Please Mr Nikon, no video

Started Jan 13, 2016 | Discussions
Tugela Contributing Member • Posts: 755
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
1

seoulsurvivor wrote:

This will put the cat amongst the pigeons. There is no doubt that the latest products to be announced, the D5 and D500 look to be great cameras.........on paper at least, and I'm sure they'll sell well to their intended market. Well done, Nikon!

But with all the latest features and enhancements that accompany these new products which no doubt evolve as a result of market feedback, I wonder if we will ever see a camera in the future which lacks video and is aimed squarely at the stills photographer. Think about the amazingly popular (and still is an all time favorite of many) D700.

I for one have never used the video component of my cameras and I guarantee I never will in the future. Video just doesn't interest me at all. Surely I'm not alone in this boat. Yes, yes, I know Nikon is not going to build a camera just for me and I know some will say that it's better to have it available if ever you need it. I get all that. But many users are paying for a feature that they will never use and I would love to see a quality product slipped into the product range which gives consumers a choice between video or no video. With the D800/D800e we had a choice of AA filter or not. In the D5 we have a choice of CF cards or XQD cards. Surely it wouldn't be that difficult to give us a video option.

Personally, if I had a FF body say with 24mp and the build quality of the old D700 or the later D8** models, but minus the video, I'd probably never part with it. Surely there must be a huge market for such a camera based around thousands upon thousands of users who never use and never intend to use the video component.

I'm sure it will never happen because camera production has much to do with keeping up with or staying ahead of the opposition and it would probably require Nikon to go out on a limb and take a huge gamble with such a product. A product sans video to me would be all about getting back to basics, but at a higher level. I may be totally wrong, but I would venture to say that many of the pro sports shooters or photo journos who simply want quality images at a super high frame rate, rarely if ever use the video function and would love to see a product simply aimed at stills photography if it came at a reduced price.

No doubt many readers will come back to me telling me they use their video all the time and I have no idea what I'm talking about. Fair enough, but I'd like to see what non video users have to say and what they would like to see in their future non video FF body.

Cheers

Video doesn't take anything away from stills, so why do you care?

 Tugela's gear list:Tugela's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P900 Sony RX100 V Nikon Coolpix P1000 Samsung NX1
Tugela Contributing Member • Posts: 755
Re: there is the Df!
1

antoineb wrote:

- all this being said, I personally never use my DSLR for video. Why? Because it is heavy and because it can't AF while filming. For short family things I use my Smartphone.

Actually, it can autofocus while recording video.

 Tugela's gear list:Tugela's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P900 Sony RX100 V Nikon Coolpix P1000 Samsung NX1
Tugela Contributing Member • Posts: 755
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

KSV wrote:

hdkhang wrote:

KSV wrote:

Problem with video that (and I am firmly believe in this) video-enabled sensor is a compromise and without video it could be developed in such way that high-ISO (that I value the most in digital) will be yet better and cleaner. But it is very costly for them to develop few sensors in parallel, so it is very unreasonable to hope that they ever will do "pure" still sensor in near future. And lets face it - even with video modern sensors are so damn good as never before!

So absent of video will not improve stills if sensor is capable for video and it simply blocked. Saying all this I still very happy that my Df has not got that stupid video button.

I'd bet you would be very very wrong in your assumption.

Video functionality requires sensors that do not overheat as much, a sensor that overheats is one that adds noise to the image. Video drove the development of more efficient sensors, and that helped with high ISO image quality that you so value (as well as I'm sure, long exposure photography). You should be grateful for video.

Statement is true, but conclusion is wrong. Heat is big problem and this is true, but it generates by extensive usage of sensor, i.e. video, so for pure still it is unnecessarily to battle those heat because it not generated at first place.

Second function that helped with image making, video drove the demand for faster processing and faster image read out which drove adoption of better processors for image processing.

Again it is for video only. May be partially for high FPS. I am not interested. However exactly necessity for fast enough readout that vital for video making compromise in still - cells cannot be discharge properly fast enough.

Unrelated to photo taking but video also expanded the market reach of DSLR's to a generation of film makers who in part helped to bring the prices of cameras down.

And who buying D5 and alike exclusively for film making? Even if one made perfectly fine videoprocessor very nature of DSLR and in particular it ergonomic makes it incredibly uncomfortable to shoot video. Expending market is just fantasy, no more. Video demanded in DSLR by greedy people who like to buy one unit that do everything and they believe that they will use it. And also stupid herd that like all boxes ticked - indeed why 6K DSLR cannot do it when iPhone can? It is like 4WD - 95% why buy them use them just for shopping and fool themselves that one day they will go for that trip. Never happens. Yes 4WD (and DSLR for this merit) became more affordable because sold in masses, but people who buying 4WD to go out (actually intended purpose) have to modify them heavily because from factory they catered for those 95% of <<insert your favorite insult word here>> that never go out. Unfortunately DSLR cannot be modified that easy.

So IMHO video in DSLR is useless gimmick that compromises still performance. But unfortunately we have to live with it. I just glad that my Df has not got that ugly video button.

The heat doesn't come from the sensor, it comes from the processor due to the heavy workload associated with processing the video feed.

Not many people buy DSLRs exclusively for film making, but the point of including it is so that you can record video at the touch of a button. If you are shooting stills, being able to shoot video of the subject in the same shoot has it's advantages, such as supplying supplementary material for your client and things of that nature.

 Tugela's gear list:Tugela's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P900 Sony RX100 V Nikon Coolpix P1000 Samsung NX1
Philip Veteran Member • Posts: 4,009
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

I agree with you 100 percent.

I have the D700 and recently purchased the D750 and I have not nor ever will use the video.

-- hide signature --

Philip

drivecancel Regular Member • Posts: 258
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
1

Tugela wrote:

seoulsurvivor wrote:

This will put the cat amongst the pigeons. There is no doubt that the latest products to be announced, the D5 and D500 look to be great cameras.........on paper at least, and I'm sure they'll sell well to their intended market. Well done, Nikon!

But with all the latest features and enhancements that accompany these new products which no doubt evolve as a result of market feedback, I wonder if we will ever see a camera in the future which lacks video and is aimed squarely at the stills photographer. Think about the amazingly popular (and still is an all time favorite of many) D700.

I for one have never used the video component of my cameras and I guarantee I never will in the future. Video just doesn't interest me at all. Surely I'm not alone in this boat. Yes, yes, I know Nikon is not going to build a camera just for me and I know some will say that it's better to have it available if ever you need it. I get all that. But many users are paying for a feature that they will never use and I would love to see a quality product slipped into the product range which gives consumers a choice between video or no video. With the D800/D800e we had a choice of AA filter or not. In the D5 we have a choice of CF cards or XQD cards. Surely it wouldn't be that difficult to give us a video option.

Personally, if I had a FF body say with 24mp and the build quality of the old D700 or the later D8** models, but minus the video, I'd probably never part with it. Surely there must be a huge market for such a camera based around thousands upon thousands of users who never use and never intend to use the video component.

I'm sure it will never happen because camera production has much to do with keeping up with or staying ahead of the opposition and it would probably require Nikon to go out on a limb and take a huge gamble with such a product. A product sans video to me would be all about getting back to basics, but at a higher level. I may be totally wrong, but I would venture to say that many of the pro sports shooters or photo journos who simply want quality images at a super high frame rate, rarely if ever use the video function and would love to see a product simply aimed at stills photography if it came at a reduced price.

No doubt many readers will come back to me telling me they use their video all the time and I have no idea what I'm talking about. Fair enough, but I'd like to see what non video users have to say and what they would like to see in their future non video FF body.

Cheers

Video doesn't take anything away from stills, so why do you care?

And I also want to know where the idea that not including video is some huge money saving opportunity.

If a DSLR has liveview, it's not going to cost much more to include video recording because that output of the camera's sensor is already being displayed.

So basically, you will have to forgo liveview entirely in order for any real money savings to become a factor. Asking for simply no video while keeping liveview is just stupid.

Outside of a niche retro product, I doubt Nikon will ever release a camera without video recording. It's a waste to omit it and only limits their sales, D700 fans really baffle me sometimes.

 drivecancel's gear list:drivecancel's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D750 Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD +1 more
Peter Budd
Peter Budd Senior Member • Posts: 1,116
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
1

While I would be quite happy with a dslr without video I can't see it happening these days.

I think I used the video on any of my cameras about 4 times in a 4 years.

What I do not get is how people can enjoy a DSLR for a video camera. It's Heavy, awkward to hold up for any length of time and  generally unpleasant to use.  I see the odd person walking around with this ridiculous contraption strapped to there chest with a huge great DSLR on the front. Loads of fun in that - Not.

I have a Sony video camera . It it light , easy to hold ( it's designed as a video camera )  has a great zoom and produces fantastic HD video. ( I may invest in a 4K one at some stage but at the moment I have no 4K TV to play 4K video. ) It cost way  less than half my D810 and that was a D810 without a lens.

-- hide signature --

Peter
GMT

 Peter Budd's gear list:Peter Budd's gear list
Nikon D810 Olympus E-M1 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye +11 more
NickZ2016 Contributing Member • Posts: 915
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

Peter Budd wrote:

. It's Heavy, awkward to hold up for any length of time and generally unpleasant to use.

It's heavy? It's the same weight in video or still mode. My main gripe is the screen is useless in bright sun. I guess a hood would solve that.

But it's already been mentioned it's not about a video versus a still camera. It's about a video and a still camera versus one camera.

 NickZ2016's gear list:NickZ2016's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G +4 more
OP seoulsurvivor Regular Member • Posts: 481
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

NickZ2016 wrote:

Peter Budd wrote:

. It's Heavy, awkward to hold up for any length of time and generally unpleasant to use.

It's heavy? It's the same weight in video or still mode. My main gripe is the screen is useless in bright sun. I guess a hood would solve that.

But it's already been mentioned it's not about a video versus a still camera. It's about a video and a still camera versus one camera.

Yes it's the same weight in either mode, but you don't see still photographers walking around with their arms permanently stretched out in front of them like videographers which surely must be tiring after a while. I'm sure that's the point Peter Budd was making.

 seoulsurvivor's gear list:seoulsurvivor's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D810 Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +4 more
OP seoulsurvivor Regular Member • Posts: 481
Re: False logic
2

GodSpeaks wrote:

seoulsurvivor wrote:

<snip>

... But many users are paying for a feature that they will never use and I would love to see a quality product slipped into the product range which gives consumers a choice between video or no video. With the D800/D800e we had a choice of AA filter or not. In the D5 we have a choice of CF cards or XQD cards. Surely it wouldn't be that difficult to give us a video option.

You are actually probably paying less for your DSLR because video is included. Take video out and the camera will not sell as well, and that means a smaller production run and that means a higher cost to produce the camera.

If you do not want video, easy, just ignore it. Do not use it. Pretend it is not there, but be happy it is there, because it's presence has saved you some money.

I understand the scales of economy of production runs vs possible minimal sales volumes (yet to be convinced of that one) but this line or theory about how removing the video component wouldn't lower the price or in fact make it higher just doesn't sit with me. I find it hard to believe that removing a feature such as 4K video (which everything will be at least from now on) in built mike, headphone and speaker jacks and focus assist software such as zebra, would not result in a significant reduction in price.

Also I understand that current sensor technology and production takes into account the need to accommodate both photos and video and it would almost impossible to separate the 2 these days to be able to produce a camera without video. However, it was clearly done with the D300 and D700 and most recently the DF. Yes the DF came with a premium price tag, but think about it, was it for the absence of video ( I think not) or rather for it's unique form factor and Nikon knowing they could up the anti on price with such a stylish product they knew many would fall in love with.

 seoulsurvivor's gear list:seoulsurvivor's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D810 Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +4 more
bikinchris
bikinchris Forum Pro • Posts: 21,549
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
1

Actually, Nixon is in the business of selling cameras. Leaving any feature off will hurt sales. The D5 is all about maximum performance.  If video hurt still features, I would agree with you.

-- hide signature --

Whenever I see an adult on a bicycle, I have hope for the human race." ~ H.G. Wells

 bikinchris's gear list:bikinchris's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D4S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF VR +1 more
OP seoulsurvivor Regular Member • Posts: 481
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
1

bikinchris wrote:

Actually, Nixon is in the business of selling cameras. Leaving any feature off will hurt sales. The D5 is all about maximum performance. If video hurt still features, I would agree with you.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against having the video feature in a camera. Of course I can turn it off or not use it at all and just forget that it's there as others have suggested as if I didn't know that. I'm just against having to pay for a feature or component that I know I'll never use. If the general consensus in this thread is that a camera without video would be more expensive (if they even produced it at all) then of course I'd have no choice but to purchase one with video. I'm just not convinced that the potential market for such a camera is a small as everyone says it is.

And if they come up with a DF upgrade in the future excluding video and with a higher MP count say like the D5 or D750, why couldn't they just swing that sensor over to a standard body style with a high build quality like the D700 was or the D8** today. Doesn't that sound feasible?

Anyway, this is like flogging a dead horse. It's never going to happen.

 seoulsurvivor's gear list:seoulsurvivor's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D810 Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +4 more
Bob Janes
Bob Janes Veteran Member • Posts: 3,179
Not false logic
6

seoulsurvivor wrote:

I understand the scales of economy of production runs vs possible minimal sales volumes (yet to be convinced of that one) but this line or theory about how removing the video component wouldn't lower the price or in fact make it higher just doesn't sit with me. I find it hard to believe that removing a feature such as 4K video (which everything will be at least from now on) in built mike, headphone and speaker jacks and focus assist software such as zebra, would not result in a significant reduction in price.

The cost of those components is not great. The cost of getting someone to do a different design to un-incorporate video features should not be underestimated. Production of a second version of software without some component modules is a significant cost, as rather than having to test one bit of software end-to-end every time a firmware release is made, you have to test two.

Also I understand that current sensor technology and production takes into account the need to accommodate both photos and video and it would almost impossible to separate the 2 these days to be able to produce a camera without video. However, it was clearly done with the D300 and D700 and most recently the DF. Yes the DF came with a premium price tag, but think about it, was it for the absence of video ( I think not) or rather for it's unique form factor and Nikon knowing they could up the anti on price with such a stylish product they knew many would fall in love with.

Some of those features which are essential for video also have significant potential use in stills - for instance the global shutter, which could allow you to take stills silently and without any induced vibration or wear to a mechanical shutter. News and sports photographers are going to be very interested in 12MP grabs from 4K video which ensure that they will get the exact moment they are after - in effect a 25 FPS motordrive.

I am a still-only photographer, but the video abilities of my kit are easily ignored and don't tend to get in the way - I would advise to just use the excellent stills capability of the available equipment - don't reject the swiss army knife just because it has a toothpick that you will never use.

Ordering off the a-la-carte menu may get you exaxtly the meal you desire, but it will not be better value than the plate-de-jour and it is unlikely to be of any higher quality.

 Bob Janes's gear list:Bob Janes's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha a99 Sony a7 II +3 more
cosmicnode Veteran Member • Posts: 4,067
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
2

WOW the video minority who want everyone else to pay for their pleasure certainly come out of the woodwork for a thread like this. The seem to think that video is free or that a camera would be more expensive without it , of course they neglect to consider the development costs of adding this feature to any camera, no part of the process will be problem free, resulting in evaluating different versions of chips , processors etc to determine which work best. Each and every different camera body tested on this site results in a ongoing set of complaints by video enthusiasts that the implementation is simply not good enough, video is a constantly moving set of goalposts 1080p, 4k, next 8k for the 2020 Olympics. The R&D for this is expensive and everyone is paying if you use it or not. The OP and many more simply want a stills body developed to be the best only for stills, give us 25 iso settings for landscape and using fast lenses fully open in bright conditions, better high iso for low light, higher dynamic range. Remember Nikon is a dslr manufacturer you can get a evf camera which is more suitable for vidio.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

 cosmicnode's gear list:cosmicnode's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D800 Nikon D500 Olympus E-PL8 Olympus E-M1 II +10 more
NickZ2016 Contributing Member • Posts: 915
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
2

cosmicnode wrote:

of course they neglect to consider the development costs of adding this feature to any camera, n

The point people have been trying to make is removing it will cost more.

Of course if you were right Ford would be offering three seat cars for less then four

 NickZ2016's gear list:NickZ2016's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G +4 more
cosmicnode Veteran Member • Posts: 4,067
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

NickZ2016 wrote:

cosmicnode wrote:

of course they neglect to consider the development costs of adding this feature to any camera, n

The point people have been trying to make is removing it will cost more.

Of course if you were right Ford would be offering three seat cars for less then four

Ford are good at charging more for less features.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

 cosmicnode's gear list:cosmicnode's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D800 Nikon D500 Olympus E-PL8 Olympus E-M1 II +10 more
Peter Budd
Peter Budd Senior Member • Posts: 1,116
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

seoulsurvivor wrote:

NickZ2016 wrote:

Peter Budd wrote:

. It's Heavy, awkward to hold up for any length of time and generally unpleasant to use.

It's heavy? It's the same weight in video or still mode. My main gripe is the screen is useless in bright sun. I guess a hood would solve that.

But it's already been mentioned it's not about a video versus a still camera. It's about a video and a still camera versus one camera.

Yes it's the same weight in either mode, but you don't see still photographers walking around with their arms permanently stretched out in front of them like videographers which surely must be tiring after a while. I'm sure that's the point Peter Budd was making.

Exactly

-- hide signature --

Peter
GMT

 Peter Budd's gear list:Peter Budd's gear list
Nikon D810 Olympus E-M1 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye +11 more
Veloster75 Contributing Member • Posts: 752
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video

I rarely use video,but Im glad its there. I just dont understand these " I dont want video in my camera" posts. Stop your whinning. Its a benefit. In labor negotations, if you take a benefit away, you may never get it back. Is it really killing you people that dont use video to know it's there? If video really took away the power from the camera to do other still things, then maybe you have a point. However, these combined cameras can do amazing things.

 Veloster75's gear list:Veloster75's gear list
Nikon Z7 Tamron SP 70-200 F2.8 G2 Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +10 more
whoosh1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,807
What extra will you get in a model without video?

If there is some tangible benefit - it would be great to have a model without video. Otherwise it will be better to just continue using the current DSLRs for still photograph shooting & ignoring the video buttons/menus - if not interested in video.

Tangible benefits could be:

  • still photographs are better as the sensor can be better optimized for still photograph performance
  • leaving out the video functionality hardware allows significant weight reduction (doubt it)
  • leaving out the video functionality hardware allows addition of some new still photography features that would not be feasible when the camera has to support video 
 whoosh1's gear list:whoosh1's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G ED +10 more
bikinchris
bikinchris Forum Pro • Posts: 21,549
Re: Please Mr Nikon, no video
1

cosmicnode wrote:

NickZ2016 wrote:

cosmicnode wrote:

of course they neglect to consider the development costs of adding this feature to any camera, n

The point people have been trying to make is removing it will cost more.

Of course if you were right Ford would be offering three seat cars for less then four

Ford are good at charging more for less features.

Examples, please. His analogy is pretty good. This discussion is like complaining for features on a car that come standard. It's like saying you want a 4 cylinder car, but the company only sells 6 cylinder ones.

The "extra" cost of building in video is negligible.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

-- hide signature --

Whenever I see an adult on a bicycle, I have hope for the human race." ~ H.G. Wells

 bikinchris's gear list:bikinchris's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D4S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF VR +1 more
Josh152 Senior Member • Posts: 2,094
Re: Nice to have the extra button

Bill1000Evening wrote:

I have a Df and a D800 and I never shoot video - but it's great to have the button on the 800 - programmed to control ISO. I use it all the time.

Yep a lot of people do that.  I don't think it's any coincidence the mode button was moved to the turret and that the ISO button has moved to that same area on the D5 and D500 and probably the D810 successor.  It is a much more logical place for it than the turret.  It can be operated one handed and is now in the same area and on the same side as the the shutter and aperture controls.  So the 3 settings you usually change the most while shooting are now grouped together on the right side and operated with the same hand.  Looks like it will also be easier to use with gloves on than the flat buttons my D800 has on the turret.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads