This will put an END to all 50D vs 90D discussions

Started Aug 29, 2008 | Discussions thread
Sal Baker Forum Pro • Posts: 11,517
Re: Buy a Nikon I have Nokia for that

Slideshow Bob wrote:

Look FF, it's not that you don't have a point (you do), it's that
people's attitudes towards this issue are unbelievably weird.

Let's forget the D90 for a moment, because that's just the first
step. What comes from here is the possibility to have exceptionally
high quality video, using some of the highest quality lenses. We've
been dealing with "video cameras" for 20 years now, and you STILL
can't get a 200mm f/2 lens for them, or a really good wide angle zoom
(think 14-24). Anyone who thinks that "video cameras" represent the
pinnacle of anything is just plain deluding themselves. They are the
cheap, easy, accessible alternative to movie film cameras. Now,
digital movie cameras have more in common with a DSLR than a video
camera, so why the hell shouldn't DSLRs have the potential to do very
well in this area?

The exceptionally high quality video will continue to come from video cameras. They have 3 sensors, each providing the maximum resolution that the format allows. It's been that way since the beginning of color video. You can't get the best quality video from single sensor cameras. And the size of the sensor doesn't matter as 720p only allows 1MP per frame images. Shoot video on an 8x10 digital sensor and it will still only use 1MP of the sensor. And the best lenses in the world don't matter, they just need to be able to do a good job of resolving 1MP images.

I agree that when DSLRs evolve to the point that they have 3 sensors, and you can hold the camera to your eye to track focus even in the sun, they will be much better than they are now. But if the use of DSLR lenses is so important, the better alternative will always be to have camcorders that accept DSLR lenses.

The problem is that most people just can't see the potential, which
is a bit scary. I guess that's because 95% of all video cameras sold
get used once or twice, then no one looks at what they shot, and the
things just gathers dust.

Exactly. For this kind of usage the D90's implementation of video is fine since they will only use it once or twice.

But this is a relatively inexpensive addition to a DSLR. Anyone who
shoots DSLRs could, in the future, shoot a little video of something
they see that's worth capturing. It's not like you've got to go and
pay an extra £1000 for the video thing. It's not like you've got to
buy special lenses for it. It's just there. Use it, or don't use it,
end of story. Anyone who treats DSLR video as if it's the anti-christ
has some serious issues. There's a lot of that going around right now.

I agree. It's like any other feature--use it or ignore it. Just don't expect that a D90 will provide video and audio that's the quality of a decent video camera.

Exactly how 1280x720 video off a APS-C sensor (with all the ISO and
DR advantages that format offers), shot through high quality lenses,
at movie frame rates, with variable apertures (up to F/8), relates to
Nokia phone cameras is somewhat of a mystery. The comparison is total
bulls* t. But if that's the limit of some people's imagination, then
so be it. Maybe they should go back to the Kodak Brownie, since all
this technology really does seem to cramp their style. Digital
cameras? Pfft!

The technology is relatively ancient at this point. It's just a matter of marketing. I'm sure most DSLRs will offer the feature soon.

I just don't like to see people mislead into thinking that DSLR video at this juncture is at all competitive with real video cameras.

This is from my post further down, and identifies what the D90 video feature lacks compared to the "cheap" HD video cameras available today for enthusiasts...

No AF, no power zoom, no real-time image enhancement, no color bar generator, no gama controls, limited clip length, only 1 sensor - not 3 image sensors like decent HD camcorders, no viewfinder for focus accuracy and for shooting in the sun, no zebra-striping in the non-existent viewfinder, no knee adjustment for dynamic range, no 16-bit 48 kHz stereo audio, no way to attach a decent off-camera microphone, limited on-board media storage and does not include industry standards (HDCAM, XDCAM, DV, etc.), no increase in resolution over any other entry-level 720p videocam, no 30fps (for high speed subject clarity) capability, no variable shutter controls, SLR-quality lenses will make no difference due to 720p 1MP per frame resolutions, no anamorphic standard-def letterbox options, , no shoulder support ergonomics, and most important ----no full-HD 1080i video resolution (!)

Still cameras and video cameras require different technology and ergonomics to do their jobs well. Someone could try to design the perfect all-purpose golf club, but it will never be as good as the individual clubs in the bag.


 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Ricoh GR Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T100 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow