bertzie

> The camera is not being marketed at sole videographers. It is being marketed to photographers that also do videography.

 

That has nothing to do with Canon leaving out features that would cost a buck or two to add (like a headphone jack) to try to force folks to buy much higher priced gear.  That is what we are discussing here.

 

> That doesn't make the DSLR a video camera any more than the screwdriver is a hammer.

 

Your statement makes no sense.  Canon advertises their DSLRs as being suitable for recording videos, so they are "video" cameras, as you put it.

 

If you don't think DSLRs are suitable for use as video / filmmaking cameras, then why are you posting on a site devoted to using them for that exact purpose?  Are you just trolling here?

DSLRs shoot video, that makes them suitable for shooting video. A headphone jack does not affect the cameras ability to shoot video.

Simply being able to shoot video does not make something a video camera. The iphone shoots video, does that make it a video camera? (Hint: The answer is no).

The 7dmk2 is a stills camera. It was designed with stills in mind. You CAN use it for video, but video is not its primary function. Video is is not the primary function because it is not a video camera. It is a camera that coincidentally shoots video.

How difficult is this to understand?

I think you don't understand the whole concept of DSLR filmmaking.  And you are ignoring Canon's own advertising. 

Canons own advertising puts photography first. The primary focus of the advertisement is photography. The camera is not being marketed at sole videographers. It is being marketed to photographers that also do videography.

You can use a DSLR as a video camera just like you can use a screwdriver as a hammer. That doesn't make the DSLR a video camera any more than the screwdriver is a hammer.

> The Vixia is a video camera. The 7dmk2 is a stills camera.

 

Your statement directly contradicts what Canon's advertising says about the 7D Mark 2.  Here is the very first thing Canon says about the camera on their official product page:

The Canon EOS 7D Mark II digital SLR camera is designed to meet the demands of photographers and videographers who want a camera that can provide a wide range of artistic opportunities.

From the very interview this thread was created to discuss:

Is the 7D Mark II predominantly a stills camera then?

Yes

 

The 7dmk2 is a stills camera that happens to take video. It was designed primarly for still photography. It is not a video camera. It was not designed as a video camera. It is not intended to be used as a video camera. It is a stills camera that happens to include a video feature.

Out of the 18 paragraphs in Canons press release for the 7dmk2, exactly two of them were dedicated to video.

If you want video features, buy a video camera. Don't buy the wrong tool for the job then complain it doesn't do the job correctly.

Just to illustrate (even more) how artificial Canon's restrictions on video features on Canon DSLRs are, take a look at the little Canon Vixia HF R400 camcorder.  It retails for $249 (I got one on sale for $199).  It can record 1080p at 60 frames per second and has a headphone jack for monitoring audio, features not present on any Rebel or the $2,000 6D, although these finally did show up on the new $1,800 7D Mk 2.  This cheap little camcorder can also do clean HDMI out (!), another feature not present on any Canon DSLR that costs less than $1,800.  It also does not suffer from moire and other line-skipping issues. However, before you all throw away your Arri Alexas and get one of these $249 camcorders, I do need to mention it has a tiny sensor so in low light the grain looks like a snow blizzard.  What amazes me though is that Canon is willing to give their cheap tiny sensor cameras features that they withhold from DSLRs costing six times as much.

 

If you are willing to spend another $100, for $349 you can get a Vixia with built-in WiFi, the same feature that costs $850 to add to the $1,800 7D Mk 2.

The Vixia is a video camera. The 7dmk2 is a stills camera.

Would you complain that a geo metro doesn't come with a fifth wheel hitch?

Is the 7D Mark II predominantly a stills camera then?

 

The fact that this question was asked makes me very seriously question the intelligence of the consumer market, and I didn't have much confidence in their intelligence to begin with.

Major points for the rep not answering it with "No shit dumbass"

How many of the DoPs are also the editors/colorists? They might not see the benefits because they arne't seeing the image benefits in post workflow. Image quality is not the soul factor of camera choice. Ergonomics and workflow also play big factors. Yes, RAW gives you more options in post, but with this camera it takes a lot more to get, and for some it's not worth the aditional effort.

Out of curiosity, why are you worried about what other DoPs are doing? The most important opinion to you should be your own.