Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Is there a camera made just for stills?
Page <<first <prev 13 of 14 next>
Mar 22, 2021 15:53:30   #
SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA
 
ItsJim wrote:
Buy a Nikon D700 (The Legend). I've picked up one in the last year. Old yes, and at 12 megapixels not a lot of resolution if you're a peeper, but you can find them aplenty at bargain basement prices. Get one with as little wear as you can find for $400-700. They still work like a charm and like me, couldn't less about video. If I wanted video I'd buy a dedicated video camera. But that's just me.


Even people that shoot primarily video, or just video for that matter, don’t use dedicated video cameras anymore, unless it’s something high end like a Black Magic, Sony, Canon or Panasonic Cinema cameras or really high end like Red or Arri.

Reply
Mar 22, 2021 17:02:13   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Ditto: "If I wanted video I'd buy a dedicated video camera. But that's just me."
ItsJim wrote:
Buy a Nikon D700 (The Legend). I've picked up one in the last year. Old yes, and at 12 megapixels not a lot of resolution if you're a peeper, but you can find them aplenty at bargain basement prices. Get one with as little wear as you can find for $400-700. They still work like a charm and like me, couldn't less about video. If I wanted video I'd buy a dedicated video camera. But that's just me.

Reply
Mar 23, 2021 08:09:57   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Think of it this way. Many people want to do both. OK a lot of people just want the capability even if they may not use it. The choice for the manufacturer is "make a product that does both and allow the user to decide if they want to use it or make one that does both and set up a separate manufacturing process to make a low demand version that only does stills. Obviously the tooling up costs for the low demand version will be added to the cost and the stills only version and it will cost more. A lot more due to the low demand. Since only three people will likely be willing to pay the additional cost it will equal the cost of a factory divided by three.

Reply
 
 
Mar 23, 2021 09:51:11   #
blackest Loc: Ireland
 
lamiaceae wrote:
There had been. Older models as you say. But both still and video features have improved. For Nikon Df has no video. Pentax K-20 and earlier have no video. Likely all still only models would only be had used. Oh, a high end Leica may be still only, check. But $$$$!


Nikon DF kinda has Video, it's possible to record the live view 1080p30 , the camera has no inbuilt ability to record video but it can be recorded unfortunately there is no clean feed. Most camera's with live view have video out, If you look through an EVF you are looking at Video

Reply
Mar 23, 2021 10:32:53   #
User ID
 
anotherview wrote:
So far, the shills for video capability in a digital camera claim two things. One, it would prove not cost effective to produce a stills-only digital camera. Two, it doesn't cost that much to implement video function in a camera given its resident electronics.

I say "claims" because I've seen no numbers that support their arguments.

Putting video capability in a a digital camera may or may not affect its cost.

For sure, though, video in a digital camera presents a starting point to promote videography as another money-making market. Recall the intense advertising that accompanied the introduction of video in digital cameras. This sell-job seemed to appear everywhere, expense be damned. A cameraman just had to own video equipment to stay in the field of photography, and especially so because now clients would demand video. Etc.

Still photographers almost overnight became relegated to the status of has-beens by typists. They hailed the new video era. Etc.

To my knowledge, nobody has examined the matter of still photographers who fell for the hoopla over video and expended big dollars to ride the wave only soon to learn that video required not just more dollars but a shelf full of accessories, to say nothing of the new skill-set necessary to produce worthy videos. Likely, their video gear gathers dust or they sold it.

Since video recording became possible in camera, I have done maybe half a dozen video clips. Videography generates no appeal for me. Blissfully, I take one photograph at a time.
So far, the shills for video capability in a digit... (show quote)


ROTFLMFAO

Thanks for the entertainment in this boring late winter season :-)

Reply
Mar 23, 2021 19:26:13   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Cite sources to validate your opinion.
dsmeltz wrote:
Think of it this way. Many people want to do both. OK a lot of people just want the capability even if they may not use it. The choice for the manufacturer is "make a product that does both and allow the user to decide if they want to use it or make one that does both and set up a separate manufacturing process to make a low demand version that only does stills. Obviously the tooling up costs for the low demand version will be added to the cost and the stills only version and it will cost more. A lot more due to the low demand. Since only three people will likely be willing to pay the additional cost it will equal the cost of a factory divided by three.
Think of it this way. Many people want to do both.... (show quote)

Reply
Mar 23, 2021 19:53:44   #
User ID
 
anotherview wrote:
Cite sources to validate your opinion.

Clearly an unnecessary dodge on your part, attempting to deny the obvious. Pure UHH low grade comedy.

Reply
 
 
Mar 23, 2021 23:48:53   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
How so? Please explain.
User ID wrote:
Clearly an unnecessary dodge on your part, attempting to deny the obvious. Pure UHH low grade comedy.

Reply
Mar 24, 2021 07:23:11   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
anotherview wrote:
How so? Please explain.


Please cite sources for your need and right for an explanation of the obvious.

Reply
Mar 24, 2021 07:59:36   #
Bbarn Loc: Ohio
 
Good evidence of any sort is lacking. The construction characteristics of the Df are quite different than Nikon's other cameras, preventing direct comparisons. And the other majors in the industry don't have a Df type offering to facilitate good comparisons. So we are down to an abundance of suppositions, like the following...

In the current market I doubt anyone is going to design a camera from the groundup without video. And omitting something already developed isn't a way to reduce cost.

Looking at an EOS RP, its not clear how to reduce it's cost by removing video. You might remove a button or two but that won't save much. Removing the LCD entirely could save more, but most still users wouldn't want to give that up. And even if there were an EOS RPnv for 10% less, how many would buy one?

Reply
Mar 24, 2021 08:03:52   #
BebuLamar
 
blackest wrote:
Nikon DF kinda has Video, it's possible to record the live view 1080p30 , the camera has no inbuilt ability to record video but it can be recorded unfortunately there is no clean feed. Most camera's with live view have video out, If you look through an EVF you are looking at Video


That's why I wish the Df doesn't have live view but I do realize if it doesn't the price would be even higher.

Reply
 
 
Mar 24, 2021 18:48:26   #
hrblaine
 
I think the Nikon F fills the bill. Harry

Reply
Mar 24, 2021 18:55:51   #
User ID
 
anotherview wrote:
How so? Please explain.

Low grade cuz it’s barely funny, even blending a bit into sad :-(

Reply
Mar 24, 2021 18:57:39   #
User ID
 
BebuLamar wrote:
That's why I wish the Df doesn't have live view but I do realize if it doesn't the price would be even higher.

Maybe if they added a film chamber it would cost even more than that !

Reply
Mar 24, 2021 23:25:49   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
The one making bald assertions carries the burden of supporting them when asked.

Of course, statements that analytically self-explain themselves may or may not require citation of sources.

Likewise, a statement that proceeds by reason or by empirical methods may stand alone needing no citation. And the same goes for original thinking.

Your attempt at mirroring my questions put to you falls short here.
dsmeltz wrote:
Please cite sources for your need and right for an explanation of the obvious.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 13 of 14 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.