that quote
Chris, Broussard, LA
 
Your prayers have been answered, simply buy a Sony "flagship", they don't even have "live view" little lone movies.
--

' You don't have to have the best of everything to get the best out of what you do have'.
 
most rediculous thing i have ever read here.. why make two if they are going to be the same price .. dont shoot video simple as that
 
Why can't Canon work a deal with Verizon and add cell phone capability, at least to their high end 1D series. I could understand their not wanting to do it with the 7D or under versions. And likely, a crop sensor might add to the problem of dropped calls. In addition, and I know this is really a wish list item, a dousing rod would be quite useful during my desert treks, but that's probably too specialized.

In reality, what we are seeing across the broad spectrum of electronic products is a commonality of function. But the way it seems to work is that the person picks his 'poison'--the pad, the netbook, the notebook, the cell phone, and he gets ancillary goodies incorporated into it. So, his majority use is purchased and he gets the distractions for free! I do know that TV stations, and some studios, are using the 7D as a cheap video camera. I think that's almost beyond interesting...it's fascinating!

Alashi
 
bikinchris said:
There was a rumor that Canon was going to make a version of the 1DMKIV for those who shoot major sports because there was a rumor that the major sports leagues would start keeping them from entering the arena or stadiums with a camera able to take video when they didn't have a video pass.
Click to expand...
I initially (back when the 5D Mk2 first appeared) also thought this would become an issue, but has come to realize it does not seem work that way at all.

I shoot at areanas and events of all sizes, and in TV studios during shows. They do not give a hoot if you are carrying even a dedicated a video cam, much less a video capable DSLR. They even usually do not care if you record some stuff. But, and here is the big but and what it all boils down to ... If you somehow broadcast or distribute that recordning without proper permissions ... You will be in a world of hurt :)

The ones that do care about video recordning are the TV companies/channels who has paid big bucks for exclusive rights to broadcast. They for obvious reasons do not want competition. But that is all about distribution of live feeds or video recordings. As long as you do not infringe that, they do not seem to care one bit what your camera does or does not in terms of video.

In short, it is not the capturing ability that has them worried, its is the broadcasting or distributing of video.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
 
Then you should know that all it's going to take is one idiot breaking the rules and the crackdown will be difficult on us poor underpaid guys standing on the sidelines. In fact the offending video will probably come form one of the all too common persons standing on the sidelines with no credentials. They "know someone" and got into the sidelines at some important game and they get lucky and get a great view of a spectacular NFL play and load a video onto one of the video sharing sites that becomes popular even viral. Then someone from the network sees it (and they know it didn't come from one of their affiliates, because they are often not allowed on the sidelines with video), then orders the crackdown.

I am not saying I think it will definitely happen, just that it's possible.

Before I get blasted, I don't care about video and don't care if my camera can take video. I have no video skills, don't practice good video skills and never have been asked to be hired to shoot video. I won't be the fool who shoots the offending video.
Grevture said:
I initially (back when the 5D Mk2 first appeared) also thought this would become an issue, but has come to realize it does not seem work that way at all.

I shoot at areanas and events of all sizes, and in TV studios during shows. They do not give a hoot if you are carrying even a dedicated a video cam, much less a video capable DSLR. They even usually do not care if you record some stuff. But, and here is the big but and what it all boils down to ... If you somehow broadcast or distribute that recordning without proper permissions ... You will be in a world of hurt :)

The ones that do care about video recordning are the TV companies/channels who has paid big bucks for exclusive rights to broadcast. They for obvious reasons do not want competition. But that is all about distribution of live feeds or video recordings. As long as you do not infringe that, they do not seem to care one bit what your camera does or does not in terms of video.

In short, it is not the capturing ability that has them worried, its is the broadcasting or distributing of video.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
Click to expand...
--

-> > "Oh, and since we're on the subject of advice, you may want to be a little leery of some of the advice you see on this, or any other, message board. If someone is giving you advice ......make a determination about how much weight you'll give that advice. You may find that sometimes there are 'serial-posters' on the internet that should read more and type less."
-Brian Blanco, Sarasota Florida

I include myself in that quote
Chris, Broussard, LA
 
bikinchris said:
Then you should know that all it's going to take is one idiot breaking the rules and the crackdown will be difficult on us poor underpaid guys standing on the sidelines. In fact the offending video will probably come form one of the all too common persons standing on the sidelines with no credentials. They "know someone" and got into the sidelines at some important game and they get lucky and get a great view of a spectacular NFL play and load a video onto one of the video sharing sites that becomes popular even viral. Then someone from the network sees it (and they know it didn't come from one of their affiliates, because they are often not allowed on the sidelines with video), then orders the crackdown.
Click to expand...
Incidents of that nature has happened, and will undoubtedly happen again. But professional photographers rarely have been involved - they do know the consequences and the hefty liabilities that could result from such indiscretions.

I spoke to a TV producer a little over a year ago, and he was not worried at all over the equipment professional photographers with credentials used. What he chiefly worried about was people in the audience making recordnings and distributing them (like recordnings from what goes one outside the scope of the TV cameras and during commercial brakes).

Sport teams, large event organizers and TV companies want to have good working relations with the working press - and the other way around. I doubt anyone will worry much about the potential video capabilities of professional PJ's. Both groups know the rules.

What might be subject to stricter control because of video functionality is rather DSLR's brough by peoiple in the audience. But that is already quite strict due to safety issues anyway, so again, not much of a difference.

In short, I doubt Canon, nor Nikon will feel any real preassure to release a pro model without video capabilities. It just would not make any sense. It is not pro users that will have trouble enetering arenas to do their job with their video capable DSLR's. It is the occasional person in the audience that might be forbidden to bring his or her DSLR - but that is often the case even without video anyway.

I have PJ collegues who has been bringing pro video gear along with their still cameras to sport arenas and other events for years. This since they after the game or show switch from taking stills to film interviews for web-TV. This has not been considered a problem. Adding video capable DSLRs to the mix do not change that.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
 
No, being able to record video requires proper hardware as well.

1) The camera processor has to be fast enough to bin the pixels and write to the buffer and then to the card

2) The camera sensor has to be capable. It has to stay cool (literally) despite being bombarded by photons. It has to have a high read-out speed. It should preferably have a very fast read-out speed to prevent any rolling shutter artifacts.
dougdiamond1 said:
Having a movie feature within a camera is no big deal to the mfg's. All they are doing is recording the live view. The Canon 40D is capable of doing movie recording with the right "hack" to the system...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/techoutsider
 
TechOutsider said:
No, being able to record video requires proper hardware as well.

1) The camera processor has to be fast enough to bin the pixels
Click to expand...
Like for liveview
TechOutsider said:
and write to the buffer and then to the card
Click to expand...
The same way it does for liveview, writing to the USB port.

And writing fast to the card is something manufactures have been pushing for years, because customers (and review sites) make such a big deal of it.
TechOutsider said:
2) The camera sensor has to be capable. It has to stay cool (literally) despite being bombarded by photons.
Click to expand...
The photons don't add appreciable heat. Sensors do "stay cool (literally)". They have for years.

Again, you're talking problems solved in the quest for better high ISO noise numbers and to get liveview going.
TechOutsider said:
It has to have a high read-out speed. It should preferably have a very fast read-out speed to prevent any rolling shutter artifacts.
Click to expand...
The same fast readout speed that's needed for 10 frames/sec on 16mp sensors. Again, better video just rides on the coat-tails of other technology.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
bikinchris said:
There was a rumor that Canon was going to make a version of the 1DMKIV for those who shoot major sports because there was a rumor that
Click to expand...
A rumor because of another rumor?

That's stretching it.
bikinchris said:
the major sports leagues would start keeping them from entering the arena or stadiums with a camera able to take video when they didn't have a video pass.
Click to expand...
You're talking professional sports, an industry where the NFL struck a deal with Canon that required all photographers, no matter what brand of equipment they were shooting with, to to wear Canon vests. The "major sports leagues" accommodate the camera companies, not the other way around.
bikinchris said:
If so, it would seem that Nikon would follow along.
Click to expand...
Ok, now something that "seems", based on a rumor of a rumor...
bikinchris said:
Plug the button for LV
Click to expand...
Hey, how did this become an anti-liveview rant?
bikinchris said:
and replace the firmware to disable video and display a screen that says NO VIDEO on command.
Click to expand...
Chris, really, just don't press the button. It's not that hard...

Don't justify whatever makes you dislike video and liveview so much with rumors, rumors of rumors, or what seems to be rumors of rumors.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
I see.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
TechOutsider said:
No, being able to record video requires proper hardware as well.

1) The camera processor has to be fast enough to bin the pixels
Click to expand...
Like for liveview
Click to expand...
That sounds like tethering, and only a select few models have this feature.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
and write to the buffer and then to the card
Click to expand...
The same way it does for liveview, writing to the USB port.

And writing fast to the card is something manufactures have been pushing for years, because customers (and review sites) make such a big deal of it.
Click to expand...
Of course they do. Why is the Nikon D5000 only capable of 5 minutes of video recording?
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
2) The camera sensor has to be capable. It has to stay cool (literally) despite being bombarded by photons.
Click to expand...
The photons don't add appreciable heat. Sensors do "stay cool (literally)". They have for years.

Again, you're talking problems solved in the quest for better high ISO noise numbers and to get liveview going.
Click to expand...
Your contradicting yourself. Despite your claim that sensors have stayed cool for a long time, 10 FPS is a decent development :O.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
It has to have a high read-out speed. It should preferably have a very fast read-out speed to prevent any rolling shutter artifacts.
Click to expand...
The same fast readout speed that's needed for 10 frames/sec on 16mp sensors. Again, better video just rides on the coat-tails of other technology.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/techoutsider
 
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
1) The camera processor has to be fast enough to bin the pixels
Click to expand...
Like for liveview
Click to expand...
That sounds like tethering, and only a select few models have this feature.
Click to expand...
What has tethering to do with anyting? ;) Feeding Live view over a cable to an external display is no more work for the camera then feeding it to the internal display as in Live view.
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
And writing fast to the card is something manufactures have been pushing for years, because customers (and review sites) make such a big deal of it.
Click to expand...
Of course they do. Why is the Nikon D5000 only capable of 5 minutes of video recording?
Click to expand...
Because they use MJPEG, an old and inefficient video codec which require storage of large amounts of uncomressed data in memory.

A more telling limitation is the 20 minutes/4 GB limit in for example the D7000 (which use a modern video codec) - this is beacuse we still use FAT32 on the memory card. And even without that, most cameras are stcuk at 29 minutes and 59 seconds due to European tax regulations.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
 
TechOutsider said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
TechOutsider said:
No, being able to record video requires proper hardware as well.

1) The camera processor has to be fast enough to bin the pixels
Click to expand...
Like for liveview
Click to expand...
That sounds like tethering, and only a select few models have this feature.
Click to expand...
Yes, like the entire Canon lineup.
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
and write to the buffer and then to the card
Click to expand...
The same way it does for liveview, writing to the USB port.

And writing fast to the card is something manufactures have been pushing for years, because customers (and review sites) make such a big deal of it.
Click to expand...
Of course they do. Why is the Nikon D5000 only capable of 5 minutes of video recording?
Click to expand...
Probably for the same reason Canon is limited to 10 minutes: the FAT32 file system.
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
TechOutsider said:
2) The camera sensor has to be capable. It has to stay cool (literally) despite being bombarded by photons.
Click to expand...
The photons don't add appreciable heat. Sensors do "stay cool (literally)". They have for years.

Again, you're talking problems solved in the quest for better high ISO noise numbers and to get liveview going.
Click to expand...
Your contradicting yourself. Despite your claim that sensors have stayed cool for a long time, 10 FPS is a decent development :O.
Click to expand...
One has nothing to do with the other. Still photos are significantly higher in resolution, and cycling the mirror and shutter at 10fps is quite an accomplishment.

--
http://models.stevemelvin.com
 
stephenmelvin said:
TechOutsider said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
TechOutsider said:
No, being able to record video requires proper hardware as well.

1) The camera processor has to be fast enough to bin the pixels
Click to expand...
Like for liveview
Click to expand...
That sounds like tethering, and only a select few models have this feature.
Click to expand...
Yes, like the entire Canon lineup.
Click to expand...
And all liveview capable Nikons, which is, I believe, also the entire lineup.
stephenmelvin said:
stephenmelvin said:
stephenmelvin said:
stephenmelvin said:
and write to the buffer and then to the card
Click to expand...
The same way it does for liveview, writing to the USB port.

And writing fast to the card is something manufactures have been pushing for years, because customers (and review sites) make such a big deal of it.
Click to expand...
Of course they do. Why is the Nikon D5000 only capable of 5 minutes of video recording?
Click to expand...
Probably for the same reason Canon is limited to 10 minutes: the FAT32 file system.
Click to expand...
And the motion JPEG codec.

But how many films have single cuts longer than 5 minutes?
stephenmelvin said:
stephenmelvin said:
stephenmelvin said:
stephenmelvin said:
2) The camera sensor has to be capable. It has to stay cool (literally) despite being bombarded by photons.
Click to expand...
The photons don't add appreciable heat. Sensors do "stay cool (literally)". They have for years.

Again, you're talking problems solved in the quest for better high ISO noise numbers and to get liveview going.
Click to expand...
Your contradicting yourself. Despite your claim that sensors have stayed cool for a long time, 10 FPS is a decent development :O.
Click to expand...
One has nothing to do with the other. Still photos are significantly higher in resolution, and cycling the mirror and shutter at 10fps is quite an accomplishment.
Click to expand...
And full resolution means insane amounts of processing power. 10fps on a 16mp camera is 160 megapixels/second. That's like 1080p HD at 80 frames/sec. ;)

I found his arguments rather strange, too.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Of course they do. Why is the Nikon D5000 only capable of 5 minutes of video recording?
Click to expand...
Probably for the same reason Canon is limited to 10 minutes: the FAT32 file system.
Click to expand...
And the motion JPEG codec.

But how many films have single cuts longer than 5 minutes?
Click to expand...
For most contexts, a limit like that has very little consequences. But for one particular situation it is truly annoying - the lone PJ who suddenly finds himself or herself doing an interview and only has a (couple of) DSLR(s). You end up with a lot of "oh, sorry, can you repeat that last sentence, my camera needs to be restarted"

If at least the camera could be set to start a new clip automatically (blinking a light right before it was about to "switch" ... Then it would be more manageable.

But overall, not very often a real problem.

And if I understand the problem correctly (fat chance, but one day I might be lucky ;) ) it originates from a limitation in the JPEG codes as to how much uncomressed data that can be managed at any one given time - like 2 gigabyte or something like that.

To me it seem odd that the camera cannot handle that gracefully, saving several smaller clips (that easily can be Humpty Dumptied back together again in post) but allowing for continous filmning ... That would also avoid the FAT 32 limitation.

Seems like a fairly easy solution to me. But I am aware I am skating on very thin ice here as far as knowledge goes ... ;)

And I really do wish Nikon retained a MJPEG as an option in their newer video enabled cameras. Even with 1920x1080 and the very short clips that would mean (if at all possible?) With all its limitations, MJPEG still has two strong points
  1. high iso performance from using the very good JPEG processing capabilities of current DSLRs. I remember looking at the big Zacuto video shootout last year. The D3s was for the most part sort of ok but not making much of an impression compared to the rest of the participants - until the low lights section where it absolutely crushed all the other cameras (I remember the qoute from one of the guys in the panel, something like "I wish Kubrick had lived to see this")
  2. fast, quick-and-dirty post processing even on a weak laptop. For someone doing web content with limited demands ... MJPEG just is so much easier on the computer and quicker to work with
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny
 
--

The greatest of mankind's criminals are those who delude themselves into thinking they have done 'the right thing.'
  • Rayna Butler
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top