Repetive sliding or panning or zooming is especially annoying. You do not need such movement if there is actually something going on, except perhaps to track better a moving subject (not a flower or a rock formation).
A personal opinion? It has long been established that static slides in a video presentation are not as interesting as zoom, pan and scan. Pan and scan and zoom movement can aid in directing the viewer's attention to a location in the image. It's a dynamic or tool that takes a simple snapshot or collection of snapshots and makes it part of an artistically created story.
Mark, you and many here have demonstrated single goal which is to show off the ability of your camera and secondarily, your ability to use it. by displaying pictures and video clips to study. Myself and some others are more interested in telling a story of our experience. Therefore we use all tools of the art form in achieving that goal. Maybe the story is annoying to you if you want to study how a camera works but understand that was not the goal or intent of the work to eg. "show off Panasonic's technology." But by the same measure, a collection of still shots or video clips randomly butt edited together with no intended obvious sequence is not a story presentation but just a collection of shots and can quickly become boring unless the purpose is for technical study of each. While this is a forum for technical study of 3D, making a static presentation is not a bad thing, but to say creating a story and an art form is annoying is a bit over the top. Not to say all stories are good and interesting, just that even a bad story is more interesting than a random collection to all people.I've always held that the first goal of editing is to tell a story.
And, that is the main topic of your discussion here. So then I would say that for you to define what is interesting and what is annoying is too restrictive. For example, I do agree that a slide show that lacks sound is bad as it fails to keep my attention as it doesn't stimulate my main sense of communication, that is hearing. The visual also lacks story as the images are stacked in random sequence, but then, so are the video clips.The whole should be greater than the sum of the parts.
If a presentation is to be successful, it must first convey a story to hold interest. Second, the story should entertain and educate to maintain interest. Third, the story needs to stimulate all the senses, the more the better.
The final step in the edit process is timing. Here is where the story is told in a more efficient way so as not to digress, sustain unnecessarily, or leave a viewer wondering, What was that? Usually timing edits result in reducing the length, but not always. Sometimes a part of the story lost due to not enough detail. I can usually edit together a story in 2-3 cuts from scratch. However the timing is often the hardest part and can take an additional 4-5 cuts and renderings before satisfaction by me and my focus group.Story trumps technical for holding interest.
While technical quality is a noble goal in any production, it should never limit the ability to tell the story. The deciding factor is whether the substandard technicality pulls the viewer out of the story and draws attention to this issue. If that happens then the story fails to be told as a result of the technology. But if the story is told and the image was slighty soft, but the viewer's interest in the story was maintained, the goal was achieved and the story a success. Learn from the defect and make the technology better on the next project.