I kick myself for not having saved the URL. Instead, I’m going by memory that I think is reasonably correct. One of the articles in my morning newsfeed today discussed the upcoming Canon R52. Part of what the author said was highly likely, like the current R5, is that it will arrive in two versions. Again, IIRC, he speculated that one of two would be a very high rez and the other specialty video like the C is today. Up to then, I liked the article because I have almost no interest and less skill with video.
However, at that point, the article went on to say that something like 80% of all camera use today is video because most folks using cameras are doing so in hopes of becoming YouTube stars. Can this be true? People are buying Z9s, R3s and Sony A1s (among others) primarily to shoot videos? This implies until the video/YouTube craze dies down, or maybe even afterward, still camera capacity is somewhat of a rump feature.
I’ll admit to having enjoyed my time editing/grading videos using DaVinci Resolve but my creative drive is wholly stills. Today three or more hours in PS is identically therapeutic as the same or more time I used to spend in one of my makeshift darkrooms. However, if the still side of camera development is really just 20% while the overwhelming drive is video, I doubt we’ll continue to see much of any improvement in stills while video runs away with the industry.
Was this article just gas or is it true that camera use today is mostly video and stills are now an afterthought?