PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Ditto

kscanman Loc: Wisconsin

I agree. Nowadays you need some video. I have a band so I need both. It helps when club owners want to see pictures and videos of the band. You can put everything on YouTube. Also, I can use my cameras to do virtual rehearsals if need be.

rkaminer Loc: New York, NY

I lent my camera to my son and he asked how to take a video. I said I don’t know where the video button was, Try the one that has a red dot. He had to search in the manual for the answer. True story.
Does that answer the survey question?

Toment Loc: FL, IL

99.5 Stills

wintermute Loc: Maryland

I use all my cameras about 80% still photography, 20% video.

Side note:
Part of the issue for many amateur photographers to utilize both of these media forms is becoming sufficiently expert with the post-processing software tools used for each medium. I use Capture One 21 for stills, augmented by Luminar 4 and AI. For video I really like DaVinci Resolve. Resolve makes it easy to record in an extended dynamic range "Log" format, and then use Look Up Tables (LUT's) to change the color palette and other parameters of the video to suit the material. All of these software tools are fun to use, not confusing or tedious, as I find Photoshop and Premiere Pro. Just my 2 cents.
Preston

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Photoshop and Premiere use very similar actions. Being very familiar with Photoshop made Premiere relatively intuitive for me to use. And I never use layers in Photoshop, just do cropping and use the sliders to adjust the brightness, contrast, exposure, saturation, temperature, tint, mid tone contrast, shadows and highlights, filters, etc. These all have very similar counterparts in Premiere. I was also very familiar with Adobe Audition for audio editing from back in the days when it was called Cool Edit and was free. I like that Adobe Audition will non destructively edit audio within the Premiere timeline. It makes it easy to match or overlap audio with scene cuts, as well as fade, edit and tweak the audio without leaving the Premiere timeline.

The first time I used Davinci I was very confused. Now I use Davinci just to convert raw CinemaDNG video to a 10 bit mov format which I then edit in Premiere. The conversion is very fast and Davinci even corrects the exposure automatically during the conversion. There's very little if any color grading that needs to be done. I don't use luts, I'd rather make those adjustments myself. Here's an example of a raw video frame before and after automatic conversion by Davinci. The sequence was shot at iso 1600, 24 fps, with daylight in the room and a desk lamp pointed at the CD case. Press download and + to see all the detail.

(Download)

petrochemist Loc: UK

Excluding the times I've pressed the video button by mistake, on my half dozen cameras video takes up less than 0.01% of the files. I've almost certainly taken stills shots that took longer than any of my video shots as well, 30s or 60s long exposures are something I do most years at some point. A 20s video is probably my limit & I can only remember about 3 of these in 10 years.

One of my MFT cameras was clearly optimised with video in mind to the extent it has a dedicated shoot video button that's sadly positioned where it's easily pressed by mistake. Shorter accidental video clips are quite common on that one body and it will have more video files in a year than all my other cameras have in the years I've had them. Other than that it's ideal for when I want a particularly compact camera, so maybe I'll add a drop of hot glue to that wretched video button.

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

75/25. But, with the “new” Fuji XT4, I suspect the video side will increase.

Cheers!

Nikonjon

I Shot 50% still , 50% video with Nikon d600 , works for me .

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Amateurish inclinations? There are certainly professional photographers who do some video, and shoot it with a DSLR. Movies have been shot with DSRs.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

I currently use 100% stills. I’m using my cell phone for sales videos to sell cattle. I would do a better job with my camera for this. Need to learn how.

petrochemist Loc: UK

Indeed, today's DSLRs & mirrorless cameras don't just take good video, they do it better than an affordable dedicated video camera.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Have done a few videos with my DSLR. They were awful. My iPhone does a better job.

If I were to do videos, it would take a lot more practice. At my age I probably don’t have the time to do it right.