Why the hate for video capable DSLRs?

[Astro]

i don´t care about video.. but as a pro you might have too:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9982656990/no-future-in-photojournalism-interview-dan-chung

[D.Sim]

Is the 50D a better still camera than the 7D? 

Yes 

I'm a still photographer, And every time i try to make a video it looks like an epileptic with parkinsons got hold of the camera. so I have alot of respect for the skill it take to make good video. Its something i cant do and right now dont have the time to get a handle on. I dont mind either way having the video on DSLRs I think its mostly a software thing, as long as they dont go re-arranging buttons and controls to suit video and cause problems for still shooting its all good.

I think wickidwombat has it right... its not impacting the camera itself (specifically anyway), and shouldn't be too much of an issue.
Where some people get the hate from is that some people think the resources put into it takes away from the stills - probably not true, it'll actually increase the importance of ISO performance IMO, and theres also the issue of having (maybe in the future) to design the said dSLR around video capabilities.

Do I shoot video myself? hardly - I'm probably worse off than wickidwombat in that my weak point is fine motor movement, I cant eat with chopsticks without it rattling away. does that stop me from shooting video once in a while on borrowed equipment? Nope - theres a place for video - just as there is a place for stills.

by all means - go video - just not at the cost of stills 

[Jedifarce]

I think you got flamed because of the threat to switch to Nikon. A brand who does the exact same thing regarding video as Canon. We are alllll tired of "switching brand threats"

I never understood the Canon-Nikon conflict mentality especially seeing how I use Nikon primes with my 5D.

[EYEONE]

Is the 50D a better still camera than the 7D? 

Yes 

Ha, ok man. 

[KeithR]

"A photograph has much more meaning, I'm just not interested in video."
 - Every artsy person, wearing an artsy hoodie and artsy glasses

Don't do that, sunshine - you're just showing your ignorance.

I'm not remotely "as described" - I'm a bird photographer who also does a bit of action photography - stuff like mountain biking, kite jumping/kite surfing, jet-skiing, some rugby, some martial arts, and I'll tell you why I photograph, rather than video these things.

Because - depending on the subject matter, but in general - video is boring.

People can appreciate an image of a bird caught in flight, but a video of the same birds tracking across the screen? Boring.   

A mountain bike caught in mid jump is good subject matter: a video of the same thing? Boring.

Someone at the top of a big air kite jump is a cool image: the ten minutes of standing round under the kite waiting for just the right minute to "pop"? Boring.

And so on. Yes, it's eminently possible to edit sequences into something more useful, but - frankly - I'm not really interested in Youtube, thanks. Let's be honest: 99.9% of the stuff on Youtube et al is crap. By all means contribute to that figure if you feel the need, but I don't.

So - just for the avoidance of any doubt - there are perfectly valid use-cases for photographs over videos that don't involve "artsy". Just because you don't understand that, it doesn't give you the right to be a smartarse about people who don't think your way.

[briansquibb]

Is the 50D a better still camera than the 7D? 

Yes 

Ha, ok man. 

... if the key criteria is lack of weight ...

 

[CJRodgers]

"A photograph has much more meaning, I'm just not interested in video."
 - Every artsy person, wearing an artsy hoodie and artsy glasses

Don't do that, sunshine - you're just showing your ignorance.

I'm not remotely "as described" - I'm a bird photographer who also does a bit of action photography - stuff like mountain biking, kite jumping/kite surfing, jet-skiing, some rugby, some martial arts, and I'll tell you why I photograph, rather than video these things.

Because - depending on the subject matter, but in general - video is boring.

People can appreciate an image of a bird caught in flight, but a video of the same birds tracking across the screen? Boring.   

A mountain bike caught in mid jump is good subject matter: a video of the same thing? Boring.

Someone at the top of a big air kite jump is a cool image: the ten minutes of standing round under the kite waiting for just the right minute to "pop"? Boring.

And so on. Yes, it's eminently possible to edit sequences into something more useful, but - frankly - I'm not really interested in Youtube, thanks. Let's be honest: 99.9% of the stuff on Youtube et al is crap. By all means contribute to that figure if you feel the need, but I don't.

So - just for the avoidance of any doubt - there are perfectly valid use-cases for photographs over videos that don't involve "artsy". Just because you don't understand that, it doesn't give you the right to be a smartarse about people who don't think your way.

Surley this completely depends on how its edited?! I LOVE watching vidoes of mountain bikes and things such as kite surfing and all that, especially when its been ran through twixtor (slow motion interpolation programme) and edited well with good music. It looks incredible. Check out some the redbull stunt stuff if you can be just a bit more open minded about it.

I like watching videos of birds flying through the air when its done well. BBC documenty team always seem to do a good job of making their videos on animals in their natural habitat interesting, so im sure its not impossible for someone else to do the same with the right editing and narrative.

I agree if someone puts no effort in at all and literally just films a subject such as bird flying about for 10 seconds yes it is boring, but thats the same as people taking very average photographs with no effort or though about how to make the subject interesting.

[daveswan]

There's something else besides "birds in flight" "mountain bike jumping" etc.

It's called "narative". Ever heard of it?

The cinematic DoF that comes with a 35mm (Cine) sized sensor is wonderful for narative. No you don't have to use super-shallow DoF all the time, it's a creative tool, same as grading in post.

I'm thinking a lot of the "hate" I'm seeing is the mirror image of the cine-snobery I find on certain cine forums I go to, sort of "Thicko cheapskate photographers, why don't they use Cooke S5 lenses (At £20,000 a time)"

[Jedifarce]

The cinematic DoF that comes with a 35mm (Cine) sized sensor is wonderful for narative. No you don't have to use super-shallow DoF all the time, it's a creative tool, same as grading in post.

Pro's such as Philip Bloom and Shane Hurlbut don't never shoot at anything below f/4. I was kinda suprised Shane Hurlbut encourages filming at F/5.6

[Policar]

The cinematic DoF that comes with a 35mm (Cine) sized sensor is wonderful for narative. No you don't have to use super-shallow DoF all the time, it's a creative tool, same as grading in post.

Pro's such as Philip Bloom and Shane Hurlbut don't never shoot at anything below f/4. I was kinda suprised Shane Hurlbut encourages filming at F/5.6

Day exteriors in narrative film are usually shot between t4 and t8 (there are tons of exceptions, Social Network way more open, New World way more stopped down) for the sake of the AC's sanity and so it doesn't all look soft and mushy.  Taking into account the size of a 5d sensor relative to super35 film, that would be more like f5.6 and 1/2 to f 11 and 1/2.  Plus that's where lenses perform best.

You can shoot whatever you want, though.  Social Network was almost all t1.3 (f1.2 or f1.1 likely).  On a 5d that feels like f2, maybe?

[Axilrod]

My beloved "live view", which I consider a must-have for manual focusing from a tripod, is also a side-effect of the video function.

That's interesting, since a 50D had live-view and did NOT come with video..... 

[HurtinMinorKey]

People can appreciate an image of a bird caught in flight, but a video of the same birds tracking across the screen? Boring.   

If you put up your still of a bird in flight next to my video shot at 300fps played back at 24fps, I'm gonna get more viewers.

[daveswan]

My beloved "live view", which I consider a must-have for manual focusing from a tripod, is also a side-effect of the video function.

That's interesting, since a 50D had live-view and did NOT come with video.....

Magic Lantern has enabled video on the 50D
QED

People can appreciate an image of a bird caught in flight, but a video of the same birds tracking across the screen? Boring.   

If you put up your still of a bird in flight next to my video shot at 300fps played back at 24fps, I'm gonna get more viewers.

And have you seen footage of starlings coming in to roost? Beautiful ever-changing patterns, or slo-mo of a fish-eagle taking a fish in flight?

As I said, the mirror image of the cine-snobbery I see on other forums.

[dilbert]

Just would prefer that rather than put all the video stuff in there, they just give us better cameras...more megapixels, better AF, faster frame rates...you can't do it all well, I would just prefer, as a photographer that they give me a better camera and stop feeing features I don't want...

I got flamed for my last such post, but while I understand some people want these features I think Canon should do three things.

Have a line of pro video cameras, have pro level dslrs and maybe a few hybrid options...

Let the flaming begin.

Do you use every feature on your camera?
Or are there some that you don't use?

I know that there are many features that my digital cameras have that I don't use.
But do I wish that they weren't there?
No.
Why not?
Because they don't tailor make camera for me, they make a camera for everyone all over the world and everyone has different needs. So if only the features I wanted were there, only people that use a camera like me would be it and that'd make it less profitable for them to make.

I'd encourage you to be more open minded about cameras.

[Ryusui]

I know that there are many features that my digital cameras have that I don't use.
But do I wish that they weren't there?
No.
Why not?
Because they don't tailor make camera for me, they make a camera for everyone all over the world and everyone has different needs.

::applause::