Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: larsrc on August 27, 2008, 12:59:59 pm
-
It was only a matter of time before DSLRs started being able to do movies. It'll be interesting to see what can be done with movies and SLR lenses. Not that I personally have much of a desire for movie taking, but I can see the utility of it, and given how long it's been in compact cameras, I don't think it's something that adds a lot of cost.
Nikon really has learned how to steal Canon's thunder, haven't they? The 50D is a respectable upgrade in many ways, ticking all the expected checkboxes and increasing all the expected numbers, but nothing truly new. This will lead all the buzz and discussion towards Nikon. A great move..
-Lars
-
Looks like MRs predictions of still and video photography merging were right on the money!
Looks like a great camera, and if I hadn't sold my Nikon lenses back in the day when I got rid of my F4 kit I would have orded one ASAP. Now all I can do is hope that Canon will follow suit.
-
Looks like MRs predictions of still and video photography merging were right on the money!
Looks like a great camera, and if I hadn't sold my Nikon lenses back in the day when I got rid of my F4 kit I would have orded one ASAP. Now all I can do is hope that Canon will follow suit.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217597\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
They have to, if only for marketing purposes. They'll obviously not have it in for PhotoKina (a win for Nikon), but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that a year from now, all new SLRs introduced will be able to do movies.
-Lars
-
Looks like MRs predictions of still and video photography merging were right on the money!
Looks like a great camera, and if I hadn't sold my Nikon lenses back in the day when I got rid of my F4 kit I would have orded one ASAP. Now all I can do is hope that Canon will follow suit.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217597\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Canon certainly has the means to do so. I've been tempted to haul my XH-G1 along and record some of the more fantastic scenes I've seen through the lens of a 1Ds and 40d. But that's more setup and gear than I care to deal with, or even have time should I bother during precious minutes as the sun sets, the animal leaves the scene, or the moment is lost, etc.
How sweet it would be to just rotate a dial or press a button and just shoot even a few minutes of footage! That alone would be a boon to some of you whom already shoot stock for istock and want to include a revenue source for video. A complete package.
-
Canon certainly has the means to do so. I've been tempted to haul my XH-G1 along and record some of the more fantastic scenes I've seen through the lens of a 1Ds and 40d. But that's more setup and gear than I care to deal with, or even have time should I bother during precious minutes as the sun sets, the animal leaves the scene, or the moment is lost, etc.
How sweet it would be to just rotate a dial or press a button and just shoot even a few minutes of footage! That alone would be a boon to some of you whom already shoot stock for istock and want to include a revenue source for video. A complete package.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217638\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And who needs video without autofocus ? Sry I don't. Interesting idea, but it would not be a buying decision on a DSLR.
-
And who needs video without autofocus ? Sry I don't. Interesting idea, but it would not be a buying decision on a DSLR.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217642\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, you have a lot of DoF with APS sensors providing you are not too close to the main subject.
I believe that at 720P, you will get very decent results stopped down at f10 with manual focus local at the distance scale on the lens if needs be.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
With video on an APS/DX sized sensor, we can finally shoot beautiful video with DOF control on a super35mm sized sensor with real 35mm lenses. No need for expensive 35mm adapters on camcorders that have teeny 1/3rd or 2/3rd inch sensors. Yay!
From now on, pretty much all DSLRs will have some sort of video mode, I'm sure. And I'm very happy about it.
-
People seem to forget that Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung..are all into their camcorders. If you expect the all in one wonder device to appear and for these makers to dump their product lines..think again. Why sell 1 device when 2 makes more money.
Camcorders will always be better at video than still, and stills cameras will be better at their native format. I have no problems with a video mode, could be handy. However, its not a major factor for me in a buying choice. The sound quality on most cameras is a weak point..I would expect this to be the same, decent enough I would think, but not camcorder quality.
Simply a case of economics
-
I agree, but at the same time, most on-camera sound from expensive professional camcorders isn't so great either, and requires the purchase of third party sound equipment for a semi-professional or professional production.
Also, I'm just guessing here, 720P video from a DX-sized sensor is much better than a 3CCD 1/3rd inch chip...eh? I wouldn't know yet, but it's probably true.
The only thing is that you can't record in RAW, and edit in RAW like the RED cinema camera allows. Of course, this is only a consumer DSLR, so you're correct by saying that currently, video cameras, no matter what the price, do video better than still cameras.
-
People seem to forget that Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung..are all into their camcorders. If you expect the all in one wonder device to appear and for these makers to dump their product lines..think again. Why sell 1 device when 2 makes more money.
Camcorders will always be better at video than still, and stills cameras will be better at their native format. I have no problems with a video mode, could be handy. However, its not a major factor for me in a buying choice. The sound quality on most cameras is a weak point..I would expect this to be the same, decent enough I would think, but not camcorder quality.
Simply a case of economics
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217675\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Almost true, however Nikon does not have a video segment to undermine or butcher. Canon would have to respond, and besides, even my four year old G5 had video, but it was nothing of a threat to the DV market.
There's a whole lot more features they would have to add in order to compete with full time camcorders (a five minute limit would be a guarantee). However, five minutes would be enough to capture something useful that you've already set up to shoot with stills. Like a great blue heron as it flys away, or the sun just as it crests, or a simple pan of the valley you've just shot. All easily done in a two minute segment.
-
Does the 5 minute limit have nothing to do with the capacity of the memory card? Do they mean, 5 minutes, then that's a clip, then you shoot another 5 minutes, and that's a separate clip, and on, and on, instead of continuous shooting for more than 5 minutes?
If that's true, hell, most hollywood movies could be shot with a 50 second per "clip" limit. 5 minutes ain't so bad.
-
And who needs video without autofocus ? Sry I don't. Interesting idea, but it would not be a buying decision on a DSLR.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217642\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'll elide the obvious comment about cameras once upon a time not having AF. Besides, I think a lot of the people who'd do this kind of video would largely use manual focus anyway. I fully expect crappy AF to arrive as the next thing, then useable AF.
I'm note into video either, but I can definitely see that this could be useful and interesting. Doing video with narrow DOF is an entirely different ballpark than camcorders. Not to mention video with specialty lenses - I don't think I've ever seen a video done with a tilt lens.
I don't think either that this will be the end of camcorders, but the other SLR manufacturers cannot afford to not add this feature. Notice how all the improvements on the 50d have been just upping the numbers a step? This sets the Nikon apart, and that's what counts for a lot of sales - combined with overall high quality.
-Lars
-
Manual focus via liveview on the fly?
-
Does the 5 minute limit have nothing to do with the capacity of the memory card? Do they mean, 5 minutes, then that's a clip, then you shoot another 5 minutes, and that's a separate clip, and on, and on, instead of continuous shooting for more than 5 minutes?
If that's true, hell, most hollywood movies could be shot with a 50 second per "clip" limit. 5 minutes ain't so bad.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=217685\")
The five minutes is just an individual clip limit - apparently the sensor gets warm. But you can string as many of those as you can fit on a 32 GB card, which is approx. 80 minutes of high def. video.
The Nikon USA site has a few short clips, but this link to the Nikon main site is much better. Check out D Movie. This was stunning to watch. It's like DSLR photos - but movies. I know that should be obvious, but seeing this really knocked me over. Here's the link: [a href=\"http://imaging.nikon.com/products/im...90/en/d-movie/]http://imaging.nikon.com/products/im...90/en/d-movie/[/url]
Also - David Pogue has a brief write-up on the camera which includes some notes on his use of it:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/27/tec...y/PTPOGUE28.php (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/27/technology/PTPOGUE28.php)
A short clipping, that includes an interesting note re: game changing pricing:
"High-definition video, at that. Stunning, vivid, wide screen, 1024 x 720 pixel, 24-frames-per-second video, with the color and clarity that only an SLR can provide.
Now, most people's first reaction is: "Well, duh. My $200 Canon has been capturing video for years." Or maybe: "What a gimmick. Who would ever use video on a $1,000 piece of photographic equipment?" Or, at best: "Well, I guess it might sometimes be useful to snag a video clip when I'm out shooting stills."
But there is something much bigger going on here. Remember: Any control, effect or lens that is available for the D90's still photos is now available for videos. Think of all the freedom you gain that you wouldn't generally have on a camcorder: control over focus, depth of field and exposure, special effects like fisheye, monochrome and vivid and excellent image stabilization when using a Nikon VR lens.
But here's the real mind-blower: You now have a video camera that takes interchangeable lenses. Before the D90, if you wanted a high-definition video camera with removable lenses, you would pay $7,000 for the camera, and $7,000 to $20,000 more for each lens.
On this camera, though, I tried Nikon's $500 fisheye lens, and filmed a complete 180-degree vista without having to turn or pan. With a macro lens, I filmed a bumblebee, huge and clear as though it were in a National Geographic documentary. With a 300-mm telephoto lens, sitting in my bleachers seat at a tennis tournament, I was suddenly filming what other people could only capture as still images."
-
The five minutes is just an individual clip limit - apparently the sensor gets warm. But you can string as many of those as you can fit on a 32 GB card, which is approx. 80 minutes of high def. video.
Sensor overheating is what's floating around as the reason for the limit, but I find it hard to understand without further explanation. Why isn't there a limit in Liveview mode and why the limit is like 20mins in lower than 720 resolutions? Also, apparently, you can shoot sequential 5min clips so what happens with the sensor heat then?
EU tax issues regarding what is classified as 'Video' cameras vs. 'Still' cameras and possible file size limitations have also been speculated but nobody has come up yet with a full explanation for the 5min limit.
Edit: File size limitations might be very real given the FAT32 filesystem. If recorded size is anything like 400MB / min then the max. size would be reached at 5mins (Edit: Or would that be 10?). If this is the case then this is the reason for the 5min limit and not sensor heating.
Anybody has any real info about average expected filesize / min for 24fps 720p mjpeg recording?
In any case, file size, EU legislation or anything else, I don't believe it's the heat that imposes the 5min limit.
-
The other issue is 720p motion jpeg. It's decent, but not a desirable editing format, but certainly easier to deal with and edit than AVCHD or mp4. I often use motion jpegA (at 95% quality) when exchanging files with outside editors whom are using FCP on Mac (I use PPro on PC), and are not using cineform or don't want uncompressed.
Motion Jpeg is comparable to a high quality windows media. Suitable for watching, but not the best to hold up to generational editing. However, I will use a good quality motion jpeg file if I'm scaling down to standard rez, or web quality.
It's a mixed bag, and certainly is not going to threaten any professional camcorder line.
-
... Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung..are all into their camcorders. If you expect the all in one wonder device to appear and for these makers to dump their product lines..think again. Why sell 1 device when 2 makes more money.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217675\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The error in this sort of argument is that it ignores the need of such companies to keep up with their competitors. Once one company offers a camera with a fairly good combination of still and motion photography and it sells well, other companies are not going to have much luck persuading people to go for their two camera alternatives.
Indeed video camera Panasonic seems very much involved in a push to bring video capabilities to interchangeable lens still cameras, through Micro FourThirds. And from the mockup of a M4/3 zoom lens having only one ring, I expect that M4/3 will offer power zoom, for total one-handed control, with the left hand only pointing the camera; more convenient than using a lens-mounted zoom ring for videography. And there will be AF in video mode!
It is like the claim that Canon will deliberately give the "5DMkII" worse image quality than Canon is capable of (say with a new sensor design deliberately inferior to the existing one for the 1DsMkIII), hoping to force customers who want better IQ to buy the 1DsMkIII instead. But the more likely result would be that many of the customers pushed away from a "hobbled" 5DII would go for similarly priced but better performing non-hobbled options from Nikon or Sony.
Only near-monopolies can afford to deliberately "hobble" product offerings, and no company has anything close to a monopoly in SLR's anymore.
Simply a case of competitive market forces at work.
-
Sensor overheating is what's floating around as the reason for the limit, but I find it hard to understand without further explanation. Why isn't there a limit in Liveview mode and why the limit is like 20mins in lower than 720 resolutions? Also, apparently, you can shoot sequential 5min clips so what happens with the sensor heat then?
EU tax issues regarding what is classified as 'Video' cameras vs. 'Still' cameras and possible file size limitations have also been speculated but nobody has come up yet with a full explanation for the 5min limit.
Edit: File size limitations might be very real given the FAT32 filesystem. If recorded size is anything like 400MB / min then the max. size would be reached at 5mins (Edit: Or would that be 10?). If this is the case then this is the reason for the 5min limit and not sensor heating.
Anybody has any real info about average expected filesize / min for 24fps 720p mjpeg recording?
In any case, file size, EU legislation or anything else, I don't believe it's the heat that imposes the 5min limit.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217766\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
from Simon Joinson in response to your dpreview question on the 5 minute limitation...
"We asked this question and were told it's a tax issue, nothing else. The fact you can take 5 mins, pause a second then do another 5 mins ad infinitum seems to support this.
SJ "
-
from Simon Joinson in response to your dpreview question on the 5 minute limitation...
"We asked this question and were told it's a tax issue, nothing else. The fact you can take 5 mins, pause a second then do another 5 mins ad infinitum seems to support this.
SJ "
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217827\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is plausible since there exists such a discrepancy in EU import tax legislation (don't know the details though about when a camera is classifed as a videocam). It would beg the question though why not have separate firmware versions (and maybe model numbers) for EU and the rest of the world.
-
This is plausible since there exists such a discrepancy in EU import tax legislation (don't know the details though about when a camera is classifed as a videocam). It would beg the question though why not have separate firmware versions (and maybe model numbers) for EU and the rest of the world.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217831\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
EU bureaucrats are a crafty lot. If that firmware could be put on the EU cameras they would likely classify it as whatever it took to get them the most money.
-
EU bureaucrats are a crafty lot. If that firmware could be put on the EU cameras they would likely classify it as whatever it took to get them the most money.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm sure Nikon could devise (a not unhackable...) way to dissalow this. But then maybe they decided that all the overhead for producing two versions of the camera and/or firmware might not worth it.
-
This video stuff is pretty exciting.
I may be a Canon user but I have to say thank you Nikon. Thanks for pushing the envelope and not releasing more of the same, over and over. I would likely switch companies if I didn't have to rebuy all my lenses.
Anyway, what I'm really excited about here, as others have said, is the use of specialty lenses. Now I can (or soon might be able to) take video footage of macro stuff, wide angle panoramas, etc. I've been lusting after a tilt/shift lens for my next purchase and think that could provide some beautiful results in video. Think of slowing tilting your plane of focus across a scene or a model.
-
The one thing that particularly interests me here is around a bit of history. I clearly remember seeing a number of discussions on various boards 3 or 4 years ago that were adamant in asserting that this (dslr video) could/would never happen. What's amazing is the almost inevitable bad guessing about how fast the technology is evolving.
-
from Simon Joinson in response to your dpreview question on the 5 minute limitation...
"We asked this question and were told it's a tax issue, nothing else. The fact you can take 5 mins, pause a second then do another 5 mins ad infinitum seems to support this.
SJ "
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217827\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
But you can shoot lower quality for a 20 minute clip? That sounds more like a file size issue.
-
But you can shoot lower quality for a 20 minute clip? That sounds more like a file size issue.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=217979\")
I don't know what the 5 minute limit reason is but soon it's going to be difficult for the broadcast companies to control the rights to major events, especially sporting events like the Olympics and world games where only "still" cameras are allowed on the grounds.
This and I assume other cameras like it are going to open up complete new territory and probably pose a whole lot of issues in regards to rights, fees, liscensing, etc.
Right now nobody is going to shoot a news broadcast or television spot with this camera, (well maybe not) but soon I would imagine all dslrs, pro and semi-pro will have some kind of video function and eventually far surpass anything that can be transmitted on hdv.
At one point I really did believe that convergence will be commonplace on the web, where video and still imagery will share equal space, maybe titled more towards the video side.
Lately I've come to adjust that thought as we really are living in the 4 to 10 second world.
Maybe stills, or moving stills will have more visual power on the web than actual traditional moving footage.
Time will tell.
Of course so will bandwidth.
One thing I am sure of is compelling imagery, more than ever, takes creativity, planning and money, especially for commerce.
The camera, whether it is a $900 dslr or a $50,000 Red, a gazillion dollar panaflex will make little difference if the story, the imagery and final result is not worth watching.
This camera does have some interesting applications, but I don't believe it will change things that much, at least not today.
A few years ago the Seinfeld American Express commercials were shot with a SD xl1.
[a href=\"http://www.dvinfo.net/canon/articles/article85.php]http://www.dvinfo.net/canon/articles/article85.php[/url]
As interesting as this was, it really didn't change or impact the production, including costs.
At this level, cost of the camera is almost not noticed on the estimate form.
JR
-
Although some current DSLRs will do time-lapse photography, you'd never want to use them for this application because you'd soon toast the shutter mechanism. I see no mention of intervalometer functions in the D90, yet this would be a near perfect camera for time-lapse acquisition. Nikon missed the boat in this respect, IMHO. T/L footage, especially in HD, would be very marketable, even if it is only near-HDTV. True 720P is 720X1920, and that's not what the D90 produces.
-
The one thing that particularly interests me here is around a bit of history. I clearly remember seeing a number of discussions on various boards 3 or 4 years ago that were adamant in asserting that this (dslr video) could/would never happen. What's amazing is the almost inevitable bad guessing about how fast the technology is evolving.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Tim,
I raised this issue a couple of years ago on this site. Why do DSLRs not have video capability like P&S cameras? With their larger sensors, they could exceed the quality of professional video cameras costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The answers seemed to centre around ergonomics. Dedicated videocams are obviously designed with video shooters in mind. They sport the features that video shooters require and find useful. A video facility in a still camera must take second place, in terms of ergonomics and features, to the features that enhance the taking of still images.
The D90 is lacking in some very basic features that you would find on any videocam costing less, such as lack of autofocussing and automatic zoom.
Nevertheless, this is a first, and one can presume that such features will follow in subsequent models if the D90 proves to be a hit.
One factor which is missing in the news of this camera I've read so far is, 'How is this 1280x720 HD image formed?' Is it a result of binning the pixels in a 16:9 crop from the 12.3mp sensor, resulting in a video with far superior noise characteristics to any prosumer videocam? Or, is the image comprised of 1280x720 unbinned pixels?
-
Although some current DSLRs will do time-lapse photography, you'd never want to use them for this application because you'd soon toast the shutter mechanism. I see no mention of intervalometer functions in the D90, yet this would be a near perfect camera for time-lapse acquisition. Nikon missed the boat in this respect, IMHO. T/L footage, especially in HD, would be very marketable, even if it is only near-HDTV. True 720P is 720X1920, and that's not what the D90 produces.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=217997\")
The D200+ cameras have it, and I read somewhere that the D90 has it too. Not sure though. Totally unrelated with LV and Video function I believe.
EDIT: According to this [a href=\"http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond90/page11.asp]http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond90/page11.asp[/url] the D90 seems to have the intervalometer functions of its bigger siblings.
-
Tim,
I raised this issue a couple of years ago on this site. Why do DSLRs not have video capability like P&S cameras? With their larger sensors, they could exceed the quality of professional video cameras costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The answers seemed to centre around ergonomics. Dedicated videocams are obviously designed with video shooters in mind. They sport the features that video shooters require and find useful. A video facility in a still camera must take second place, in terms of ergonomics and features, to the features that enhance the taking of still images.
The D90 is lacking in some very basic features that you would find on any videocam costing less, such as lack of autofocussing and automatic zoom.
Nevertheless, this is a first, and one can presume that such features will follow in subsequent models if the D90 proves to be a hit.
One factor which is missing in the news of this camera I've read so far is, 'How is this 1280x720 HD image formed?' Is it a result of binning the pixels in a 16:9 crop from the 12.3mp sensor, resulting in a video with far superior noise characteristics to any prosumer videocam? Or, is the image comprised of 1280x720 unbinned pixels?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218004\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It took so long because of the sensor sizes and related heat and bandwidth issues I believe. Also marketing played its part, I suppose.
AF it is reasonable to expect that manufacturers are working on it, no mean feast though to perform adequately fast and precise contrast based AF for these large DOF limited sensors..
Electric zoom, I doubt very much that Nikon or Canon will do it any time soon since it will involve new body to lens interface and new lenses. never say never though... Don't know much about other manufactures body to lens basics to comment. Some form of 'digital zoom' might easily be offered though since with current HD formats these sensors have resolution to spare.
-
The D200+ cameras have it, and I read somewhere that the D90 has it too. Not sure though. Totally unrelated with LV and Video function I believe.
EDIT: According to this http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond90/page11.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond90/page11.asp) the D90 seems to have the intervalometer functions of its bigger siblings.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218010\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's not clear that the intervalometer controls apply to the new video mode. Shooting time lapse in "standard" mode, ie with the shutter actuating for each frame, is a non-starter. You'd very soon reach the rated number of shutter actuations.
-
DELETED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
This isn't so. I've been using DSLRs of all stripes (Fujifilm S2, Canon 300D, 400D, 450D, 20D, 40D, 5D, Nikon D2X, D200) for time lapse for a few years now.
You don't hit the number of shutter actuations for quite some time. Pretty much the lowest rating for a DSLR was 30k shots for the 300D (digital rebel across the pond) - 20 minutes at 25fps. I usually shoot 750 frames in a time lapse - 30 seconds, so even the 300D will make 40 odd saleable shots for £150 - the cost of a new shutter. My 300D - now rarely used - is on its fourth shutter mech. My D200 is on 150k and has been my favourite time lapse camera for nearly three years now. Eventually the shutter will give out - but bodies are just a small part of all the other gear (lenses, motions control, timers, external batteries) I use - and when the D200 does go 'pop' - it may be an excuse for an upgrade!
Robbie Allen, Lobster Pictures
www.lobsterpictures.tv
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221337\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Interesting cost calculations. I stand corrected. Abuse of my D300's shutter mechanism ahead!
Lovely reel. Your motion control time-lapse is gorgeous. : )
-
True 720P is 720X1920, and that's not what the D90 produces.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217997\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I couldn't find any reference to that resolution... isn't it 1280x720?
EDIT:
Robbie Allen, Lobster Pictures
www.lobsterpictures.tv
Really enjoyed your reel there.
-
On camera sound, on pro cameras, can be superb in quality and equal to that of recording on a specialist audio recorder. We've upgraded the sound on the RED One (free upgrade - see RED forums for details) and with a decent mic, the quality is top professional audiophile quality - seriously, and anyone who knows me knows I'm fussy about audio as well as the image. So it can be done.
It's not so much the size of the chip, although a nice decent sized chip should make for good video, but how you deal with it. Looking at the 720p from the Nikon, it's "rough and ready" and not up to the quality of stills you get from a Nikon, and not up to the quality of taking stills, properly downsampling them, and then making them into a movie, even if you used the same codec and bit rate as used in camera. Nikon do seem to be taking a lot of "short cuts" with their video processing and it shows in chroma sparkles, aliasing, compression and scaling artifacts.
Also, their CMOS is not designed for video. It's designed for stills with a physical shutter. It has an electronic rolling shutter on the CMOS. Now, that's not necessarily bad if the shutter is fast enough to avoid skew and jelly wobble. RED was not perfect with regards to this when it was first released and shot with, but that was soon remedied so that the rolling shutter was very fast indeed. The Nikon rolling shutter is slow, and causes wobble and skew making it practically unusable for many shooting scenarios.
Graeme
I agree, but at the same time, most on-camera sound from expensive professional camcorders isn't so great either, and requires the purchase of third party sound equipment for a semi-professional or professional production.
Also, I'm just guessing here, 720P video from a DX-sized sensor is much better than a 3CCD 1/3rd inch chip...eh? I wouldn't know yet, but it's probably true.
The only thing is that you can't record in RAW, and edit in RAW like the RED cinema camera allows. Of course, this is only a consumer DSLR, so you're correct by saying that currently, video cameras, no matter what the price, do video better than still cameras.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217683\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Robbie Allen, Lobster Pictures
www.lobsterpictures.tv
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221337\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
(http://www.lobsterpictures.tv/images/robbie.jpg)
you bitch you use my account!