I've been working on shortening my video clips as was advised by many. I know that some of my movies are too long. But my wife had a fit when I shorted them up for general public viewing. We made the videos for our own entertainment, and we can relive those trips over and over, so we like to see the whole full length movies.
That 7:57 Chama video is the short version, done for other people. I did it after having completed a longer (39:44) version (including a few flashbacks from a trip 15 years previous -- it was on Hi8 tape) for our viewing. You absolutely MUST target your video to the intended audience, so multiple versions are not amiss.
A hint on cutting enough to make the shorter version easier for others to watch: Make the long version first, then watch it at least two or three times while sitting in front of your TV, and try to imagine what someone with only a mild interest in your subject would think about that. So often I find that a 30 second clip (for example) can become one four second and one eight second clip, or even just one six second clip, depending on the material. I've cut a lot of deadwood that way, as well as discovering that two versions will occasionally be the way to go.
Having done that with a few videos, I discovered that watching the shorter version was often easier to watch, even for me, when I didn't feel the need for the many details. But I'll still watch the long version once in a while for enjoyment, as well.
I have an easier time with conventional camera types like dslr or mirrorless designs.
My biggest problem with those for video is the lack of easy, smooth and gently slow zoom, as well as several other aids found in camcorders, such as zebra and continous running for extended periods (my Nikon 7100 is limited to 20 minutes at a crack), plus the camcorder is easier (for me at least) to hold up and steady for somewhat extended periods (through the viewfinder, not by using the swing out screen), among other things.
I bought a gimble to steady my video, and the smaller lighter mirrorless cameras are well suited for gimble use.
I guess you mean Steadycam and the like. They have those for light and heavy camcorders, too, even for the pros (watch football endzones for a guy with such a rig), but those not only take practice for them to work well, but they tire my arms more quickly than doing without. Of course there are the body mount versions (like the pros use), but those are expensive and, at times, too awkward to use (takes time to set them up).
So much about the equipment and editing depends on your personal needs and likes.