Do all cameras nowadays really need to cater to videographers? Am I a purist for disagreeing?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
KariP Veteran Member • Posts: 5,486
... it is easier and cheaper to add video "gadgets"

fraga500 wrote:

I was watching Kai W's recent X-T4 video and in the beginning he talks about how he wants a camera that does both things - photos and videos - really well.

Won't get into details of what he concluded at the end of the video, but this intro reminded me of this annoying trend (or norm) in the camera industry: the apparent necessity for a camera to cater to both photographers and videographers at the same time.

I know this is not something that only occurs to Fuji, and that we do not live in a perfect world where people have lots of money and space to acquire a videocamera + a camera for photographing, but what really baffles me is the fact that nowadays some people downplay a camera if it doesn't have lots of video features. It's like every camera today must be a hybrid one, and that even if it does the "photography part" flawlessly, it will "lose some points" for not focusing on video capabilities.

What do you guys think? Is this judgment and downplaying correct? Should all cameras in 2020 have at least some decent video capabilities (meaning am I a purist for seeing no necessity for every camera to be hybrid?)? I wonder too if this became a norm because us (the users) demanded it?

PS:I am posting this here because I own Fuji cameras and because I've seen this unfair downplaying happen a lot to Fuji X cameras, especially the older ones (examples: "what do you mean it only records 10 minutes at a time? What, no 4K? Pfff"), here in DPReview.

Of course very much of the video talk is nonsense. Like this recording "only" ten minutes. I do not know what kind of videos need 15-30min recordings. Film/video maker (serious) NEVER takes so long footage clips. Decent films are made of shorter clips - preplanned.   Only recording of a soccer match ( 100%) needs that - like 30-60min . Cameras are not made for recording whole evening shows.  Nobody needs that.

There is also a problem with 4K. I just did a short video just for fun for grandkids (reading a bedtime story)  - 4K was absolutely useless because the file size becomes so huge and there is no point in shooting 4K ant then conversing it to some very  low quality. 4K is great - if you look at your own movies at home alone. How can you send a High quality 4K video ?

But we will get more and more video things that almost no one uses - because it is cheap to add some new firmware and software. Inventing new  photography gear is difficult and expensive.

Better cameras for photography are very difficult to make - focusing systems and a new sensor for more DR is more expensive. Cameras are not getting much better very fast - video systems get better - very fast, soon 8K. Very few can or will use them. Where are the great 4K videos ? It is easy to find great photographs by amateurs, but videos ?

-- hide signature --

I started SLR film photography in 1968, first DSLR was Canon 40D in 2007. Now Fujifilm X-E3 and X-H1 for nature, walking around ,traveling/landscapes - fantastic 5DMkIV for landscapes, macro , BIF ... .

 KariP's gear list:KariP's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Fujifilm X-E3 Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +10 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow