Nikon D90

[Morgan_Moore]

will any who understand moving images give me the pros and cons of this

a big pro is that I have both $999 and nikkors from 14 through to 400

could you make stuff for company promos on the web etc

I know that there is manual focus only but if the screen is like the live view on the D3 that would make it better than most camcorders I have played with

S

[Morgan_Moore]

and sound ..

does anyone know about using a third party digital recorder like radio journalitsts use

could that easily be synched up

S

[tgphoto]

Things may have changed since I was in school, but it's always been my understanding that the sensors used in DV camcorders were engineered differently from those used in dSLRs.  

Perhaps that is no longer the case?

[jliechty]

DPReview claims that exposure is uncontrollably automatic during video recording, while Rob Galbraith claims that exposure can be locked before commencement of video recording.  Hopefully RG is right, but the pessimist in me thinks that DPR may be correct.  Someone with access to a production camera should confirm this, assuming that NDAs are up (with high res samples being posted, I'd assume so).

[mahleu]

and sound ..

does anyone know about using a third party digital recorder like radio journalitsts use

could that easily be synched up

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Synching from two sources shouldn't be much of a problem with any of the available software.

[jliechty]

Synching from two sources shouldn't be much of a problem with any of the available software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218718\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For the sort of durations that will be possible with the D90 (less than five minutes), drift over time shouldn't be a noticeable problem.  When DSLRs are able to record video for an hour, then keeping audio in sync over time will become a major issue (I'm not anticipating Nikon adding timecode and genlock connections to the D99).

[Graeme Nattress]

My major concern is that although video may seem to be just stills at least 24 frames per second, but there's much more to it than that. Things that "work" on stills, don't work on motion. For instance, compression artifacts that don't seem visible on a still appear to move and bubble upon motion, or aliasing which is bad enough on stills causes distribution codecs to freak out when they see detail moving in the opposite direction to the object it's part of. Or cross-colour artifacts that flicker upon motion. Or edge sharpening that looks fine on a still contributes to the perception of motion judder upon movement.

The other thing is that current DSLR sensors, may produce beautiful stills, but their read/reset time is too long which causes skew and even jello-cam on even the slowest of camera moves, or moving objects in a shot.

[Dan Carter]

will any who understand moving images give me the pros and cons of this

a big pro is that I have both $999 and nikkors from 14 through to 400

could you make stuff for company promos on the web etc

I know that there is manual focus only but if the screen is like the live view on the D3 that would make it better than most camcorders I have played with

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217891\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't think we'll really know the pros/cons until the D90 gets into the hands of more users. I do think we're going to be amazed at what creative people can do with its video abilities.

[craigwashburn]

And there's still the problem of doing good tracking focus.  Still camera lenses aren't made for motion in mind so there's the problem of 'focus breathing' where the image size changes slightly while adjusting focus - sort of like zooming in and out slightly.  Not a problem when you're taking a single frame, but a bizarre and unnatural effect when seen in motion.  35mm Cine lenses have complicated (and expensive) internal optic mechanisms to eliminate this.

And focusing while maintaining composition is difficult... cine films have a crew member (the focus puller) that handles focus specifically mainly through distance measurements while the camera operator focuses (no pun intended) on composition.  A special focus puller viewfinder might be used on difficult macro shots.  Thus the lenses are designed for setting focus by distance specifically.  Many still lenses have this, but its not nearly as refined or accurate.

I think that stills as movie cameras are a neat trick, but don't expect them to replace proper video devices.  Likewise, I don't see video devices replacing still cameras.

[Morgan_Moore]

Those knocking it

5mins - is an absolute age - I think the average clip length on MTV is 2 seconds probably from a 5 second 'rush'

Exposure not lockable could be a nightmare

Zooming in shot is a trashy effect so that is no worry to me

Manual focus - well Ive been doing that for a while, but my experience of video is that I cant see what is in or out, my experience of live view on the D3 is that it is very obvious what is sharp and what is not

720 is HD TV right ? sounds low to me

Still looking good to me

S

[Graeme Nattress]

720p is HD. For all intents and purposes, it's as good as 1080i (see my section in Michael's article), and in ways better in that it compresses more efficiently. The demo clips I've seen from the D90 show, to me, objectionable compression artifacts which would make it an unsuitable acquisition format for professional level video work of movie making, especially when colour correction becomes involved. That and the very obvious skew issues will probably keep any "video" camera manufacturer from worrying about this product, but will not stop them thinking of the problems, benefits and solutions to the convergence of stills and motion images in general.

[Morgan_Moore]

720p is HD. For all intents and purposes, it's as good as 1080i (see my section in Michael's article), and in ways better in that it compresses more efficiently. The demo clips I've seen from the D90 show, to me, objectionable compression artifacts which would make it an unsuitable acquisition format for professional level video work of movie making, especially when colour correction becomes involved. That and the very obvious skew issues will probably keep any "video" camera manufacturer from worrying about this product, but will not stop them thinking of the problems, benefits and solutions to the convergence of stills and motion images in general.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218890\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So you think it is a toy rather than a tool ?

What about web use, lets say web use gets quite a lot better than you tube but not TV standard

You think the artifacts ruin it

My mission with the camera, should I get one, is to start creating a bit of movie around my still shoots for commercial small to medium clients - those clients would then probably use on the web or in the background at trade shows or whatever

also to learn a new skill

Do you think I would be better to spend $1000 on a handy cam considering the crap look from mini chips and lack of lens choice compared to my nikkors from 14 to 400

I think this could be cool with some nikon primes shot wide open 50 1.2 MF is one that I have gathering dust for instance

S

[Graeme Nattress]

The main issue you'll see on even a YouTube quality video is the skew. If you're shooting locked off shots and the shots are talking heads, or have little inherent movement, then you'll be fine. It doesn't seem to take much movement, action, a pan or a zoom to head into jello-cam though.

[fike]

The HD video of this camera looks kind of like a BETA.  I am not sure it will be incredibly useful for any substantial production, although someone will make a feature length movie with it and show it at Sundance or something.  I can imagine using it to capture short snippets to make montages, but substantially more care will be needed to overcome the exposure and focusing limitations that have been discussed.  

It is undoubtedly an exciting step.  I honestly wonder how long it will be before someone makes a dedicated video body that fits with DSLR lenses.  Canon is unlikely to do this because they have a real video business that they need to protect, but Nikon seems to have little to lose.  

Another thought on this topic is that you could also do a lot of digital zooming to extend the range of the installed lens.  if all you want is 720 lines of resolution, a 1.5x cropped sensor has lots of room to digitally scale and still get that size image.

Another interesting problem will be with the displays.   As much care as we take to ensure sharpness and color rendition, the HD televisions will be well outside of our normal expectations.  

This transition may help sell more high-end PCs.  Processing these videos could really suck up some processing power.

[Morgan_Moore]

The main issue you'll see on even a YouTube quality video is the skew. If you're shooting locked off shots and the shots are talking heads, or have little inherent movement, then you'll be fine. It doesn't seem to take much movement, action, a pan or a zoom to head into jello-cam though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218963\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Are there links any examples yet ?

(ive seen chase jarvis plug and the nikon main site)

good or bad

S

[Graeme Nattress]

http://eyevio.jp/movie/159289 shows this quite clearly.

Graeme

[fike]

http://eyevio.jp/movie/159289 shows this quite clearly.

Graeme
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=219008\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can see some novel MTV-type videography, but that wobble effect is really problematic.

The camera sets a cool new direction.  Nikon is throwing the gauntlet down to Canon, but this is at a very early-adopter stage.

Not yet game-changing.

[Morgan_Moore]

http://eyevio.jp/movie/159289 shows this quite clearly.

Graeme
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=219008\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

you mean the building uprights waving as the camera is moved - does indeed look a bit cr*p

also from this vid the exposure appears not to be locked causing the building to change brightness as subject move in front and away from it

can anyone confirm the exposure lock or lack of

it would appear to me that a lack of exposure lock is a fatal flaw too

So graham - in your opinion $1000 on this or a $1000 on a handycam as an introduction to the world of the moving image

(not exactly an introduction as I do hang out with quite a few TV boys who are giving me some pointers)

S

[Graeme Nattress]

Now remember I work with RED, so I'm biassed....

I don't think we  know enough yet  how manual video controls work on  the Nikon. Indeed, that will define how well it can be used for different situations.

The image skew will limit use for action use for sure, but does it matter for talking head shots? Probably not. The compression and image artifacts may not matter on the web, but will not stand up to large colour correction.

We all know that "good enough" will always be used to make movies and TV. But we also know that many will not settle for good enough. What we know for sure is that although this is the first such product, it's not the last.

If you just want to play with moving images, this Nikon seems as good as anything. But if you have a specific job in mind, you may want to look at video camera tools specific to that job.

Graeme

[Morgan_Moore]

Now remember I work with RED, so I'm biassed....


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=219191\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know you are biased but also knowledgable

The question $1000 on this or $1000 on a video camera will not include red or scarlett so there is no bias

In fact you should be steering me towards the nikon and keeping my initial investment $ down and glass $ in nikkors - which of course fit RED

A red is not out of the question for me - as a video newb that may sound stupid but I have used enough video to know

- that I need a decent wide which with a decent camera cost a lot almost as much as a simple red rig

- small chip cameras look crumby and are hard to focus

both pushes me towards just getting the Red and sticking with the nikkor lenses rather than getting a $10k vid rig

There are other factors; resale value, possible rental income, and obselecense of low res stock footage

My most likely route is to go D90, learn, be annoyed, then go Red and nikkors

Are people working with Red and nikkors or is the focus travel all wrong ?

If you had a $6000 NikkoRed camera with a decent chip size I would just get that

D4X-Af-60fps is what you need to worry about ! ?

So $1000 on D90 or a handycam

S