Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: New Nikon D4S  (Read 11558 times)

David Anderson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 715
    • http://www.twigwater.com
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #20 on: January 08, 2014, 05:22:02 am »


Actually I'd like to meet the professional photographer that hasn't been asked to shoot motion.  


I wish I had a dollar for all the times I've been asked to do both at the same time, on the same job and for the same price - my retirement would be far more comfortable.  :D

So for me, the question is not what the new Nikon/Canon pro camera is capable of, but will anyone pay more to have it on a job ?




Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #21 on: January 08, 2014, 06:30:56 am »


So for me, the question is not what the new Nikon/Canon pro camera is capable of, but will anyone pay more to have it on a job ?


You know the answer to this.

Of course not, at least not in the traditional way of I have a camera, here's the line item.

But if it's a camera that let's you expand your repretioire, produce better work, you'll get more work.

I have to admit that I'd love to see Nikon knock it out of the park with a great motion camera, that shot stills.  One that was really thought out and was professional in both mediums.

Of any company you would think they would be best positioned, because they have no video/cinema territory in other products to worry about.

They could make a 1dc that is better and never worry about their eng or cinema market because they don't have one.

IMO

BC
Logged

Sareesh Sudhakaran

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
    • The Indie Farm
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #22 on: January 08, 2014, 09:14:52 am »

I have to admit that I'd love to see Nikon knock it out of the park with a great motion camera, that shot stills.  One that was really thought out and was professional in both mediums.

Of any company you would think they would be best positioned, because they have no video/cinema territory in other products to worry about.

They could make a 1dc that is better and never worry about their eng or cinema market because they don't have one.


I've always wondered about this. I can only think of three explanations:

1. Their deal with Sony prohibits it.
2. They have a complicated glass-making business that might suffer?
3. They looked at the video market, and it was too tiny.

Even with the newly announced D3300 and D610, they continue to cripple video, knowing full well all they have to do is copy Magic Lantern's success. Look at Sony, they just released a consumer 4K camcorder with a 1" sensor for $2,000.

What is truly amazing is the Digital Bolex story. Two individuals hell-bent on making a RAW video camera can actually do so, and still sell it for $3,000 to make a living.

The GH4 is coming, with 4K at 200 Mbps, for less than $2,000 - in February. I suspect the BMCC4K will start shipping by then as well.
Logged
Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #23 on: January 08, 2014, 09:53:20 am »

At some point along the way, we're looking for a video-capable DSLR that derives individual video frames from full-frame captures.  That's one key convergence point: 30+ fps of 16MP captures, downsampled to 4k or 1080p, at least 12 /good/ bits, no decimation, line-skipping, etc.  

I've been hearing that the Arri Alexa is the one go-to digital cinema camera these days.  A well known person I spoke with recently in this area said it's pretty much all Alexa for him and everybody, though sometimes he shoots with the C500 and likes it for low light.  Does not like the look of the Red.  

BC, you tried the Alexa?

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #24 on: January 08, 2014, 10:35:41 am »


I've been hearing that the Arri Alexa is the one go-to digital cinema camera these days.  A well known person I spoke with recently in this area said it's pretty much all Alexa for him and everybody, though sometimes he shoots with the C500 and likes it for low light.  Does not like the look of the Red.  

BC, you tried the Alexa?


No, well semi-no.

Early on I looked at the Alexa, thought it was obviously well made, was smart shooting 2.5 k to downsample to 2k and offering prorezz out of camera.

I went with RED for this reason.  It's was 4k (well semi 4k) which is not the most important thing in the world, but 4k is a catch phrase, clients like catch phrases and though they'll never need 4k for their videos or the fact your probably better off conforming Alexa footage to 4k it's not 4k.

Also having a base in LA made RED a little easier to participate in. 

Then of course costs.

 My first R1 was about $20,000, 2nd new R1 $25,000, the  Scarlet, I don't remember but somewhere around 20 by the time I added what was needed.

In other words I ended up with 3 4k cameras for the price of a new Alexa.

Then there is size.  An R1 weighs in at 15 lbs with battery on board and a PL lens, can be dropped to 8 lbs with small nikon lenses.  A scarlet/Epic can be configured to 6 or 7 lbs. the Alexa was much heavier and size makes a difference in my type of production.

But you need to remember something when you hear from "industry" experts.   Cameras like RED and the little 4k Panasonic are disruptive technologies. 

If you use a full Blown Red or Alexa you better have the chops to be a decent DP, better have a focus puller on speed dial and have a heck of a dit station and system.

A camera like the gh 4k really is a game changer.  I know, I've used the gh3's a lot last year and the footage was very good, not RED good, not Alexa good, but damn good and moveable and fluid and (drum roll please) fast to set up and shoot.

Since the new gh will have xlr inputs, I hope better preamps, SDI out, it doesn't lack much, except a heavy duty codec and highly variable frame rates, though it will be 10 bit 422 and for $2,000 that's crazy.

Then of course there is the autofocus and regardless of what you here, autofocus if it works and doesn't hunt for a lot of advertising imagery is really amazing at least with the gh3.

But again the price of the gh 4k . . .

That's like buying a Nikon D800 for $300 . . . actually it's like buying an $18,000 Canon 1dc for $2,000, or $18,000 less.

So my point is when dp's say they love the Alexa (which I'm sure they do) there is also this tempered thought of "I like complicated cameras because it keeps the wannabes out of the biz", and btw:  don't think the film production companies have not taken a huge financial hit during this new normal recession, because they have.

Also keep in mind that creative people are the least likely to accept change.  (sounds crazy right?).

DP's know Arri, don't know RED, don't care about panasonic cause that's for the video boys, so they don't pay attention to it.

Don Mantle the DP that DP'd Rush for Ron Howard talked about the cameras he used from go-pros to the Canon c series.  The Canons he used because of size but because the project was cost limited at 18 million (which is quite low for a production of this type) and Ron Howard had a relationship with Canon.

When he spoke of the Canons and the other non Arri and non Film cameras he didn't use, he also speaks with apology.    In the Film Biz, big stuff is the way they work.  What is a Van to me is two 18 wheelers for them.  That's their world, but there is more convergence every day and not just in stills and motion but in high end to low end.

A DP someday has to wake up and think what do I want?  To let the production company spend 2 million on equipment and cut my pay by 1/2 or shoot on a bunch of little cameras and get paid in full?

I think we know that answer and btw: the little cameras they used in rush made amazing imagery and did things you could never do with a large camera.

In fact I think the coolest panasonic announcement at CES was the pana 4k wearable camera.  I can think of about 40 uses for that camera.

IMO

BC


Logged

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #25 on: January 08, 2014, 10:38:07 am »

"Also keep in mind that creative people are the least likely to accept change.  (sounds crazy right?)."

Not at all. And when a leader embraces a change the herd stampedes.
Logged

peterottaway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #26 on: January 08, 2014, 06:37:04 pm »

Camera manufacturers need to keep their models up to the latest standards. But to make a big deal about something that should be a genuine expectation is either PR B.S. or an indication of the low standards expected.

Nikon did need to provide a circuit breaker with the problems with the D600 although these were magnified by their own inability to be honest with the buying public. But the "update" to the D610, the Df and what they appear to have changed with the D4s, is the photographic version of going from monochrome fins ( with chrome) to duo tone fins ( with more chrome).
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #27 on: January 08, 2014, 07:23:51 pm »

And when a leader embraces a change the herd stampedes.

Stampoodles.

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #28 on: January 08, 2014, 10:35:10 pm »

At some point along the way, we're looking for a video-capable DSLR that derives individual video frames from full-frame captures.  That's one key convergence point: 30+ fps of 16MP captures, downsampled to 4k or 1080p, at least 12 /good/ bits, no decimation, line-skipping, etc.  


I talk a lot about motion imagery and people probably think I don't do stills.  

I'll always be a photographer at heart, but learned how to edit, then learned how to shoot motion and in todays times it keeps the doors open and actually let's our business grow.  

So anything I say about motion cameras doesn't come from a dp's point of view, it comes from a still photographer's point of view that now does  .  . I guess our new job description is content creation which sounds like someone in an office of the Facebook campus, drinking a green tea and driving a segway.

Anyway, 4k video cams are the future, in both still and motion.  This week we've been pulling stills from motion centric productions for clients.   They are usually shot as stills with still cameras, but sometimes with the gh3 we shoot some stills because heck, I'm there it looks good, why not?  

Stills from a camera like the gh3 set on still camera settings are very good, as long as your at 800 iso or below.  If your shooting living humans, (as opposed to non living humans) waist up there amazing, but so is most digital capture.

I just processed out a gh3 stills uprezzed in adobe camera raw or is that raw convertor of adobe or heck I dunno something that should just say I processed in photoshop and could clearly see the crew behind me about 45 ft. away in the reflection of the subject's eyes.  

First thing I thought of is s__t I don't need any more still cameras.  Second thing I thought of us damn my crew on this gig spent a lot of time standing around watching me work.

Anyway, with 4k stills as you shoot footage are coming.  With the RED anything waist up is good, full length a little challenged and soft, with the panasonic gh3's you can make a still from a 2k file but it has some alaising, (think 4mpx still camera) and sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

We have two images the client really wants stills of that are only from gh3 footage where the camera is set for motion  and it was one of those magical moments we couldn't get again, so I'll send it to our retoucher and listen to her complain, but at the end it will look pretty good.

Things are changing, though cameras kind of continue to be single purpose.  I think a camera like the gh 4k will be good for stills and video but not all at once.   Maybe someday we'll have that but I kind of have my doubts, just because they are such different genres is technique and style.

Especially if you shoot dialog because that never makes a good still frame.  I'ts like all those mobile phone shots I see people shoot in restaurants of their "friends" while they are eating.  It's never pretty.

Also great sharp looking footage is usually slightly blurred at 1/48th of a second or lower and doesn't usually make a good still.

I can ramp a RED up to 1/125th and it doesn't strobe, but it does get a little choppy, where the Panasonics taken to 1/125th in video are very choppy, (kind of cool effect though).

Anyway it's late.

IMO

BC

P.S.  BTW:  most cameras are just cameras and professional production makes almost everything look good.  Look at the latest Louis Vittuon spots with David Bowie, all shot on the RED. They could be 35mm film, an Epic an Alexa or a Panasonic, though once again they're shot with a RED.

Pretty production with budget makes for a pretty project.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2014, 10:37:02 pm by bcooter »
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #29 on: January 08, 2014, 11:58:15 pm »

Also keep in mind that creative people are the least likely to accept change. (sounds crazy right?).

I find this to be true no matter what sort of creativity is involved. In the electric guitar world there are many innovative designers trying to make a sustainable impact with their designs, but guitarists pretty much want Strats, Teles, Les Pauls & 335s. Or, for acoustic players, various Martins & Gibsons. Proven designs with caché. And those proven designs work so why should I play, say, a Steinberger with its weird headstock and tiny carbon fiber body, forward-looking though it is? (Hey, my name here is Telecaster...guilty as charged.) Taylor has broken through on the acoustic side but their designs are (at least visually) very traditional.

I suppose the reason why I tend to be such a polygamist when it comes to cameras is that I'm always looking for the One that'll unlock a higher level of creativity. I'm sure this is true of many people. I know it's silly. I can pick up any guitar and music comes out 'cuz it's always there to come out. A guitar is just a facilitator. Now while I think I'm a pretty good snapper, taking photos isn't organic the way music is. I dream music. I often wake up with rock 'n' roll bands or orchestras playing in my head. Really intricate stuff...which, of course, I almost always immediately forget.  :o  But I don't dream photographs. So maybe on some level I'm (foolishly) hoping for a camera that'll do the dreaming part of it for me. Helps keep the photo industry going if nothing else!

The first couple films I saw that were shot with an Alexa, I remember watching the credits roll to see whether it was on Kodak or Fuji film. But no, it was digital! That system seems to have an inherent smoothness to it that really looks pretty on-screen. Or maybe it's just the people involved who are giving it that look...dunno. Either way I like it.

-Dave-
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2014, 04:27:31 am »

Camera manufacturers need to keep their models up to the latest standards. But to make a big deal about something that should be a genuine expectation is either PR B.S. or an indication of the low standards expected.

Nikon did need to provide a circuit breaker with the problems with the D600 although these were magnified by their own inability to be honest with the buying public. But the "update" to the D610, the Df and what they appear to have changed with the D4s, is the photographic version of going from monochrome fins ( with chrome) to duo tone fins ( with more chrome).


Ah, fins: I love the '59 Coupe de Ville fins! Some Chrysler fins were beautiful too. But you need a trunk; they look out of place on a hatchback.

Rob C

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2014, 04:45:22 am »

I find this to be true no matter what sort of creativity is involved. In the electric guitar world there are many innovative designers trying to make a sustainable impact with their designs, but guitarists pretty much want Strats, Teles, Les Pauls & 335s. Or, for acoustic players, various Martins & Gibsons. Proven designs with caché. And those proven designs work so why should I play, say, a Steinberger with its weird headstock and tiny carbon fiber body, forward-looking though it is? (Hey, my name here is Telecaster...guilty as charged.) Taylor has broken through on the acoustic side but their designs are (at least visually) very traditional.

I suppose the reason why I tend to be such a polygamist when it comes to cameras is that I'm always looking for the One that'll unlock a higher level of creativity. I'm sure this is true of many people. I know it's silly. I can pick up any guitar and music comes out 'cuz it's always there to come out. A guitar is just a facilitator. Now while I think I'm a pretty good snapper, taking photos isn't organic the way music is. I dream music. I often wake up with rock 'n' roll bands or orchestras playing in my head. Really intricate stuff...which, of course, I almost always immediately forget.  :o  But I don't dream photographs. So maybe on some level I'm (foolishly) hoping for a camera that'll do the dreaming part of it for me. Helps keep the photo industry going if nothing else!

The first couple films I saw that were shot with an Alexa, I remember watching the credits roll to see whether it was on Kodak or Fuji film. But no, it was digital! That system seems to have an inherent smoothness to it that really looks pretty on-screen. Or maybe it's just the people involved who are giving it that look...dunno. Either way I like it.

-Dave-


And there's your answer: for you it's music but not photography that's 'organic' but that's simply your experience and personal makeup. I am the exact opposite to your experience: I listen to music at every opportunity that I can, was bought a guitar at age of eleven or twelve and sold it on when I was in my late teens. Why? In all those years I learned to play E,A,D,G,B,E as long a somebody else tuned it for me.

With cameras, as long as the focal length's available, it wouldn't really hinder me from thinking up a shape. I think them up, as well as captions, every time I go for a walk; sometimes the caption comes into my head and rattles around there all alone, and then I figure out an illustration for it. Now if that's not 'organic' we are just throwing around fancy, pop-speak adjectives that mean zilch.

;-)

Rob C

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2014, 05:35:55 am »


I suppose the reason why I tend to be such a polygamist when it comes to cameras is that I'm always looking for the One that'll unlock a higher level of creativity. I'm sure this is true of many people. I know it's silly. I can pick up any guitar and music comes out 'cuz it's always there to come out. A guitar is just a facilitator. Now while I think I'm a pretty good snapper, taking photos isn't organic the way music is. I dream music. I often wake up with rock 'n' roll bands or orchestras playing in my head. Really intricate stuff...which, of course, I almost always immediately forget.  :o  But I don't dream photographs. So maybe on some level I'm (foolishly) hoping for a camera that'll do the dreaming part of it for me. Helps keep the photo industry going if nothing else!

The first couple films I saw that were shot with an Alexa, I remember watching the credits roll to see whether it was on Kodak or Fuji film. But no, it was digital! That system seems to have an inherent smoothness to it that really looks pretty on-screen. Or maybe it's just the people involved who are giving it that look...dunno. Either way I like it.

-Dave-


I wrote this before I saw Rob's post and we pretty much mirror our thoughts.  

I would say the only way a camera will unlock creativity is if previous cameras kept you from doing something, i.e. tracking autofocus, low light, long lenses, fast lenses, stabilization, but that's all pretty much covered now.

I also love the night, especially with long lenses.  The compression and night are special.    

It's funny your a musician that looks for visual inspiration, but if I have a personal project and want something to inspire me lyrics to songs always do it.

I have three songs I keep on my computer that I want to desperately shoot, but never find the time as they would be long expensive projects.

Yesterday I had to write an intro to a series of videos.   The intro run's about 30 seconds and is more commercial than intro.

I had the base written, but  until I found the right score, I couldn't get to the real feeling of the words.  Once I heard the right score I think I wrote it in 10 minutes.

Anyway, maybe you should think about visualizing your music.

In regards to the RED vs. Alexa vs. a small cam like the Panasonic.   The RED looks like Kodak vision you know the ants crawling up the wall look, though it does shoot like film and loves warm, hates cool.  Cool looks require post, warm is a snap.

The Alexa is just pure Arri.  Everything is european refined and thought out the RED pure U.S.A.      Think of the Alexa like BMW, a RED like a 500 hp pick up.  They both do the same thing, except the RED gives you that feeling like if you pick it up wrong it's gonna hurt.

The Panasonic, everybody will look past, which is fine by me because I can do things with that camera that blow me away.

It just doesn't look impressive to have a mini 5d2, but final image matters . . . I think.

P.S.   But when it comes to still cameras.  Leicas inspire me.  I want the S2 so bad I can taste it and don't need it.  My producer and wife finally said, you've never shot anything with a leica that wasn't beautiful (her words not one hand clapping, I promise), so maybe when you hold something in your hand like an S2 it makes a difference.

Then again I'm in love with the little olympus omd em-1.   That camera just feels so good and shoots so right.



IMO

BC


« Last Edit: January 09, 2014, 05:40:10 am by bcooter »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2014, 09:49:49 am »

BC, did you try the Leica S with Leica Image Shuttle? Good, bad, indifferent?

What is it about the Leica you'd prefer over say an H5D-40 with True Focus?

I know when I pick up a Leica - or for that matter a Hasselblad - there are no excuses.
 



But Keith, you never needed excuses; what's in your head is there whatever you hold that goes click. Were that not so, you wouldn't/couldn't still be a working photographer; you'd have been weeded out and on the heap years ago. It happened all the time when I was starting out: guys came, they hung around a year or so and then vanished without trace.

What you are experiencing is the pure, unadulterated pleasure of the best stuff in the world.

And yep, if you can afford it, that's value enough if it also delivers what you need.

I suspect there's going to be a bigger Leica in your life soon...

Rob C

Chris L

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #34 on: January 09, 2014, 11:41:33 am »

From BC
"We have two images the client really wants stills of that are only from gh3 footage where the camera is set for motion  and it was one of those magical moments we couldn't get again, so I'll send it to our retoucher and listen to her complain, but at the end it will look pretty good.

Things are changing, though cameras kind of continue to be single purpose.  I think a camera like the gh 4k will be good for stills and video but not all at once.   Maybe someday we'll have that but I kind of have my doubts, just because they are such different genres is technique and style.

Especially if you shoot dialog because that never makes a good still frame.  I'ts like all those mobile phone shots I see people shoot in restaurants of their "friends" while they are eating.  It's never pretty.

Also great sharp looking footage is usually slightly blurred at 1/48th of a second or lower and doesn't usually make a good still.

I can ramp a RED up to 1/125th and it doesn't strobe, but it does get a little choppy, where the Panasonics taken to 1/125th in video are very choppy, (kind of cool effect though).
"

Talk about convergence; I have been using my BMCC video camera as a stills camera just because I like the look of the file compared to my Canon's. I shoot it at 45 degree shutter angle ( 1/200 second ) and process DNG's in C1 Pro. They look great and the latitude and gradability blows away the Canon raws. Here's an example: http://tinyurl.com/kxnouxj

I have also done it by shooting video primarily, at 24p with a 18o degree shutter ( 1/48 second shutter ) and can sometimes pull a sharp still from it but way less frames to choose from.

Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1516
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #35 on: January 09, 2014, 02:50:31 pm »




Talk about convergence; I have been using my BMCC video camera as a stills camera just because I like the look of the file compared to my Canon's. I shoot it at 45 degree shutter angle ( 1/200 second ) and process DNG's in C1 Pro. They look great and the latitude and gradability blows away the Canon raws. Here's an example: http://tinyurl.com/kxnouxj

I have also done it by shooting video primarily, at 24p with a 18o degree shutter ( 1/48 second shutter ) and can sometimes pull a sharp still from it but way less frames to choose from.



Chris,

For your type of lifestyle which lends itself to mos, and voiceover, I get it, clients get it, if they like the image, that's the frame they want, whether it's from a 2k video camera or a 36mpx still camera and yes they'll run it across a storefront, if it's the content that fits.

As long as I'm tight on a person like waist up or closer we can clean it up, on the REDs fake some sharpening, on the smaller cameras kill some rasterizing and make a still that will go through.

Full length I can fake it, but I wouldn't make it my plan to shoot video to replace stills.

This from the RED


These from p30 contax


Even in these small sizes I can see the difference in sharpness and detail and these are really small sizes.

Some people think it's fine, but I'd rather re stage the scene and shoot stills, though we all know that time is a premium in production.

There is software that will cut strobbing if you shoot at 125th, though the motion image will suffer some and your running dngs into a suite like C-1 but if you have a lot of footage your render times must be brutal.

Even with the RED's running $4,500 render cards I'm just a little even with 1 to 1 and then someone has to scrub through footage to find the still.  It's not the easiest way to work on the backend.

Then there is the issue of holding focus.  You know, I know, everyone knows that a lot of manually focused motion imagery is soft.  Maybe not for the whole scene, but there are those moments where it's off an inch or two and for a still that's pretty awful.

Regardless, convergence is coming just because it's less of a client want, it's becoming a must and the only issue is the cameras and the software aren't there yet.  

For a still photographer going to motion, especially if they are shooting dialog, multiple cameras, unless they just turn the footage over there isn't a learning curve, it's a learning wall.

Going from c-1 to Di-Vinci, photoshop to After effects is like comparing a bicycle to a Top Fuel Dragster.    The two mediums could be easier if c-1 or lightroom adding tracking, multiple time limes and had some agreement to work with a render card, or if someone would re-write a color suite that was more intuitive.  

Same with cameras.  

I thought the REDs would be closer and they are with cine-x and like I say at waist up images they're ok, but they really aren't still to motion captures.  Early on before I bought the reds I did this test with a 5d2 which kind of illustrates the difference in the two files.  

(click the image when it opens to see it full size).

http://tinyurl.com/nukkanm

This is the difference in a 5d2 and obviously a RED is better, but takes some work.


IMO

BC


« Last Edit: January 09, 2014, 04:22:27 pm by bcooter »
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #36 on: January 09, 2014, 03:41:14 pm »

Rob & BC, thanks for the observations & thoughts! Yeah, doing music & video together...it's on my mind. Thus my recent interest in shooting even stills at 16:9 for HD display rather than printing.

OK, end of therapy session.   :D  Did Nikon say something about releasing a new high-end camera?

-Dave-
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #37 on: January 09, 2014, 04:39:10 pm »

OK, end of therapy session.   :D  Did Nikon say something about releasing a new high-end camera?

That's just the thing; Nikon hasn't said anything yet.  What else can we do but kibitz until some facts come along? 

Actually, the question of what Nikon would have to deliver in the way of "improved video" was an apt thing to speculate about.  I said I thought that deriving video frames from full-frame captures would be worth noting, but little short of that.

AreBee

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 638
Re: New Nikon D4S
« Reply #38 on: January 09, 2014, 05:09:57 pm »

Keith,

Quote
No chance, Rob, it's just not for me.

Not even if Leica 'fixed' the shutter? ;)
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up