brucebil

How many people really use the video feature of your DSLR and appreciate having it. I have a Canon 5D Mk 4 and never use the video and never will. I would so appreciate it being removed and either the price lowered or other features added. Also it is just something else to go wrong. Just interested, not looking for a debate.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

Have never used mine -- ether the 5DMkII or the 5Ds
However glad it's there -- never know I may use it some day

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I've been tempted, but to this date haven't used it on either my D800e or D850. I've had the 800e for at least a couple of years.

Now, I've actually started learning my way around iMovie. But, that's for a future project and most likely involving a video camera.
--Bob

JoAnneK01 Loc: Lahaina, Hawaii

Have used my video twice and glad it was there. Been using a DSLR for about 21 years.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

I've only used mine to verify how it works.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I haven't used mine, but I would like to play with it someday. But I can't understand people who object to it being there. The idea that not having it should cost less or allow other features has been repeatedly debunked - it's just some extra software, and having the same model available with it and without it isn't practical. Some people will actually spend more money to get a camera without video. I can't understand that. I'm sure most digital cameras today have some features that some people don't ever use.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

I wouldn't buy a camera without video. I use it frequently.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

I use mine. (Nikon D810)
It has a much different look than the dedicated handy-cams.
Have to use an auxiliary mic and recording device ‘cause the on-board system is awful. I’ve shot several jobs with mine. It’s a whole different game, but it’s fun.

Nikon offers (offered?) the DF which had no video recording option. I don’t think adding video costs that much more to a camera’s price.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I've not used mine yet. Guess I should try it to see how it works.

Properframe Loc: US Virginia

I use the video on my 850 for only one thing - slow motion video. First and foremost the results stop you in your tracks. I make the analogy to filmed movies. When the director/producer wants to grab the audiences attention or a particular action scene effect is highlighted they edit in the slo mo footage. I shoot mostly nature and animals are pretty much full time special effects actors. Polar bears shaking off snow, elephants drinking a falling stream of water, leopards stalking - heck I have stationary leopards and the breeze slowly moving grass all around them just stops you in wonder.
I have learned that a videographer has a whole quiver of arrows to master over and above a photographer in some respects.
One other small benefit with slo mo is it has no sound - which when you are shooting a lion and all the clicking lenses and vocalizations are happening it is nice not to have any sound editing to do. Because as a photographer I don't want a part time sound editing job. Also the viewer mentally expects there not to be a contemporaneous sound track with slow motion.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

I really do use the video feature of my cameras, appreciate having it and enjoy video editing.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

My Nikon Df doesn't have video.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

And you paid more for not having it.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Do you mean if it had video it would have cost less?

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

I would think so --- kinda like asking for crank role down windows on a new car when all cars are mass produced with electric windows