Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon D90  (Read 23843 times)
larsrc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


WWW
« on: August 27, 2008, 11:59:59 AM »
ReplyReply

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
Logged

svein-frode
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92



« Reply #1 on: August 27, 2008, 12:50:46 PM »
ReplyReply

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.
Logged

Svein-Frode, Arctic Norway

www.svein-frode.com
larsrc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2008, 03:21:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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
Logged

Pete Ferling
Guest
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2008, 03:42:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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.
Logged
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2008, 04:10:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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.
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7526



WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2008, 04:15:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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
Logged

A few images online here!
T-1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 579


« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2008, 05:43:20 PM »
ReplyReply

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.
Logged
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 549


« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2008, 06:28:18 PM »
ReplyReply

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
Logged
T-1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 579


« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2008, 07:35:41 PM »
ReplyReply

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.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 07:39:37 PM by T-1000 » Logged
Pete Ferling
Guest
« Reply #9 on: August 27, 2008, 07:36:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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.
Logged
T-1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 579


« Reply #10 on: August 27, 2008, 07:44:32 PM »
ReplyReply

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.
Logged
larsrc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 27, 2008, 09:23:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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
Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #12 on: August 27, 2008, 10:02:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Manual focus via liveview on the fly?
Logged
Theodore
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66



WWW
« Reply #13 on: August 27, 2008, 11:15:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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]


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

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."
Logged
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2008, 04:59:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2008, 06:06:55 AM by NikosR » Logged

Nikos
Pete Ferling
Guest
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2008, 08:55:28 AM »
ReplyReply

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.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2008, 09:15:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... 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.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2008, 09:24:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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 "
Logged
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2008, 09:42:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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.
Logged

Nikos
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2008, 10:06:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
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.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad