I want just still photography

[clgriffin]

<p>Shun, those into Videography appear to have no problem doing just that. Some are using separate sound recording because they don't need or don't like the built-in sound recording. From my limited experience, it seems easy to use programs like Nero or Microsoft's moviemaker to add a soundtrack to a video.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>I've been recording audio on the camera (either directly, with the built-in mic, or with a simple external mic plugged into the camera) as a reference. I then record to separate digital audio recorder (the everyone-uses-it Zoom device) using a good shotgun mic or lapel mic (wired or wireless, depending on the circumstances), and then sync that audio to the camera's native file after the fact using just a few mouse clicks. I use Plural Eyes, which does it so well and so fast that it doesn't matter whether I like the process or not! </p>

[angkordave]

<p>Canon 5D2 has better audio quality than I had with my Nikon D300S. The 5D2 and a decent shotgun mic gives good results. Maybe things have changed now with Nikon but my experience of Nikon Audio was poor.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I have used the video on my 5Dii just once. I turned it on by accident getting out of my truck at Canyon de Chelly and got a few seconds of my crotch and the steering wheel.<br>

Somehow, I still like the camera. :)</p>

[model mayhem gallery]

<p>I personally would never buy a DSLR which doesn't have video which is better than my sons Android phone, My Iphone 4S or Gallayx S4 which are all capable of HD video. I currenbtly make all my money doing on youtube.com making short video adds and comercials with my 5D2 and 85 1.2L lens. I personally absolutely love the video capabilities of the new DSLR's and have been amazed at how quickly my kids have learned to make videos. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>They are absolutely not interested or impressed with still photos as tell a story which pictures that don't move or have sound is quite boring to anyone who uses twitter, youtube, facebook hulu, Facebook, etc. Everything now is about the video. Capturing police brutality or car accident live as it is happening.<br>

I think cameras which do not do video will be obsolete like film cameras soon as they just don't playu a role in whats important "Social Media". Anyone who has a smartphone, Tablet, or Internet connected TV wants HD Video. Not just video HD video. And everything can and should be able to do this now. Think about how much every phone having video capabilities is changing the way police act in now. Crimes in general, someone hit and run all I got to do is record thier license plate.<br>

Video in my opinion is like the eveolution of silent movies to sound or black and white to color. Yes, it is more complicated, but I also think it is much more rewarding for those of us who have taken the time to truely master our DSLR's which which we have already paid in full.</p>

</blockquote>

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>So many 5DmkII's were sold for video that I'm sure there were video shooters wondering about why all this "still" stuff was on their video camera.<br>

BTW, I'm with JDM on auto apertures. I remember the days of manual, pre-set, semi automatic and automatic apertures. Still not sure about these new fangled lenses. LOL.<br>

BTW, for those of you who don't know a semi automatic diaphragm was one that you had to cock after each shot. Back in that time period (early to mid 60's) if you bought a Canon it was a Bell and Howell Canon here in USA. </p>

[angkordave]

<p>One thing currently disappointing about online video as opposed to stills is the relatively poor quality of most. I find it frustrating to shoot and edit HD video and see the results on utube for example. It all to do with internet bandwidth which is improving all the time. 10 years ago viewing online images was a problem.<br>

With better internet, video content will increase; but you cant print a video like a still image. So still photography is not going to fade away ever. </p>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>In my somewhat extensive experience, there is no perfect camera. We have to choose what we need to use on them, and ignore all the other stuff. One of my pet peeves on old film cameras that have automatic features is how the manufacturers always seemed to leave out ONE feature, forcing you to upgrade to a newer camera that also had ONE feature that was sub optimal. Not a coincidence I suspect. It sold cameras. I'm sure they still do this.</p>

<p>This video thing is disturbing though. We already have to suffer through a ton of dreadful photos online that were taken by self described "pros". Now we're expected to suffer through long videos made by these same people?! Not me, I'll rent a movie and watch something made by a competent and talented film maker.</p>

[gunjanvaishnav]

<p>Most of the time if you go one or two versions prior on any camera line, there you have pure photography DSLR rightly priced. Dont worry if it still has video capabilities.. as its coming for free for you in that price.<br>

T2i - T3i available in less than 400 USD<br>

5DMarkII available in less than $1800<br>

7D available in about $1100<br>

All these are value for money purely for their photography features.<br>

One cannot stop evolution and convergence. Most of the time both of these phases of life cycle brings in cheaper and affordable enrichment </p>

[richterjw]

<blockquote>

<p>I'll rent a movie and watch something made by a competent and talented film maker.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Good luck with that! Those seem to be an increasingly rare find as well!</p>