November 21, 2014, 07:23:27 PM

Author Topic: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg  (Read 30465 times)

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2539
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #90 on: January 23, 2014, 10:45:56 AM »
How hard is it to achieve 4k video?  I was watching a digrev tv episode where a guy had to shoot a film using a Barbie camera... and gee said that his galaxy note could do 4k... it might not have been a note, but something similar.  Certainly we have the pixels for it and then some... so what is the bottle neck in the slr world... oh... and I absolutely would not about at 4k for home videos.  I feel I am assuming previous hard drive space just using 30 fps 1080p footage of my daughter sucking at basketball.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #90 on: January 23, 2014, 10:45:56 AM »

Thecrispyone

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 2
  • T4i
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #91 on: January 23, 2014, 12:21:42 PM »
1080/60p is also cool but 120p is much cooler. So if they are boasting about video capabilities, I would really expect something as good or even better than the 1D-C but not so much that its out-shinning it.
+1
As for the microphone, right now an external mic isn't really an option for me because I need to shoot with a extremely light and compact setup. Plus it wouldn't even fit in my current camera backpack. But I would like to upgrade to one in the future when that option becomes more viable. Thanks for your input! :)

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2539
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #92 on: January 23, 2014, 12:27:08 PM »
1080/60p is also cool but 120p is much cooler. So if they are boasting about video capabilities, I would really expect something as good or even better than the 1D-C but not so much that its out-shinning it.
+1
As for the microphone, right now an external mic isn't really an option for me because I need to shoot with a extremely light and compact setup. Plus it wouldn't even fit in my current camera backpack. But I would like to upgrade to one in the future when that option becomes more viable. Thanks for your input! :)
Maybe they are just using marketing hype to get free advertising.  Maybe what they are saying is,

UNLIKE ANYTHING EVER BEFORE, within the market category...
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

mkabi

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #93 on: January 23, 2014, 01:10:32 PM »

UNLIKE ANYTHING EVER BEFORE, within the market category...

lol...

How hard is it to achieve 4k video?  I was watching a digrev tv episode where a guy had to shoot a film using a Barbie camera... and gee said that his galaxy note could do 4k... it might not have been a note, but something similar.  Certainly we have the pixels for it and then some... so what is the bottle neck in the slr world... oh... and I absolutely would not about at 4k for home videos.  I feel I am assuming previous hard drive space just using 30 fps 1080p footage of my daughter sucking at basketball.

I don't think its much, I mean look at the Go Pro Hero 3/3+ Black edition...
http://gopro.com/cameras/hd-hero3-black-edition#technical-specs

It supports 4K, 2.7K, 1440p 1080/60p...

Only problem is its tiny and no interchageable lenses.... oh wait... no... this guy made it possible to change lenses: http://www.back-bone.ca/

Its still tiny though! Annoyingly tiny.

Canon 7D - EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L, EF - 20mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 100mm f/2.0, Custom Cine 50mm & Custom Cine 35mm

jiphoto

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #94 on: January 23, 2014, 03:54:05 PM »
How hard is it to achieve 4k video?  I was watching a digrev tv episode where a guy had to shoot a film using a Barbie camera... and gee said that his galaxy note could do 4k... it might not have been a note, but something similar.  Certainly we have the pixels for it and then some... so what is the bottle neck in the slr world... oh... and I absolutely would not about at 4k for home videos.  I feel I am assuming previous hard drive space just using 30 fps 1080p footage of my daughter sucking at basketball.

I don't think its much, I mean look at the Go Pro Hero 3/3+ Black edition...
http://gopro.com/cameras/hd-hero3-black-edition#technical-specs

It supports 4K, 2.7K, 1440p 1080/60p...

Only problem is its tiny and no interchageable lenses.... oh wait... no... this guy made it possible to change lenses: http://www.back-bone.ca/

Its still tiny though! Annoyingly tiny.
The GoPro 3+ isn't a fair comparison, since it only offers usable (30p or higher) video at 2.7K and lower resolutions.  It's also worth noting that the 1DX can do 18MP stills at 14fps, comparable to the GoPro's true 4K setting.  The GoPro is impressive because of its 1080/60p and 720/120p modes - that's more reasonable to compare.  Canon will probably reserve 4K for its significantly more expensive models, meaning the C series, and instead work on more marketable modes like 1080/60 or 720/120, since most consumers don't have a 4K display anyway, but would like more slow-motion capabilities.  The 7D replacement would be a good place to add those capabilities, since we're expecting dual processors and hence significantly more computing power than the 70D.
7D, 50 f/1.8 II, 20-35 f/3.5-4.5, 24-105 f/4L, 100-400L, 580EX II

mkabi

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #95 on: January 23, 2014, 04:47:01 PM »
How hard is it to achieve 4k video?  I was watching a digrev tv episode where a guy had to shoot a film using a Barbie camera... and gee said that his galaxy note could do 4k... it might not have been a note, but something similar.  Certainly we have the pixels for it and then some... so what is the bottle neck in the slr world... oh... and I absolutely would not about at 4k for home videos.  I feel I am assuming previous hard drive space just using 30 fps 1080p footage of my daughter sucking at basketball.

I don't think its much, I mean look at the Go Pro Hero 3/3+ Black edition...
http://gopro.com/cameras/hd-hero3-black-edition#technical-specs

It supports 4K, 2.7K, 1440p 1080/60p...

Only problem is its tiny and no interchageable lenses.... oh wait... no... this guy made it possible to change lenses: http://www.back-bone.ca/

Its still tiny though! Annoyingly tiny.
The GoPro 3+ isn't a fair comparison, since it only offers usable (30p or higher) video at 2.7K and lower resolutions.  It's also worth noting that the 1DX can do 18MP stills at 14fps, comparable to the GoPro's true 4K setting.  The GoPro is impressive because of its 1080/60p and 720/120p modes - that's more reasonable to compare.  Canon will probably reserve 4K for its significantly more expensive models, meaning the C series, and instead work on more marketable modes like 1080/60 or 720/120, since most consumers don't have a 4K display anyway, but would like more slow-motion capabilities.  The 7D replacement would be a good place to add those capabilities, since we're expecting dual processors and hence significantly more computing power than the 70D.

Here is the question, can Canon afford to keep 4K off their future models?
I mean, ok... lets ask another question... is 4K a fad or something that is sustainable until at least 8K comes along?

If 4K is a fad... then no problem... lets move on.
If 4K is not a fad and every consumer will embrace it, can something like the 7DII afford to not have that feature? Given that 4K was introduced recently (within the last year or two), and supposing everyone will go out and buy a 4K TV, Canon will have to wait 4-5 years before they introduce it in a 7DIII (or whatever other name - Mark II).

Canon 7D - EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L, EF - 20mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 100mm f/2.0, Custom Cine 50mm & Custom Cine 35mm

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3457
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #96 on: January 23, 2014, 05:15:38 PM »
How hard is it to achieve 4k video?  I was watching a digrev tv episode where a guy had to shoot a film using a Barbie camera... and gee said that his galaxy note could do 4k... it might not have been a note, but something similar.  Certainly we have the pixels for it and then some... so what is the bottle neck in the slr world... oh... and I absolutely would not about at 4k for home videos.  I feel I am assuming previous hard drive space just using 30 fps 1080p footage of my daughter sucking at basketball.

I don't think its much, I mean look at the Go Pro Hero 3/3+ Black edition...
http://gopro.com/cameras/hd-hero3-black-edition#technical-specs

It supports 4K, 2.7K, 1440p 1080/60p...

Only problem is its tiny and no interchageable lenses.... oh wait... no... this guy made it possible to change lenses: http://www.back-bone.ca/

Its still tiny though! Annoyingly tiny.
The GoPro 3+ isn't a fair comparison, since it only offers usable (30p or higher) video at 2.7K and lower resolutions.  It's also worth noting that the 1DX can do 18MP stills at 14fps, comparable to the GoPro's true 4K setting.  The GoPro is impressive because of its 1080/60p and 720/120p modes - that's more reasonable to compare.  Canon will probably reserve 4K for its significantly more expensive models, meaning the C series, and instead work on more marketable modes like 1080/60 or 720/120, since most consumers don't have a 4K display anyway, but would like more slow-motion capabilities.  The 7D replacement would be a good place to add those capabilities, since we're expecting dual processors and hence significantly more computing power than the 70D.

Here is the question, can Canon afford to keep 4K off their future models?
I mean, ok... lets ask another question... is 4K a fad or something that is sustainable until at least 8K comes along?

If 4K is a fad... then no problem... lets move on.
If 4K is not a fad and every consumer will embrace it, can something like the 7DII afford to not have that feature? Given that 4K was introduced recently (within the last year or two), and supposing everyone will go out and buy a 4K TV, Canon will have to wait 4-5 years before they introduce it in a 7DIII (or whatever other name - Mark II).
Look at a 60D...it can handle 1920x1080 no problems.... it can read the sensor 60 times per second no problems...

To go to 2K video at 60 frames per second you will need twice the computing power (easy) and probably 1.8X the storage speed (easy with a good card)

To go to 4K video at 30 frames per second you need 4X the computing power (easy) and probably 3.5X the storage speed (could be done with a fast compact flash card, SD is out)

To go to 4K video at 60 frames per second you need 8X the computing power (easy with dual Digic5+ or dual Digic6) and around 7X the storage speed. SD and compact flash are both out.... it will have to be cFast or something else...

You could reduce storage requirements by compressing it more heavily, but if you do, there goes quality.... and if you do not have quality, why bother with 4K video in the first place?

If the 7D2 supports 4K video, odds are very high that it will take a cFast and an SD card for storage...
« Last Edit: January 23, 2014, 05:17:41 PM by Don Haines »
The best camera is the one in your hands

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #96 on: January 23, 2014, 05:15:38 PM »

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2539
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #97 on: January 23, 2014, 05:16:33 PM »
I could tell the difference between up converted 480p and 1080I...I could definitely tell the difference between 480I and any high Def feed.

I don't think 4k is that noticeable v 1080p... I wouldn't call it a fad, but it won't take hold the way hdtv did. 

How hard is it to achieve 4k video?  I was watching a digrev tv episode where a guy had to shoot a film using a Barbie camera... and gee said that his galaxy note could do 4k... it might not have been a note, but something similar.  Certainly we have the pixels for it and then some... so what is the bottle neck in the slr world... oh... and I absolutely would not about at 4k for home videos.  I feel I am assuming previous hard drive space just using 30 fps 1080p footage of my daughter sucking at basketball.

I don't think its much, I mean look at the Go Pro Hero 3/3+ Black edition...
http://gopro.com/cameras/hd-hero3-black-edition#technical-specs

It supports 4K, 2.7K, 1440p 1080/60p...

Only problem is its tiny and no interchageable lenses.... oh wait... no... this guy made it possible to change lenses: http://www.back-bone.ca/

Its still tiny though! Annoyingly tiny.
The GoPro 3+ isn't a fair comparison, since it only offers usable (30p or higher) video at 2.7K and lower resolutions.  It's also worth noting that the 1DX can do 18MP stills at 14fps, comparable to the GoPro's true 4K setting.  The GoPro is impressive because of its 1080/60p and 720/120p modes - that's more reasonable to compare.  Canon will probably reserve 4K for its significantly more expensive models, meaning the C series, and instead work on more marketable modes like 1080/60 or 720/120, since most consumers don't have a 4K display anyway, but would like more slow-motion capabilities.  The 7D replacement would be a good place to add those capabilities, since we're expecting dual processors and hence significantly more computing power than the 70D.

Here is the question, can Canon afford to keep 4K off their future models?
I mean, ok... lets ask another question... is 4K a fad or something that is sustainable until at least 8K comes along?

If 4K is a fad... then no problem... lets move on.
If 4K is not a fad and every consumer will embrace it, can something like the 7DII afford to not have that feature? Given that 4K was introduced recently (within the last year or two), and supposing everyone will go out and buy a 4K TV, Canon will have to wait 4-5 years before they introduce it in a 7DIII (or whatever other name - Mark II).
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2539
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #98 on: January 23, 2014, 05:25:56 PM »
I'd like to say for the record that if the c series is actually holding us back and bottle necking the technology... I'm a bit ticked.

That would be like Ford limiting the horsepower in the truck line because it would equal the girl efficiency of their dump trucks. 

Yes they are similar.. yes one costs a ton more, yes they do different jobs,

I'm sure there are better analogies... and I don't even like video...but I don't want to stills side to suffer.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

vscd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 185
  • 5DC
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #99 on: January 23, 2014, 05:58:56 PM »
<jehova>There is no need for any videomode in a DSLR, grab a Cam instead</jehova> or with other words <unix>one job, one tool</unix>.    ::)
5DC, 24-85, 85 1.2L II, 80-200 2.8L, 100 2.8L IS, 14 2.8, 35 1.4, 75-300 IS, 40STM

pj1974

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
    • A selection of my photos (copyright)
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #100 on: January 23, 2014, 10:06:12 PM »

.....

Look at a 60D...it can handle 1920x1080 no problems.... it can read the sensor 60 times per second no problems...

To go to 2K video at 60 frames per second you will need twice the computing power (easy) and probably 1.8X the storage speed (easy with a good card)

To go to 4K video at 30 frames per second you need 4X the computing power (easy) and probably 3.5X the storage speed (could be done with a fast compact flash card, SD is out)

To go to 4K video at 60 frames per second you need 8X the computing power (easy with dual Digic5+ or dual Digic6) and around 7X the storage speed. SD and compact flash are both out.... it will have to be cFast or something else...

You could reduce storage requirements by compressing it more heavily, but if you do, there goes quality.... and if you do not have quality, why bother with 4K video in the first place?

If the 7D2 supports 4K video, odds are very high that it will take a cFast and an SD card for storage...

Don, I really like so many of your posts here, they are clearly worded, well formatted & thoughtfully written.  The above is one great example.

I have seen 4K (in a specialist store, on top end equipment), and it's great...  particularly if the screen is large. I do think 4K will be something more mainstream- ie wealthier households in the west will be having it more commonly in the next 5 years or so (but it will probably be somewhat of a delayed take-up).

What I do wonder, is where is Canon (& other manufacturers) seeing (or 'making') the bottleneck? If the above is true, and 4K has historically been unachievable due to card write speed? CFast sounds like a possibility (as does USB3) for Canon's next 'higher end' / XD (ie single digit series) of cameras... eg 7DmkII, or 5DmkIV, or ID___

I have a 7D, and enjoy it immensely, but I only use video very rarely. I prefer taking / making still photography to videos myself, though I appreciate good video that others take/make.

If Canon will come out with clean, great 60fps 4K video, I do expect it will probably be on their 1DC or dedicated video body range, and then 'trickle down' to the 'normal' DSLR range.

Let's see what the future holds... in the meantime, enjoy your photography / videography!

Paul :)
I'm not a brand-fanatic. What I do appreciate is using my 7D and 350D cameras along with a host of lenses & many accessories to capture quality photos, and share with friends.

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3457
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #101 on: January 23, 2014, 10:29:25 PM »

.....

Look at a 60D...it can handle 1920x1080 no problems.... it can read the sensor 60 times per second no problems...

To go to 2K video at 60 frames per second you will need twice the computing power (easy) and probably 1.8X the storage speed (easy with a good card)

To go to 4K video at 30 frames per second you need 4X the computing power (easy) and probably 3.5X the storage speed (could be done with a fast compact flash card, SD is out)

To go to 4K video at 60 frames per second you need 8X the computing power (easy with dual Digic5+ or dual Digic6) and around 7X the storage speed. SD and compact flash are both out.... it will have to be cFast or something else...

You could reduce storage requirements by compressing it more heavily, but if you do, there goes quality.... and if you do not have quality, why bother with 4K video in the first place?

If the 7D2 supports 4K video, odds are very high that it will take a cFast and an SD card for storage...

Don, I really like so many of your posts here, they are clearly worded, well formatted & thoughtfully written.  The above is one great example.

I have seen 4K (in a specialist store, on top end equipment), and it's great...  particularly if the screen is large. I do think 4K will be something more mainstream- ie wealthier households in the west will be having it more commonly in the next 5 years or so (but it will probably be somewhat of a delayed take-up).

What I do wonder, is where is Canon (& other manufacturers) seeing (or 'making') the bottleneck? If the above is true, and 4K has historically been unachievable due to card write speed? CFast sounds like a possibility (as does USB3) for Canon's next 'higher end' / XD (ie single digit series) of cameras... eg 7DmkII, or 5DmkIV, or ID___

I have a 7D, and enjoy it immensely, but I only use video very rarely. I prefer taking / making still photography to videos myself, though I appreciate good video that others take/make.

If Canon will come out with clean, great 60fps 4K video, I do expect it will probably be on their 1DC or dedicated video body range, and then 'trickle down' to the 'normal' DSLR range.

Let's see what the future holds... in the meantime, enjoy your photography / videography!

Paul :)
Thank you for the kind words... I try to use logic, but some many subjects are very emotionally charged....

As I've said before, I shoot with a 60D. The first time I shot with a borrowed 7D I knew that I bought the wrong camera and have been waiting (somewhat impatiently) for the 7D2 to come out. I did not feel like the 7D was enough of an upgrade to warrant my getting it, despite the fact that it is what I should have bought in the first place...

For example, video is an emotionally charged topic. Personally, I seldom use it, but would have thought long and hard about getting a camera without it. There are many who feel that Canon should just make "pure" cameras and leave video out... but at what cost? Yes, it does take away some R+D resources from stills and yes, it does increase the complexity of cameras, but what happens if Canon leaves it out? The great buying masses would go elsewhere because rightly or wrongly, they think they need the feature, and without it Canon's sales would plummet, economies of scale would be lost, there would be far less R+D money, and the company would implode.... a small price to pay (actually it's savings) for features I could live without, but in reality, I find nice to have.
The best camera is the one in your hands

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2539
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #102 on: January 23, 2014, 11:29:09 PM »
Thank you for the kind words... I try to use logic, but some many subjects are very emotionally charged....

As I've said before, I shoot with a 60D. The first time I shot with a borrowed 7D I knew that I bought the wrong camera and have been waiting (somewhat impatiently) for the 7D2 to come out. I did not feel like the 7D was enough of an upgrade to warrant my getting it, despite the fact that it is what I should have bought in the first place...

For example, video is an emotionally charged topic. Personally, I seldom use it, but would have thought long and hard about getting a camera without it. There are many who feel that Canon should just make "pure" cameras and leave video out... but at what cost? Yes, it does take away some R+D resources from stills and yes, it does increase the complexity of cameras, but what happens if Canon leaves it out? The great buying masses would go elsewhere because rightly or wrongly, they think they need the feature, and without it Canon's sales would plummet, economies of scale would be lost, there would be far less R+D money, and the company would implode.... a small price to pay (actually it's savings) for features I could live without, but in reality, I find nice to have.

I upgraded from my xs to the 60D primarily because of it's video function.  I didn't want to buy a video camera that cost $300 when I could have sold the xs and used that 300 towards the 60D. 

Video, especially now that very few of us put the video on dvd's/blu-rays/physical media, is just easier to capture and upload.  I liked the editing... but that has fallen to the wayside now. 

For me... I can't have a single body in my house (only body in my house) that doesn't have video... because I do need it... not a ton... but I do need it to capture my 5 month old and my 125 month old.  So if Canon were to drop video entirely... I would probably have to jump ship in 5 years when I out grow my mkiii... I know it isn't likely that they will drop it... but it is what it is.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #102 on: January 23, 2014, 11:29:09 PM »

AvTvM

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #103 on: January 24, 2014, 03:52:28 AM »
...
I upgraded from my xs to the 60D primarily because of it's video function.  I didn't want to buy a video camera that cost $300  ...
...
For me... I can't have a single body in my house (only body in my house) that doesn't have video... because I do need it... not a ton... but I do need it to capture my 5 month old and my 125 month old.  So if Canon were to drop video entirely... I would probably have to jump ship in 5 years when I out grow my mkiii... I know it isn't likely that they will drop it... but it is what it is.

This is exactly why I would like all DSLRs to come in a "basic" stills-only version without video capturing capability [hardware disabled, easy to do]. And for those who really want or "need" steills and video in one single device, should be offered a video-enabled version of those cameras ... of course at a surcharge. Maybe 10% more, maybe 20% more or any other reasonable number, that would still make "one dual-use camera" a better deal than "two single-use cameras" (or rather camera systems). 

For every other product on earth the principle is clear: more features and/or more convenience = higher price.   
We can order cars in a basic, "no frills version" or "fully loaded". "2 wheel drive" or "all-wheel drive". Stronger engine, more "extras" ... no problem. But ... not for free. 
You want it  ... you select it ... you pay for it ... you get it.

Only video-users clamor for their extra video-capability and single-device convenience in EVERY camera ... and they DEMAND it "FOR FREE".

Now, as that demands shifts to ever more advanced video capturing (4k, 8k, 60fps, 120fps, 1000fps?) ... it gets very evident, that video capability in DSLRs does NOT come for free, but does cause rather significant extra cost: extra R&D effort, more CPU-power, stronger hardware, larger and faster storage media, additional firmware and software ... all of this has to be designed, developed, tested, manufactured, implemented and serviced. It requires extra capital and extra labor from (highly skilled) humans, who certainly do not work "for free". But the extra feature only wanted by a minority of buyers should be "free of charge", "all inclusive". Paid for by the majority of stills idiots, who neither need nor want video capability in their stills cameras, but are not given a choice. Unlike cars, we only  get our cameras "fully video loaded", and have to swallow the price for it. 

This is the single reason, why the topic of "video-capable DSLRs" is "emotional". Because the way (all) camera makers are currently dealing with the market demand for "dual-use cameras" is very UNFAIR towards those wanting cameras that are fully optimized towards one single use scenario, that DSLRs were really designed for: capturing still images.

The argument will be less pronounced when the shift to mirrorless cameras has happended, since these cameras are video-enabled by their very design [for viewfinder&backscreen image] without mechanical mirrors blocking the lightpath. Nevertheless, implementing video CAPTURE and video OUTPUT causes extra cost and is an extra feature and extra convenience. It should therfore come as a choice for those who want or need it AND ARE WILLING TO PAY at least a modest surcharge for it.  :)

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2539
    • View Profile
Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #104 on: January 24, 2014, 07:13:16 AM »
...
I upgraded from my xs to the 60D primarily because of it's video function.  I didn't want to buy a video camera that cost $300  ...
...
For me... I can't have a single body in my house (only body in my house) that doesn't have video... because I do need it... not a ton... but I do need it to capture my 5 month old and my 125 month old.  So if Canon were to drop video entirely... I would probably have to jump ship in 5 years when I out grow my mkiii... I know it isn't likely that they will drop it... but it is what it is.

This is exactly why I would like all DSLRs to come in a "basic" stills-only version without video capturing capability [hardware disabled, easy to do]. And for those who really want or "need" steills and video in one single device, should be offered a video-enabled version of those cameras ... of course at a surcharge. Maybe 10% more, maybe 20% more or any other reasonable number, that would still make "one dual-use camera" a better deal than "two single-use cameras" (or rather camera systems). 

For every other product on earth the principle is clear: more features and/or more convenience = higher price.   
We can order cars in a basic, "no frills version" or "fully loaded". "2 wheel drive" or "all-wheel drive". Stronger engine, more "extras" ... no problem. But ... not for free. 
You want it  ... you select it ... you pay for it ... you get it.

Only video-users clamor for their extra video-capability and single-device convenience in EVERY camera ... and they DEMAND it "FOR FREE".

Now, as that demands shifts to ever more advanced video capturing (4k, 8k, 60fps, 120fps, 1000fps?) ... it gets very evident, that video capability in DSLRs does NOT come for free, but does cause rather significant extra cost: extra R&D effort, more CPU-power, stronger hardware, larger and faster storage media, additional firmware and software ... all of this has to be designed, developed, tested, manufactured, implemented and serviced. It requires extra capital and extra labor from (highly skilled) humans, who certainly do not work "for free". But the extra feature only wanted by a minority of buyers should be "free of charge", "all inclusive". Paid for by the majority of stills idiots, who neither need nor want video capability in their stills cameras, but are not given a choice. Unlike cars, we only  get our cameras "fully video loaded", and have to swallow the price for it. 

This is the single reason, why the topic of "video-capable DSLRs" is "emotional". Because the way (all) camera makers are currently dealing with the market demand for "dual-use cameras" is very UNFAIR towards those wanting cameras that are fully optimized towards one single use scenario, that DSLRs were really designed for: capturing still images.

The argument will be less pronounced when the shift to mirrorless cameras has happended, since these cameras are video-enabled by their very design [for viewfinder&backscreen image] without mechanical mirrors blocking the lightpath. Nevertheless, implementing video CAPTURE and video OUTPUT causes extra cost and is an extra feature and extra convenience. It should therfore come as a choice for those who want or need it AND ARE WILLING TO PAY at least a modest surcharge for it.  :)

I feel as though I've had this conversation before.  Video is software... so it doesn't really cost much to implement into a body with sufficient capabilities.  So you create a body capable of capturing 8 fps at 18mp... and the video capabilities are already built in.

Now... if the manufacturers HAVE to improve the specs to acheive high end video... then there's an argument... but having a stills only camera v. (not the other cameras in the lineup) the competition will severely hurt the stills only market. 

If Canon was the only one making cameras... sure... but they aren't.  Sony will include it... nikon, etc... and if the price is the same and offers what many would consider a significant upgrade of capability, then the stills only will lose. 

I don't think you can make a camera that doesn't provide some level of video.  When I got my XS (I was stupid) and didn't realize it didn't do video.  My old fuji 3mp camera did crappy video... so I was surprised my new slr didn't.  I made do... but if I had known that the nikon d3000 did video and it was the same price as the XS kit I got... then I probably would be at nikon rumors right now. 

We need a poll... but not of the people at canon rumors... but of just everyday soccer mom types who drive the entry level market.  And
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D Mark II on Cameraegg
« Reply #104 on: January 24, 2014, 07:13:16 AM »