1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Do you shoot video with m4/3? [poll]

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by robcee, Feb 20, 2016.

Tags:
  1. Yes, all the time, I need it.

    32 vote(s)
    18.8%
  2. Yes, sometimes, maybe once per month or more.

    37 vote(s)
    21.8%
  3. Yes, occasionally, maybe 2-3x per year.

    27 vote(s)
    15.9%
  4. Rarely. Mostly stills. Less than 2x per year.

    28 vote(s)
    16.5%
  5. No. I'm a stills shooter. (other than to try it out once or twice)

    46 vote(s)
    27.1%
  1. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    289
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    There's some discussion going in the rumored EM1 mk II specs thread about 4K video. I'm taking a stand that 4k isn't as important a feature as all the fuss makes it out to be. Others are saying it's an important feature for future proofing and providing better quality video.

    But I'm curious about how much people really use video with their m43 cameras. Certainly people choose the GH line of Panasonics for video and excellent stills, but what about the rest of us?

    Poll is up for 7 days. Have at it.
     
  2. yendikeno

    yendikeno Mu-43 Regular

    128
    Sep 5, 2015
    Voted - no.
     
  3. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    289
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    I voted Yes, occasionally. Probably more than 2-3x per year but I don't care a great deal about 4K. In some ways it's an anti-feature for me.
     
  4. WendyK

    WendyK Super Moderator

    Feb 28, 2014
    Northern Virginia
    Wendy
    I selected the once/month or so option - I only use it for family documentary purposes, so for me 4K wouldn't be a selling point (I'd rarely use the 4K option for that even if I had it), though I would probably use 4K burst mode occasionally if it was available.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    683
    Sep 20, 2014
    York, UK
    I do shoot video professionally from time to time and if Olympus offered a body that could shoot 4K with a reasonable codec it would be a no-brainer to me.

    While I rarely deliver in 4K (though I have done several times, including for a feature film b-roll) it does give the option for cropping post where subject movement is hard to predict, so framing can't be tight enough while shooting.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. pake

    pake Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 14, 2010
    Finland
    Teemu
    Voted. I shoot video maybe once or twice a month.

    <slightly off-topic>
    My worthless 2 cents on the 4k debate... Adding a 4k to a camera doesn't take anything away from anyone, now does it? I don't really get this anti-4k thing. Personally I don't like touch screens and I've disabled it on my E-M5. But I don't go preaching that cameras shouldn't have touch screen simply because I don't need it. Adding a touch screen doesn't really harm the camera anyway - just like 4k doesn't either. One might claim that it increases the price but at least Olympus overprices their cameras anyway and I honestly don't think the upcoming E-M1II would be any cheaper without 4k video.
    </slightly off-topic>
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  7. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    289
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    OK, fair enough. If the feature were to magically appear on my camera and have no negative drawbacks to adding it, then great. I would happily take it.

    I wrote a blurb about the costs of implementing such a feature and Panasonic's (video) vs. Olympus' (medical imaging) core competencies, but I deleted it. We can all imagine what goes into an engineering project like building video into a camera and honestly, that's their job: Weighing cost to implement features vs demand for those features. We'll see what they give us come September.
     
  8. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    683
    Sep 20, 2014
    York, UK
    The cost to implement a new feature, amortised across all the units shipped with that feature (remember that feature could go in multiple bodies) is likely to be a lot smaller than more people think.

    How much cheaper would your camera be today if they never bothered to develop all the art filters that I will never use?

    Video itself is a by-product of being able to do live-view, which is pretty much needed anyway for mirrorless cameras :) While the refresh rate and codec may vary, it's still the same thing in the end.

    For those complaining about video just think about how far live view has come in the last few years on the back of improving the video capabilities.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Exposed

    Exposed Mu-43 Regular

    136
    Apr 13, 2011
    Central Washington State
    Randy dawson
    I work for a junior A hockey team in the BCHL shooting game footage, interviews and commercials for advertising using a Sony HXR-NX70U. I am in the process of putting together recurtment videos. Doing coach and player interviews, I want a 2 camera shoot so I used my EM-5 and 12-40 lens as a second camera. It worked great. It was just a static shot, no movement, but the colors were great and sharp. I now have the EM-1 and am thinking of trying it as a game footage camera. I would like to try it shooting behind the goal, behind the glass and see what I get. Use manual focus and start and stop after each period. I voted once or more per month but once I see the results of game footage, it may be more.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    289
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    That's a great point. If 4K video ends up giving a better live feed, faster sensor readout then yes, give it to me. And yeah, the development costs are paid for over time, it's just that we're likely to see a bigger hit up front as they try to recoup the costs.

    I don't think the art filters cost a thing. They just installed some free VSCO filters downloaded from the internet. ;)

    I admit I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here. I do shoot video. I have a gopro and routinely record in 2.7K from my drone and it looks a ton better than 1080p footage. I use my olympus for video on occasion and am pretty impressed with the new movie IS modes. So yeah, I'd welcome better video.
     
  11. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    683
    Sep 20, 2014
    York, UK
    Assuming you're right for a second, someone still had to find them, download them, add them to the firmware, add them to the menus, test them, create a new knob on the PEN-F (costs hardware, circuits etc) and of course program that control to work. Not exactly free ;)
     
  12. m4/3boy

    m4/3boy Mu-43 Veteran

    306
    Jul 21, 2013
    No! Never. If I wanted video I would buy a video only camera.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    Vin
    I'm rather baffled by this backlash against video I see often from m4/3 users. 4K doesn't hurt your photographic experience, but increases your video capabilities when needed. How is that a bad thing? I just don't get it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  14. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    Adding 4K or other things that will make it more attractive to people who need that, mean increased sales and thus potential lower price or earlier discounts.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  15. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    In my personal life, I only shoot video very rarely, a couple times a year, maybe. But at certain times it's been necessary at work, and my GX1 was able to give the highest quality video of the options available (camcorders, P&S cameras, or DSLRs).

    I will say though, that adding 4K to a camera makes me much more likely to be interested in shooting video than even the best 1080p, because at that point extracting stills from video is actually usuable, which isn't really the case with a 2MP compressed JPEG from 1080p. The Panasonic 4K Photo features are far more interesting to me than 4K video is inherently.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  16. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    I use the video on the EM5 Mk II and EM1. 1080p is plenty for me at the moment. Not enough client base out there for my market with a 4k capable display.
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. wbuzatto

    wbuzatto Mu-43 Regular

    55
    Nov 17, 2011
    Campinas, SP - Brazil
    Walmyr T. Buzatto
    I even purchased a BMPCC a year ago (1080p) in order to experiment in video post-processing on DaVinci Resolve. I just don't have a 4K-capable display at home, but would love to have the 4K option in a camera. The videos I shot with a drone (DJI Phantom 3 Professional) looked excellent on a Mac Pro screen at 2.7k. If it comes without a significant price increase, why not have 4K on an Olympus camera? Everybody else does, including smartphones!
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. JDK504

    JDK504 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    527
    Jun 28, 2013
    Whether you shoot video or not its a added feature. Does everyone use every single feature on their cameras? NO, then why have them? Well because they are a selling point for those that do use them.

    Why wouldn't you want to get more for the same price? They will not have the new EM1 II without 4k. Olympus would be a fool not to. The new Canon has 4k at 60fps - I'm hoping that Em1 II will have that with no crop

    and the 5 axis! Maybe an update version of the 5 axis? Besides I'll probably mostly just down scale my 4k to 1080p which looks better. Plus ill be able to zoom,slide, etc with the footage I get.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    +1 If nothing else, downsampling to 1080. 4K with usable codec plus IBIS would be a true game changer for m4/3. I am looking at a 5K screen and this is the way forward.
     
  20. TassieFig

    TassieFig Mu-43 Top Veteran

    535
    Oct 28, 2013
    Tasmania, Australia
    Yes, occasionally, maybe 2-3x per year. I use it more as moving pictures and small snippets and not for fully edited video. 1080 is ok with me. I'm not really interested in 4K for video but I would use it to pull stills from. So, by all means, add 4K BUT it will create even more pressure to change tilt screens to a swivels. That, I don't like. On the other hand, I think tilties will go anyway so give us 4K already.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3