Camera Labs

First, I am not knocking anyone that does video with their DSLR! But, I am totally into DSLRs for photography, nothing else. Canon (I know nothing about Nikon) seems to be putting a lot into adding video features, including new lenses, these Step-focusing lenses now. Are all these features they are putting into these DSLRs costing me for something I want nothing to do with? I really have to look at the bottom dollar. I know I still have a way to go with my photography and I'm going to push the limits of my 550D but my dream is a 7D or when they upgrade it. But I'm a 1 income household with my first kid on the way and if it is costing me, I really wish Canon would separate them. Maybe someone could correct me (and make me feel better ), if DSLRs and Digital video is so close it is only the software on the camera that allows it to do both and it is not that much of a cost increase.

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS

There will be some cost to having video, but there will also be some saving. If adding video sells more DSLRs, they get better economies of scale and help prices down. Quantifying either of these will be practically impossible, but overall, I think if they removed video, the price wouldn't change to any significant amount either way. Canon have kinda separated the video and stills lines somewhat, with the EOS Cinema range of bodies more dedicated to video. But that doesn't mean they need to remove all trace of it in DSLRs.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

I don't think so, if anything the Cameras are better and less expensive than before. Look at the movie implementation as a bonus.

All you have to do is look back in history to see the stuff they were selling and at what price. Nobody would give them a second look these days. Here's an example of a EOS D30 for $1,183.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30

I tend to use video very occasionally, usually 30 second snippets of the kids etc, but although it's not of great importance to me, it's definitely a handy feature to have imho.

Mike, with a youngster on the way, I guess there'll be occasions when you'll be glad of it too.

My parents had a cine-camera, nearly 50yrs ago (must have been quite an expensive hobby in those days) & i'm grateful now that I can look back at those old family/events. Great memories ....even though there's no sound.

For the few dollars extra it's gotta be worth it.

_________________

Nikon D800E & D700 bodies + Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f4.5-5.6G ED VR, 50mm F1.4G, 16-35mm f/4G VR, 105 F2.8 VR macro, 70-300mm lenses. A couple of filters, Giotto tripod & ballhead. Lowepro Slingshot 302 AW

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcarlos/

Hi Mike,

Video on DSLRs kinda happened on accident, where an engineer thought of taking video technology they incorporated in point-and-shoot cameras and putting them in a dSLR (5dII) in case people wanted to take casual video clips. Then Vincent Laforet took a gamble and proved these video modes, while just an afterthought, were actually incredible. So as far as the 5dII is concerned, I'm guessing the development cost for the video mode would probably translate to a 5$ increase on a camera that sold for way over 2000$.

Then Nikon got jaleous and started working on their own video modes, mostly just to compete with Canon, but again focusing mostly on what they were good at: insane ISO, but mostly offered 720p options.

Then Sony came in and incorporated technology it had learned from their P&S but also from their camcorders and brought in autofocus.

So basically whenever those big guys bring out video features on their DSLRs, the R&D has mostly been absorbed by either their P&S or their camcorder counterparts.

The only extras you can think of lately is the extra plug they added for audio monitoring (such as headset), which I'm sure costs less than 1$ to manufacture.

That's also why you don't hear of companies such as Hasselblad offering video modes, for them it would probably be a billion dollar investment.

For Canon/Sony/Panasonic, and somewhat for Nikon, it's just a matter of asking an engineer working on the video side to send them some code, then adapt it to the DSLR.

On the other hand, if you're never gonna use video, you might want to skip technology like STM, which I don't think will improve anything on the video side, but I'm looking forward to seeing the test results of the AF system on those lenses, as well as the image quality. In any case, the manufacturers need to add an AF motor anyways, and it's probably not that much more expensive to put an STM instead of USM AF system.

_________________
Cameras: Canon EOS Rebel T2i, Canon S90
Lenses: Tamron: SP70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD, Canon: EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens, 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III, and EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Retired camera: Fujifilm Finepix s700

Thanks for the comments, I guess you all are correct and it is not worth grumbling over, and true, it my come in handy with a new baby that a video might capture something more important than a photo

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS