I just dont know about this statement. I mean I do know that everyone keeps saying that photography is increasing about video, that you must get into hybrid photography etc.. although a lot of these people obviously have a vested interest in seeing videos success - not least the camera manufacturers that are all losing money except for Canon, Nikon and Leica. I also understand that if you are a professional photographer you really have to provide a video product to earn a decent living - but I am not and nor are most people on this forum. So there is a lot of pressure to get into 'video' unless you be the equivalent of 'the last person shooting film in a digital world'.Photography is about pictures AND INCREASINGLY about video.
Still I havent got into video and a lot of other people I know 'avoid' it despite all the pressure to use it. I have a personal theory that Olympus sales do quite nicely because 'its video is crap' as opposed to missing out from the lack of 'video buyers'. You sort of feel with a Panasonic camera you might be paying for something that you dont particularly want or need. And the underlying reality in pure numbers is that over the past 3 years Olympus sales of M43 cameras have increased 3 times relative to Panasonic (Panasonic has gone down in market share and Olympus has gone up.)
And to be frank the arrival of 4k video actually makes it less likely I will try video. As far as I can tell it means more processing, more effort etc.. Of course I can avoid that and try video with the old tech but then well I would fall into the 'yes it is ok but it isnt 4k bracket'. 4k isnt a technology like auto-focus that makes your life easier, it is actually likely to make your life harder. And that is why 'video' might be an increasing part of a 'pros' world but not one of a photographers' - we typically pay people to do things that we cant do ourselves or dont want to. And that for me sums up 4k video.