Tepid D90, worse than EOS 20D

[tropical canon shooter]

I have seen alot of people praising the video modes of the D90, saying Nikon has broken the glass ceiling. How many people can seriously manage manual focus either through the view finder or live view, assuming the camera is on a tripod and follow the object at 1/3 DOF focus, to produce a video clip comparable to the Sony SR11 or Canon HF30, to name a few ??

I saw the clips on the nikon site, the D90 simply increased the exposure of the night scene. Exposure gain is present on most top-end consumer camcorders. As for changing lens, how many people are going to buy f2.8 lens or faster just to make this video feature count. Camcorders routinely use apertures of f1.8 to f3.0 . I know that nikon wants sales, but even Sony, who supplies their sensors must be laughing at them now. Then consider 'mono' sound. Not even the best AV recievers, packed with all the THX audio processing bells and whistles could reform that lump of clay. This feature could lead alot of nikon customers to frustration, like the owners of AMC Gremlins/Pacers from the 70's.

Nikon/Canon kit lens of the aperture range of f3.5 - 5.6 were never designed to handle videography, however Nikon, who gave us a D300 with 12bit 8fps while concealing 14bit (at 2.5fps) is once again trying to herd unsuspecting customers to the counter to buy faster lens. Its not going to work.

However there are some other disappointing features of the D90 which I hope folks can comment on;
1. 12 bit RAW files in an age of 14 bit processing from the 450D

2. 200-3200 native ISO. If you compare this to the EOS50D, remember native ISO is 100-3200. Even the 40D can simulate iso6400 by exposure compensation.

3. 4.5 fps for a 7 frame bust in RAW and 25 frame burst in jpeg. This looks like Canon's ancient EOS20D, which the EOS1000D outperforms.

4. Then consider Canon's gapless design on the microlens of the EOS50D sensor. This is where sensor quality will pull away from gimicks.

Lets focus on what we all know is truly important. I think the competition between Canon and Nikon is benefiting us more that the companies would like, but we shouldn't bury our heads in the sand and hail this tepid product in 2009. I really wonder what difficulty Nikon/Sony has with putting out a genuiene 14 bit sensor together with a processor that can handle the data.

Also for those blinded by the 51 point/11 point autofocus, consider humans have 2 eyes,none of which reside at the back of the head. If the object is large enough, I wonder how effective 51 points of autofocus would be in capturing shallow depth of field on the single point of interest to a photographer?? I can't wait for the autofocus test on the new 50D.....

 

[satish_varma]

I am wondering then why are you so worried about it?

 

[tropical canon shooter]

I hope Nikon gets the 14 bit processing and native ISO 100 going for the D400. It was so embarrassing at the D300 announcement to see so many poeple SWEAR the D300 was shooting 8 fps at 14 bits, saying Canon was buried and how good the sony sensor was, only to be confronted with the VERY FINE PRINT of 14 bits at 2.5 fps. Some still think this is achieved by double scanning the sensor.

It just proves that an SLR is about the sensor first, chip/AF second and all other bells and whistles after. Any comparison between Canon and Nikon SLR's on these points will consistently end in one particular way.

But seriously, I think the D90 is a poor, warmed over version of the EOS 20D, with a dodgy implementation of video capture.
--
EOS 30D, 10-22 EF-S, 60mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, Speedlight 580 EX, BG-2 Grip

 

[Chasen]

I have seen alot of people praising the video modes of the D90,
saying Nikon has broken the glass ceiling. How many people can
seriously manage manual focus either through the view finder or live
view, assuming the camera is on a tripod and follow the object at 1/3
DOF focus, to produce a video clip comparable to the Sony SR11 or
Canon HF30, to name a few ??

I saw the clips on the nikon site, the D90 simply increased the
exposure of the night scene. Exposure gain is present on most top-end
consumer camcorders. As for changing lens, how many people are going
to buy f2.8 lens or faster just to make this video feature count.
Camcorders routinely use apertures of f1.8 to f3.0 . I know that
nikon wants sales, but even Sony, who supplies their sensors must be
laughing at them now. Then consider 'mono' sound. Not even the best
AV recievers, packed with all the THX audio processing bells and
whistles could reform that lump of clay. This feature could lead alot
of nikon customers to frustration, like the owners of AMC
Gremlins/Pacers from the 70's.

Nikon/Canon kit lens of the aperture range of f3.5 - 5.6 were never
designed to handle videography, however Nikon, who gave us a D300
with 12bit 8fps while concealing 14bit (at 2.5fps) is once again
trying to herd unsuspecting customers to the counter to buy faster
lens. Its not going to work.

However there are some other disappointing features of the D90 which
I hope folks can comment on;
1. 12 bit RAW files in an age of 14 bit processing from the 450D

2. 200-3200 native ISO. If you compare this to the EOS50D, remember
native ISO is 100-3200. Even the 40D can simulate iso6400 by exposure
compensation.

3. 4.5 fps for a 7 frame bust in RAW and 25 frame burst in jpeg. This
looks like Canon's ancient EOS20D, which the EOS1000D outperforms.

4. Then consider Canon's gapless design on the microlens of the
EOS50D sensor. This is where sensor quality will pull away from
gimicks.

Lets focus on what we all know is truly important. I think the
competition between Canon and Nikon is benefiting us more that the
companies would like, but we shouldn't bury our heads in the sand and
hail this tepid product in 2009. I really wonder what difficulty
Nikon/Sony has with putting out a genuiene 14 bit sensor together
with a processor that can handle the data.

Also for those blinded by the 51 point/11 point autofocus, consider
humans have 2 eyes,none of which reside at the back of the head. If
the object is large enough, I wonder how effective 51 points of
autofocus would be in capturing shallow depth of field on the single
point of interest to a photographer?? I can't wait for the autofocus
test on the new 50D.....

This is a CONSUMER camera. Folks at this level care very little, if at all, about the features that you have selectively chosen. I doubt Joe Schmo goes into BestBuy and asks about bits, native ISO, burst speed, or gapless design on the D90. Why add cost to the camera unnecessarily.

And anything close to P&S video will suffice for a first-generation/early-adopter feature.

 

[Rickard Hansson]

It must really hurt you that nikon bringed out the D90.
Why else all this yada yada!!??

I have seen alot of people praising the video modes of the D90,
saying Nikon has broken the glass ceiling. How many people can
seriously manage manual focus either through the view finder or live
view, assuming the camera is on a tripod and follow the object at 1/3
DOF focus, to produce a video clip comparable to the Sony SR11 or
Canon HF30, to name a few ??

I saw the clips on the nikon site, the D90 simply increased the
exposure of the night scene. Exposure gain is present on most top-end
consumer camcorders. As for changing lens, how many people are going
to buy f2.8 lens or faster just to make this video feature count.
Camcorders routinely use apertures of f1.8 to f3.0 . I know that
nikon wants sales, but even Sony, who supplies their sensors must be
laughing at them now. Then consider 'mono' sound. Not even the best
AV recievers, packed with all the THX audio processing bells and
whistles could reform that lump of clay. This feature could lead alot
of nikon customers to frustration, like the owners of AMC
Gremlins/Pacers from the 70's.

Nikon/Canon kit lens of the aperture range of f3.5 - 5.6 were never
designed to handle videography, however Nikon, who gave us a D300
with 12bit 8fps while concealing 14bit (at 2.5fps) is once again
trying to herd unsuspecting customers to the counter to buy faster
lens. Its not going to work.

However there are some other disappointing features of the D90 which
I hope folks can comment on;
1. 12 bit RAW files in an age of 14 bit processing from the 450D

2. 200-3200 native ISO. If you compare this to the EOS50D, remember
native ISO is 100-3200. Even the 40D can simulate iso6400 by exposure
compensation.

3. 4.5 fps for a 7 frame bust in RAW and 25 frame burst in jpeg. This
looks like Canon's ancient EOS20D, which the EOS1000D outperforms.

4. Then consider Canon's gapless design on the microlens of the
EOS50D sensor. This is where sensor quality will pull away from
gimicks.

Lets focus on what we all know is truly important. I think the
competition between Canon and Nikon is benefiting us more that the
companies would like, but we shouldn't bury our heads in the sand and
hail this tepid product in 2009. I really wonder what difficulty
Nikon/Sony has with putting out a genuiene 14 bit sensor together
with a processor that can handle the data.

Also for those blinded by the 51 point/11 point autofocus, consider
humans have 2 eyes,none of which reside at the back of the head. If
the object is large enough, I wonder how effective 51 points of
autofocus would be in capturing shallow depth of field on the single
point of interest to a photographer?? I can't wait for the autofocus
test on the new 50D.....

--
Rickard Hansson
Sweden

 

[tropical canon shooter]

please don't under estimate 'Joe'. I had an Olympus Sp350 and thought things were great until I tried shooting a play in a dimly lit hall. Even at ISO400, the supplied apertures just couldn't make the shot. I paid about $250US for the camera at that time. When people move up to SLR's they really don't want to ever have to abandon a $250 investment again, so they will research these features. If I use your argument, the no one will buy an SLR, why not just pay for the Nikon P60 or Canon S5, after all they have photo and video capability too.

New SLR owners are checking which sensor is best, then which camera is cheapest. Long before they see the video capapbility of the D90 they will ask 'Why is the base ISO 200, when my last point and shoot had ISO 80?' . People aren't stupid, they know that a light canon camera next to a heavy more expensive, D300 must have some advantage. Probably image quality ?? You tell me !!
--
EOS 30D, 10-22 EF-S, 60mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, Speedlight 580 EX, BG-2 Grip

 

[tropical canon shooter]

I am dissapointed that Nikon hasn't raised the bar on the image quality of their sensors. Would you go to a wharehouse full of 1960's consumer grade 35 film and take it home by the tuck load, just because its free ? to use it in you film SLR, assuming you still have one ? But nikon gives a 12bit, 200-3200 ISO camera for $1200 in 2009, and no one should complain.......
--
EOS 30D, 10-22 EF-S, 60mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, Speedlight 580 EX, BG-2 Grip

 

[Slideshow Bob]

But I understand... the Canon has got higher numbers, so you've got to make some kind of song and dance about it, right? Only one small problem...

14bit DOESN'T MAKE ANY REAL WORLD DIFFERENCE!

SB

 

[Andrew dB]

please don't under estimate 'Joe'. I had an Olympus Sp350 and thought
things were great until I tried shooting a play in a dimly lit hall.
Even at ISO400, the supplied apertures just couldn't make the shot. I
paid about $250US for the camera at that time. When people move up to
SLR's they really don't want to ever have to abandon a $250
investment again, so they will research these features. If I use your
argument, the no one will buy an SLR, why not just pay for the Nikon
P60 or Canon S5, after all they have photo and video capability too.

You would be surprised. I've worked in camera sales and for the most part people don't consider these issues and a sizeable proportion wouldn't even know what ISO is. I remember a customer who had an EOS 10D (when it was still new and hot and very expensive) and he had no idea what we were talking about when we mentioned noise at high ISO or low light. Most camera buyers are nowhere near as informed as you.

I notice from your signature that you own several lenses and a flash gun. Considering there are only something like 1.4 lenses sold for every SLR, this puts you in a small and keen minority.

New SLR owners are checking which sensor is best, then which camera
is cheapest. Long before they see the video capapbility of the D90
they will ask 'Why is the base ISO 200, when my last point and shoot
had ISO 80?' . People aren't stupid, they know that a light canon
camera next to a heavy more expensive, D300 must have some advantage.
Probably image quality ?? You tell me !!

This will be true for some buyers but most won't know or care. The intricacies of what determines base ISO are things that confuse a lot of people on dpreview so expecting the general public to understand it if they have even heard of it is a stretch. The questions we used to get were; how much is it, how heavy is it, how much zoom does it have and for the most part, that was it.

 

[RobertoAvanzi]

But I understand... the Canon has got higher numbers, so you've got
to make some kind of song and dance about it, right? Only one small
problem...

14bit DOESN'T MAKE ANY REAL WORLD DIFFERENCE!

If you just shoot jpeg, you are right.
If you do PP, it does.

Roberto

 

[LeporelloBBR]

1. 12 bit RAW files in an age of 14 bit processing from the 450D

Show me an example between 12 and 14 bit with any REAL difference.

2. 200-3200 native ISO. If you compare this to the EOS50D, remember
native ISO is 100-3200. Even the 40D can simulate iso6400 by exposure
compensation.

You have absolutely NO idea what ISO and BASE ISO means, don't you?

3. 4.5 fps for a 7 frame bust in RAW and 25 frame burst in jpeg. This
looks like Canon's ancient EOS20D, which the EOS1000D outperforms.

So what?

4. Then consider Canon's gapless design on the microlens of the
EOS50D sensor. This is where sensor quality will pull away from
gimicks.

Again, show me an example of a REAL difference.

 

[tropical canon shooter]

The base ISO of the D90 is ISO 200. It achieves ISO 100 by exposure compensation and probably affects the dynamic range of pictures taken at this setting.

If you don't care about shooting in RAW, you are wasting your money even buying an SLR in the first place, stick to the P&S cameras if you don't get my point.
--
EOS 30D, 10-22 EF-S, 60mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, Speedlight 580 EX, BG-2 Grip

 

[john wedrychowski]

Lets get real. The 20D is known to be good. This is a silly comparison
--
John W

 

[bimmerman]

I have seen alot of people praising the video modes of the D90,
saying Nikon has broken the glass ceiling. How many people can
seriously manage manual focus either through the view finder or live
view, assuming the camera is on a tripod and follow the object at 1/3
DOF focus, to produce a video clip comparable to the Sony SR11 or
Canon HF30, to name a few ??

Can't picture myself using a DSLR to capture video but this gimmick will definately be attractive to those looking for a camera in this segment. When the novelty wears off they'll just continue using the camera in a way DSLRs are intended to be used and maintain the bragging rights that their DSLR shoots video.

I saw the clips on the nikon site, the D90 simply increased the
exposure of the night scene. Exposure gain is present on most top-end
consumer camcorders. As for changing lens, how many people are going
to buy f2.8 lens or faster just to make this video feature count.
Camcorders routinely use apertures of f1.8 to f3.0 . I know that
nikon wants sales, but even Sony, who supplies their sensors must be
laughing at them now. Then consider 'mono' sound. Not even the best
AV recievers, packed with all the THX audio processing bells and
whistles could reform that lump of clay. This feature could lead alot
of nikon customers to frustration, like the owners of AMC
Gremlins/Pacers from the 70's.

again, i don't think the video mode is intended to go head to head with dedicated camcorders. similarly, camcorders that shoot still images are equally not intended to challenge even the most basic of DSLRs. But hey, when all you have around your neck is a DSLR when the Loch Ness monster surfaces it'll be pretty handy to have video. Can't think of another reason why i'd want video on a DSLR though.

When live view first made it's appearance on a DSLR, purists argued that it had no place in a DSLR. I don't hear them complaining now. I certainly have never used Live View though. I'll try it someday but since it adds no extra weight to my DSLR I don't mind it being there. If my DSLR shot video i wouldn't mind it being there too. Just in case I came face to face with the Kraken during my sailing trips.

AMC gremlin owners are frustrated due to other reasons. Mainly rust and reliability.

Nikon/Canon kit lens of the aperture range of f3.5 - 5.6 were never
designed to handle videography, however Nikon, who gave us a D300
with 12bit 8fps while concealing 14bit (at 2.5fps) is once again
trying to herd unsuspecting customers to the counter to buy faster
lens. Its not going to work.

Sorry to disagree again but I don't think Nikon is trying to sell fast glass this way.

However there are some other disappointing features of the D90 which
I hope folks can comment on;
1. 12 bit RAW files in an age of 14 bit processing from the 450D

Yup, it's brave of Nikon to stick to 12 bit in a 14 bit age.

2. 200-3200 native ISO. If you compare this to the EOS50D, remember
native ISO is 100-3200. Even the 40D can simulate iso6400 by exposure
compensation.

I don't have a problem there but I do find that in certain situations my 20D has better high ISO performance than my D300. If you accidentally underexposed 2 stops on the 20D and try to recover the picture using photoshop levels, you'll still get a useable picture. With the D300 the picture is wrecked by noise.

3. 4.5 fps for a 7 frame bust in RAW and 25 frame burst in jpeg. This
looks like Canon's ancient EOS20D, which the EOS1000D outperforms.

Let's not forget that the D90 is marketed below the 50D which is marketed below the D300. Which is also consistant with the product pricing of these cameras.

4. Then consider Canon's gapless design on the microlens of the
EOS50D sensor. This is where sensor quality will pull away from
gimicks.

I've seen the 50D sample images at high ISO and the images look excellent. Check out the rally car shot at ISO1600.

Also for those blinded by the 51 point/11 point autofocus, consider
humans have 2 eyes,none of which reside at the back of the head. If
the object is large enough, I wonder how effective 51 points of
autofocus would be in capturing shallow depth of field on the single
point of interest to a photographer?? I can't wait for the autofocus
test on the new 50D.....

Of cause you only need 1 AF point when you're shooting stuff that don't move. Multiple point AF is designed to minimize or eliminate the focus and recompose dance routine. You can't focus and recompose when tracking a subject and deliberately placing it off centre can you? You'll need well placed AF points for that and the more of these, spread out across the frame the better. It was Canon that started with 45 AF points on the 1 Series when Nikon only had 5 points.

Nikon's 51 point 3D tracking works I tell you! I was tracking and panning with 4 race cars with various colours on a race track and I wanted the AF to be on the red car and I wanted to place the red car towards the left of the frame. Once I locked on to the red car I was free to track and pan while the AF points miraculously switched positions to follow the red car as I composed the shot. I had total freedom to concentrate on my panning and composition while the camera followed my subject around the frame! It's no gimmick!!

But here's a point in Canon's defence. Both the 40D and 50D have 9 AF points that are fully cross type! Now that's something! The D90 has 9 points but only the centre one is cross type and as for the D300 it has 15 cross type sensors but all clumped in the centre. So depending on what you're shooting and your shooting style the 50D does not lose out.

 

[steras]

What puzzles me is why a Canon fan is so disappointed Nikon hasn't raised the image quality bar.

You have just been served the 50D and should be happy since it will probably produce the 14-bit high quality pictures you want...or maybe you want to see even better quality so your fantasies about the upgrade from the 5D will have some reality to them...

 

[Roger Lesher]

Canon produces the better camera but Nikon gets the market share.

FWIW - I think the video system is pretty cool, even though practicality is limited.

Comments from a Minolta/Sony user.

 

[vpera]

I can't find any reason for your message, except bashing Nikon, for whatever reason. Also, I don't see why you posted your message on this forum. Also, I'd be glad if you didn't call yourself "canon shooter" because that (along with messages from other canon fan*boys*) easily makes people think all Canon users have such childish opinions. But your message is not alone, and the same is true for persons using other camera brands.

About the D90 video mode:

So far it seems a very reasonably priced way for an amateur video to achieve "film look". 35mm adapters for camcorders aren't very practical (I have been told) and buying video cameras with larger than 1/3" sensors would be expensive.

As I see, the video in D90 is only practical for pre-planned shooting in studio-like environment.

saying Nikon has broken the glass ceiling. How many people can
seriously manage manual focus either through the view finder or live
view, assuming the camera is on a tripod and follow the object at 1/3
DOF focus, to produce a video clip comparable to the Sony SR11 or
Canon HF30, to name a few ??

The same way as pros work, perhaps with an assistant adjusting the focus according to preset marks. In most cases adjusting focus is not necessary at all.

I saw the clips on the nikon site, the D90 simply increased the
exposure of the night scene. Exposure gain is present on most top-end
consumer camcorders.

Doesn't every camera with autoexposure do that. Sorry I just don't see what is the problem. The right way is to use manual exposure or lock it and adjust after that.

As for changing lens, how many people are going
to buy f2.8 lens or faster just to make this video feature count.

I'm sure many have old manual Nikkors with fixed focal lengths and proper focusing rings. Those can be bought second hand, propably not too expensive.

Camcorders routinely use apertures of f1.8 to f3.0 . I know that
nikon wants sales, but even Sony, who supplies their sensors must be
laughing at them now.

??

Then consider 'mono' sound. Not even the best
AV recievers, packed with all the THX audio processing bells and
whistles could reform that lump of clay. This feature could lead alot
of nikon customers to frustration, like the owners of AMC
Gremlins/Pacers from the 70's.

So what? Good enough quality audio recorders (even with XLR connectors) are not too expensive. For good video you should never use the camera microphones. syncing the sound with picture is no problem at all with common arrangements.

Nikon/Canon kit lens of the aperture range of f3.5 - 5.6 were never
designed to handle videography, however Nikon, who gave us a D300
with 12bit 8fps while concealing 14bit (at 2.5fps) is once again
trying to herd unsuspecting customers to the counter to buy faster
lens. Its not going to work.

What has the kit lens to do with D300 or videography? You can blame Nikon marketing if you like (I like to blame marketing in general ;-), though.

Other:

Also for those blinded by the 51 point/11 point autofocus, consider
humans have 2 eyes,none of which reside at the back of the head. If
the object is large enough, I wonder how effective 51 points of
autofocus would be in capturing shallow depth of field on the single
point of interest to a photographer?? I can't wait for the autofocus
test on the new 50D.....

I have used EOS-3 with 45 AF points and already in it was possible to select one point. It was sometimes helpful to be able to select just the correct AF point to get (more or less) perfect framing. But I still prefer fast reliable and accurate AF over tens of AF points.

V

 

[Rajeshb]

3 posts about Canon 50D in the first page of Nikon D300-100 forum.

roughly around 9-10 posts about nikon D90 in canon 50D-10D forum, and mostly bad mouthing the D90 (and D90 doesn't even compete with 50D). it tells a lot about canon fanboys.

Why are you people so insecured? Canon still is the no.1 SLR maker in the world and makes great cameras afterall.

(BTW, this is my first post in any canon forum. couldn't help

Rajesh

 

[Jogger]

Huh? 50d and d90 arent even in the same market.. its like saying D700 is better 50D.. no kidding.

Canon produces the better camera but Nikon gets the market share.

FWIW - I think the video system is pretty cool, even though
practicality is limited.

Comments from a Minolta/Sony user.

 

[vpera]

it tells a lot about canon fanboys.

Such messages have been seen by Nikon fanboys, too, but I admit Canon fanboys are better in their bashing (which is not an advantage, though).

V