D90 True Motion Pictures - One Opinion

munro harrap said:

....and the not so good, unfortunately. Exposure is unalterable
during a shot. So is focus.
--

Click to expand...

how many times do you have to be told otherwise.

1st:
how can an slr fix focus? Every lens I have ever used allows manual focus.

2nd:

when there is a will there is a way. I'd be willing to be that with an AI/AI-S lens we will be able to adjust aperture.....hence adjust the exposure.

Heck....with a small modification to the aperture of an ai/ai-s lens one can remove the click stops of the aperture resulting in a continuously variable aperture that doesn't jump between stops.

And if this does become a technology that adapts & evolves in DSLR's I bet we see a couple of lenses designed with film type results in mind.

You really need to stop trolling and think about the possibilities for a moment.

the great swing to bigger sensor bodies is for shallow dof . And so with that there is less and less room for error on accurate focusing. So these 2 are in opposition to each other.

For general media fans...maybe something there. But for creative types that want to focus on creating an image vs recording a scene....this D80 stuff is next to useless.
--
Have a great and wonderful Day !! Cheers !!

See Death Valley; China; and Cuba
http://www.jonrp.smugmug.com

I totally agree with everything you said.. this feature makes the D90 a really awesome camera.. being able to use your photo lens to make a movie? WOW

I almost regret my D300 that I bought 1 month ago.

junksecret said:

I'll just say this, look at the movie Nikon made with this camera, as
a launch video and tell me of any other affordable camcorder that
could even come close to this? Did it take time, creativity,
planning and talent???? YEP

http://www.nikonproducts.co.uk/d90-video.aspx

Click to expand...

Thanks for re-posting the link Joe. I am 100% with you on everything you write. Those who disagree don't get it.

I hadn't watched the video yet but it is indeed mighty impressive, and much better than what I can shoot with my consumer Canon HD10 costing exactly the same and offering full HD resolution.

I find it amusing that some people think they can produce pro looking videos with a camera, whatever its capabilities. It is already extremely difficult to take good still pictures in the wild, videos is an order of magnitude more complex.

In that real world context where there is no assistant to modify the light and no 100.000 US$ HMi lights to lighten up the background, having good control on DoF will make all the difference.

What the D90 offers is so totally game changing that people just cannot believe it is true, but at the same time it is no magic bullet and you are totally correct to write that only those with talent and creativity will be able to tap into the potential. I do believe that this can include family shooters willing to devote some time to this.

Cheers,
Bernard

Thom Hogan said:

Correct. Who's going to pull your focus while you're looking through
your D90?

Click to expand...

This isn't a new problem with the D90 - it's common to nearly all movie cameras.

Where mechanical follow-focus devices (and big fleshy focus-pullers) aren't usable, the camera operator must handle that himself, which means taking measurements and setting marks or limiters for focusing to predetermined distances by feel. To do the same with an SLR lens, you could put bits of tape & plastic on the lens barrel.

Thom Hogan said:

Thom Hogan said:

Films routinely use quality sound recording equipment and the sound
is then sync'ed to the motion in post-production/editing.

Click to expand...

Again, this misses the point a bit. If you have the money to do true
syncing with separate equipment, you'll just buy or rent a Red. Why?
Well, because the sync slate alone costs more than the D90. Your
overall budget is already well outside the consumer DSLR scene.

Click to expand...

Remember this is an all-digital production - you could record stereo sound to a notebook PC, and then you could sync the sound on that notebook (or any other PC) by lining up the waveforms by eye, with millisecond accuracy. You could then insert the high-end audio stream into the M-JPEG files without loss.

Software for this sort of thing can be had for free, or you could spend at most a few hundred dollars on better software & more flexible hardware, like USB audio interfaces with multiple channels. Any recent notebook PC with any vaguely nerdy operator could do the job, and it's reasonable to assume there'd be a few of those on-set anyway.

Thom Hogan said:

Thom Hogan said:

The fact that scenes can be shot and reshot, take after take, without
the cost of film and processing is also monumental.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is potentially nice. However, it isn't without cost, as any
serious videographer will tell you. When you've got expensive RAIDed
SCSI or Fiber drives taking up most of your office, you'll know what
I mean.

Click to expand...

SCSI? Fibre? Your videographer pals should get out more.

These days you can get network-attached storage appliances for $250 (or less) per terabyte, and they're only as big as shoeboxes. They're kinda slow, but you can configure them for RAID-1 to store all your footage fairly safely, and (for speed when editing etc.) you could add RAID-0 to any new-ish workstation for the price of the drives alone.

Cable-wise, all you need for (compressed) realtime HD is gigabit ethernet, which is becoming ubiquitous in home-office hardware. If you were really serious about secure, fast storage (especially for film insurance purposes), you'd probably just rent a multi-terabyte blade server in a secure location, or you could make your own for a few thousand dollars.

I've worked in post-production since the '90s - I can remember having to scrounge daily for a few meg of disk space to store the frames I was pulling off backup tapes - but these days I have more storage at home than I know what to do with.

The NAS I have here even has a USB port and will automatically offload any storage device that's plugged into it. On set, a few memory cards could be in constant rotation between the cameras and the storage, freeing up a computer and an operator for other tasks.

Anyway - we can probably assume that the D90's movie files are at most 30 megabytes per second (more likely about 15MB/s), as that's the top write speed of an SD card. If we call that a gig a minute, then a plain, off-the-shelf $250 NAS with half a terabyte of RAID-1 could store 500 minutes of footage, which is more than enough for an ultra-low-budget film production.

15-30MB/s is pretty good, too. There's no temporal compression with M-JPEG, so every frame is a keyframe, and at 300KB to 1MB per frame, each frame is going to look pretty good, with none of that MPEG smear & jiggle.

It's not unusual for post-production studios to deliver high-end TV commercials etc. in sequential JPEG, even, because lossy formats are quite acceptable when broadcast is the only stage remaining.

Being able to shoot movies, shorts etc. at that quality for under $2,000 should be pretty liberating. Being able to do so on a whim, without a full film crew (like clapper-loaders & focus-pullers), is going to be be utterly fantastic.

All i'm affraid off is a heavy bunch of kittens movies filling up the forums, like we haven't seen enough of stills with them already.

All in all, I'm getting the Sigma 10-20 first, then the D90 and use both cameras (I have a D50 now) to better capture the life of me, using movies and stills, and NO CATS allowed. Peace!

Joe,

Thanks for poiting these out, as you suggest D90 can be used as a professional movie camera when used by an elite Hollywood crew and other equipment such dollies, motorized stands, audio recording equipment etc. But an average or even an excellent photographer is not a Hollywood camera crew. an average customer who buys D90 will thus, be hardly able to exploit D90's movie mode. A consumer product should be made in a way that is good enough to be usable by an average consumer of that targeted market.

All said, I like this feature and I look forward to having it when it is mature enough.

--
Richard, NC

junksecret said:

I've read lots of posts complaining about the "limitations" of the
D90's D-Movie mode, especially compared to current consumer
digicams/camcorders. I find quite the reverse to be true.

As a preface, I was an agent in the Television/Film industry for 20+
years and while I suspect I have little talent for actual filmmaking,
I've seen a great deal of it happen.

Shortcoming Misconception A - "the D90 doesn't even autofocus"

Films are routinely shot on 35mm motion picture cameras like the
Arriflex or Panavision camera's which can be a bit spendy ($100,000 -
$200,000 plus). These cameras don't autofocus, they are often
operated by a camera operator who deals with camera movement and
composition and a focus puller who focuses based on markings made on
the lens to correspond with "marks" to be hit by the subjects.

Shortcoming misconception B - "you can't accurately focus when
subject distance changes dramatically"

If you pay attention to a feature film you will see lots of shots
with the camera moving with the subject. Dollies are routinely used
to keep focal ranges relatively constant while maintaining shallow
DOF.

Shortcoming misconception C - "how can it be serious, it can only
shoot 5 min clips"

I'm not a film historian but I would be surprised if any mainstream
motion picture ever had a 5 min. continuous shot. Shots are much
more often measured in seconds rather than mins.

Shortcoming misconception D - "it doesn't even have stereo or an
external mic".

Films routinely use quality sound recording equipment and the sound
is then sync'ed to the motion in post-production/editing.

The fact that scenes can be shot and reshot, take after take, without
the cost of film and processing is also monumental.

Is the D90 for $1,000 plus lenses a replacement for the 1/4 million
dollar film cameras? Certainly not, but it is a far more creative
tool given it's access to a gigantic sensor in digicam terms, it's
access to superb quality lenses and their inherent DOF and creative
flexability, than any current HD consumer digicam/camcorder.

I think all the consumer digicam/camcorders to this point have been
the equivilent of P&S and THIS camera is the begining of the digital
revolution in motion equivilent to an SLR.

I'm so excited to see what the current crop of young bright
filmmakers will do with this camera. Once it gets in their hands it
should change the shape of youtube and micro=filmmaking in ways I can
barely imagine.

Oh and one last aside, perhaps the 5 min clip limit will spare us the
boring soccer games and birthday parties which are much better served
by the current crop of digicams and will bring us some truly creative
and beautiful images (albeit moving), which is the reason we are here.

I can't wait.

Joe
--
'f8 and be there'



Nikon D40 + Nikkor 18~200VR + Nikkor 18~55

Click to expand...

Alex,

It's great to hear someone who understands the technical end better than me confirm my feelings that this really is groundbreaking for "filmmakers". As I stated in my original post, I have been exposed to a good deal of the creative process, as well as the actual production.

I know film students should have a heyday with this technology and while the people wanting it to be the quick solution to their boring 30 minute videos of god knows what may be disappointed, those that wish to be truly creative without having incredibly "deep pockets" will likely find this camera their first real opportunity.

Personally, I can't wait to see it....wish I had more talent so I could participate but representing them down the road is as close as I'd come....

Joe
--
'f8 and be there'



Nikon D40 + Nikkor 18~200VR + Nikkor 18~55

Rcihardc said:

Joe,
Thanks for poiting these out, as you suggest D90 can be used as a
professional movie camera when used by an elite Hollywood crew and
other equipment such dollies, motorized stands, audio recording
equipment etc. But an average or even an excellent photographer is
not a Hollywood camera crew. an average customer who buys D90 will
thus, be hardly able to exploit D90's movie mode. A consumer product
should be made in a way that is good enough to be usable by an
average consumer of that targeted market.
All said, I like this feature and I look forward to having it when it
is mature enough.

Richard, NC

Click to expand...

Richard,

I appreciate your view, but disagree with it. I feel that the camera doesn't need to mature as much as we do as "cinematographers" if we choose to use this mode. I wouldn't say when the D90 matures enough to be easily used to shoot snapshots for "average consumers" it would be good, it would be a coolpix.

I am not at all certain the function will be overly useful to me. I have limited talent and creativity and find still photography tough enough.

While I understand this camera has a few limitations (most if not all of which seem to have been addressed somewhere in this thread), I think those that take the movie function as seriously as many here take their still photography, great things will come. I hear apparently knowledgable people in this thread talking about how to sync sound with software, focus solutions, etc. and while it's greek to me, so is the wisking around in CS3 that I find equally daunting.

I hope and expect this to be a wonderful tool for those willing to devote the effort and talent, and for the rest of us with point and shoot video skills, perhaps a P&S video cam?

Actually I expect in decent light with the camera set at a hyperfocal distance it may be pretty usable even for the talent impaired.

Joe
--
'f8 and be there'



Nikon D40, Nikkor 18~200VR, Nikkor 18~55

"...for one thing, once recording has begun, only manual focus adjustments are possible. Its the same with aperture: you can change it before or after, but not during exposure".

The above is quoted from the Imaging Resource review. Those are serious limitations.

I have also checked out the very jerky original video files from Dpreview. Because we dont move like that I cannot accept it.

The still image IQ is, that said, rather better than the D300!!

In another league and on another planet at low isos, very nice, what a shame Nikon didnt wait then till they got the right sensor now!

What a difference a year makes........

--bt



http://www.dmalikovski.deviantart.com/gallery

Alex McLeod said:

Anyway - we can probably assume that the D90's movie files are at
most 30 megabytes per second (more likely about 15MB/s), as that's
the top write speed of an SD card.

Click to expand...

According to the 3 full res movies I have downloaded, the data rate ranges from 1.6MB/sec to 2.7MB/sec. Still, I don't see any JPEG artifacts in the still frames. I have a feeling they are compressing as much as possible before noticable artifacts appear.

munro harrap said:

I have also checked out the very jerky original video files from
Dpreview. Because we dont move like that I cannot accept it.

Click to expand...

Part of that may be your PC. The rest is the electronic shutter speed being much higher than 1/48th. Stack some ND filters and get that shutter speed down and it will look a lot better.

Linear, I think that you are playing devils advocate! (But) the more you object, the more we see the gains in this development. In two years, every new DSLR will have this (but improved) video feature.
--
WillemB

junksecret said:

junksecret wrote:
I'm so excited to see what the current crop of young bright
filmmakers will do with this camera. Once it gets in their hands it
should change the shape of youtube and micro=filmmaking in ways I can
barely imagine.

Oh and one last aside, perhaps the 5 min clip limit will spare us the
boring soccer games and birthday parties which are much better served
by the current crop of digicams and will bring us some truly creative
and beautiful images (albeit moving), which is the reason we are here.

I can't wait.

Joe
--

Click to expand...

I agree completely.
--



Please do not quote the pictures in the original post unless you're saying something specifically about one!

True, but a JPEG's file size depends on its content. A busier background (like a city-scape or garden) recorded at the same quality could more than double the file size.

It's also possible that the D90 throttles back on quality to accommodate the write-speed of the memory card - and not all SD cards are made equal. On paper, 30MB/s is the top speed, but most cards cannot sustain even half that.

Yes, I'm being optimistic here, but Nikon don't exactly have a history of letting us down...

Nah, the longest continuous shot was either in Hitchcock's Rope, or the film Russian Ark, which appears to be entirely one shot.

--
Mark
(my other camera is a RZ67)

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8230549@N08/

This is the first time I have ever posted on these forums.

I felt compelled to on this occasion as I think that Joes anlaysis of what this camera could do for the independent filmmaker is both eloquent and spot on.

I have worked around indy/low budget film shoots enough to know that this camera, even if there is no development in this niche, (which is unlikely), is going to revolutionise the craft.

In the past, the only way of achieving anything approaching a film look with a midrange HDV such as the Sony HDR FX1 cam, was to use complex and optically delicate 35mm adapters such as the Letus 35 which projected an image through a still camera lens onto a rotating ground glass screen which was in turn filmed by the cam's taking lens. In this instance, autofocusing is impossible, as the camera lens is focused on the ground glass and a half to 2/3 of a stop was lost through transmission inefficiencies. At the end of the day, the camera body, (to the filmmaker), is a far more utilitarian item than it is to stills photographer. What is important, is the aesthetic that different tools provide and the ability to attach lenses and their control mechanisms to what is essentially just a recording device. As such, the D90 facilitates the 35mm aesthetic admirably and the flange to chip distance is less that that required for professional movie lenses such as the Panavision etc, so fabricating a Nikon to Panavision adapter, (for example), would be extremely easy allowing filmakers to use lenses they already had, could borrow or hire. There is a 900,000 pixel rear screen which could probably be viewed by a lupe to give a definition and quality far far beyond anything available on even a FX1. The camera has HDMI out, so a live feed to be taken out to an external monitor. The camera can shoot up to 3200ASA, giving around a 2 1/2 stops advantage over most mid range DV cams, that get pretty awful once the gain kicks in. Sound is not an issue. Keep the camera mic on, use an external recorder such as the Zoom H4 or Olympus LS10 with some decent mic's and use a clapper board or finger snap and sync them in post. You're not going to get much drift on a 5 minute take.

This camera is revolutionary for the indy film maker. In the hands of the right practitioner is going to produce some wonderful art. This camera is not a 'Red' at $25,000, but it's probably the next best thing. Actually, I think I'm going to pack up stills and start making movies. I cannot wait to see what we have in a year or two, when this technology really starts maturing. The makers of traditional DV cam's must be absolutely bricking it as it'll be taking a huge chunk out of their sales to the Indy/low budget/student filmmakers market.

The D90 looks like an astonishingly good stills camera too. If you don't need the movie facility, that's fine, don't press the button, but I think we should congratulate the luck of those who could really put this facility to use.

Isn't this camera really marketed to those who have point and shot cameras with video? While there are some interesting video capabilities in the D90, there's too many missing features and I think it misses the mark.

Consumers want autofocus. They want image stabilization. They want to be able to shoot and pan without stopping. Canon will probably put all these things in the next 5D and 60D.