Video, I don't get it

Started Apr 21, 2013 | Discussions thread
Ron Outdoors Contributing Member • Posts: 739
Re: Video, I don't get it

tjuster1 wrote:

Can anyone explain the demand for super high-quality video capabilities in an m43 camera? I truly don't get it.

I suspect I'm like most photographers: I display most of my images on a computer screen, but make a few large prints from time to time. It's for those large prints that I need a good camera system, and so things like resolution, DR, and noise at high-ISO matter to me. If I never printed, or rarely printed larger than 4x6, I'd be just as well served with a cheap P&S or even a camera phone.

I also shoot video, but much less often. It is almost always to record memories, and is always shown on a computer screen or maybe a television. Some videos are seen a handful of times; most only once.

I understand and accept that others shoot much more video than I do, and are much more serious about it than I am. But what I don't understand is: what kind of videos are they making that require such high quality? What is the video equivalent of "a few large prints"? It seems to me that if one were truly serious about video--with the goal of publishing videos that be seen by a mass audience--then a dedicated video camera would make much more sense than a 'hybrid' camera.

In other words, I understand why stills photographers want the best IQ they can get, because they typically produce some prints for which that IQ matters. But I suspect that almost none of the videos produced by m43 users require such high quality--so why are some m43 users so eager to have and pay for those features?

Both Facebook and Youtube accept HD video now, and they sure do look better when viewed on my computer. And the m4/3 cameras have much better low light capabilities then P&S cameras.

-- hide signature --

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow