Dishonest Manufacturing?

[sanveer]

We all know, that the Exposure Triangle is mostly not applicable for video. Because one cannot have super high shutter speeds for 24p video, or randonly keep varying the f-stop across frames or scenes. While ISO limits have probably becoming wider in terms of usability, camera which have minimum ISO for log profiles have lesser options, since the base ISO starts pretty high.

While this may be acceptable for well controlled environments, it may not be possible for most run and gun shoots, or shoots without absolutely natural ideal lighting conditions (natural and cameras specs being coincidentally complimentary)  or shoots without elaborate controlled lighting. 

So, would be be fair, that for video shooting, ILCs/DSLRs, not having internal NDs (whether manual or electronic), is actually a bad unfinished job. Because without internal NDs, the cameras are not truly factory ready for shooting video. They could be for photos, but not for video. So, why even make the video shooting devices without such NDs? 

What do you think? 

[kye]

7 hours ago, sanveer said:

We all know, that the Exposure Triangle is mostly not applicable for video. Because one cannot have super high shutter speeds for 24p video, or randonly keep varying the f-stop across frames or scenes. While ISO limits have probably becoming wider in terms of usability, camera which have minimum ISO for log profiles have lesser options, since the base ISO starts pretty high.

While this may be acceptable for well controlled environments, it may not be possible for most run and gun shoots, or shoots without absolutely natural ideal lighting conditions (natural and cameras specs being coincidentally complimentary)  or shoots without elaborate controlled lighting. 

So, would be be fair, that for video shooting, ILCs/DSLRs, not having internal NDs (whether manual or electronic), is actually a bad unfinished job. Because without internal NDs, the cameras are not truly factory ready for shooting video. They could be for photos, but not for video. So, why even make the video shooting devices without such NDs? 

What do you think? 

It depends on what you're trying to do really.

Before the DSLR revolution shooting a video was likely an auto-SS kind of situation and shooting a film was more of a completely controlled full-manual situation.

Really, the concept of shooting something that looks like a film but is shot like a video (ie, with no control over the situation) is something quite new and quite indulgent, in a sense.  To want it all, so to speak.

I will be the first to admit that it's what I do, I absolutely want to walk around in the world waving a camera around with one hand and somehow miraculously getting silver-screen quality images.  Vloggers and low-budget film-makers and corporate and wedding and event videographers are often in this camp as well.

But the industry hasn't really caught up.  It will, and I'd imagine that in 5 years or so many video-first cameras will have auto-eND filters in them that can do it for you.  I look forward to that day, but in the meantime I just use auto-SS for my videos (as they are actually videos) because for what I shoot, speed matters in getting the shot, where I currently sometimes catch the moment only by a couple of seconds and if I added having to adjust exposure to my camera operating responsibilities then I'd often miss shots entirely.

[Al Dolega]

14 hours ago, sanveer said:

Because without internal NDs, the cameras are not truly factory ready for shooting video.

But they are factory ready for shooting video. Just not with a 180-degree shutter. Cell phones, action cameras, dashcams etc all lack NDs, do they not shoot video? Ugly video is still video.

I'm not sure we'll ever see hybrid cameras come with built-in NDs outside of a few models that are very video-biased, in the vein of an S1H, GH6, etc. It just adds too much bulk to keep the traditional photo-camera form-factor.

You have to have room for an assembly a bit wider and taller than the sensor to completely slide/rotate/flip out of the way. Ideally you'd have a clear replacement to keep the backfocus to the sensor consistent. And this is competing for space with IBIS and mechanical shutter mechanisms.

If global shutters ever happen without DR or sensitivity compromises, that would clear up some room I guess.

You could use a fixed E-ND that doesn't need to move, but then you're always losing whatever its minimum setting is... a stop, two stops? Low-light sensor performance hasn't improved enough lately to absorb that difference and stay competitive.

IBIS is too valuable to photographers (and many videographers including myself) to trade it for ND. Adding an ND to my lens or lens adapter is massively easier than adding and using a gimbal.