D90 movie function is a game changer!!!

[jerseyguy]

I'm sorry. I must have clicked on the wrong link. I thought this was the Canon 1D/1DS/5D forum. My apologies.
--
Life is what happens while you're making other plans

 

[Suntan]

I can't see any serious indie producer using the D90--not with a 5
minute limitation on clips. That's a serious problem, along with the
fact that any recorded audio is in mono.

You can get very cheap audio recorders (an old pocket Sony Minidisc player) to record 16 bit 48Khz and a relatively cheap mic to record stereo audio and sync the audio to the video afterwards. Also, the advantage is that you don’t need a cable running from the camcorder to the place you want to capture the sounds.

Anyway, I don’t know if the D90 implementation would be the ultimate derivation of this, but to get the equivalent of a 200 f2VR (or the equivalent of an 85 1.2L, say) on an HD cam-corder would be out of the league of the “average” indie producer at least.

I've always believed in using the tools that were designed for the
job: phone for talking, camera for taking photos, video camera for
taking video. Convergence frequently allows cross functionality, but
at a loss in quality to all the elements that are converged.

I tend to agree with this too in normal life (at least as far as using my cell phone to actually make phone calls.)

But let me tell you a little story about a couple of dudes that got a wild hair to lob a bunch of Canon 1D’s around a room, coordinate them together and use them to shoot a sequence, involving a chick in some tight fitting leather, that would come at the beginning of their movie. They called the technique “Bullet Time.” It ended up being pretty cool, and helped make them a fair bit of scratch in the process. Not to mention make everyone, geeky teenager to grizzled film insider, drop their jaw and say “WTF??”

Creativity can come up with some pretty cool stuff that sounded pretty stupid before the fact.

-Suntan

 

[semorg]

I also predict D90 will change the indi movie world and put a huge
damper on the RED company. Many indi movie makers love HD but don't
like the deep DOF and long for the shallow DOP of 35 film. Guess
what? They got their wish for less than $1000 on a system that
already has numerous amount of quality lenses.

Depth of field will be very similar between the D90 and the Red One
camera as the sensor sizes are quite close. (The Red is likely a bit
larger than the area used in a D90 for video.) Not even considering
the difference between 720P and 4K, in terms of actually shooting a
movie for real, the D90 isn't going to work and the Red is already
being used by a lot of top name directors and cinematographers.

(I am assuming the D90 uses the entire sensor width and downsamples
appropriately. If it windows the center of the sensor, then it will
have small sensor depth of field properties similar to existing
consumer video cameras.)

-Z-

Haven't been in any Z replies in a long while. So this is refreshing. Looks like you've been following up on the Red one as well. There are sample videos from Nikon, I have a link in one of my replies in this thread. It looks good, and they are emphasizing the DOF. I am assuming it's downsampled rather than crop from what I can see.

--
must watch: http://www.climatecrisis.net/
My Latest Gallery: From Peru to Chile: http://www.pbase.com/salim/peruchile2005

 

[semorg]

Seriously, just wait for the actual digital cine camera. Use your
still camera for stills. It'll be nice being able to make high
quality home movies in the meanwhile I guess.

I am sure scarlet would be a great camera . Red has already proven themselves with Red one. That said, even when the camera comes out, it will not have the huge amount of glass that exist for nikon. Imagine the possibilities of fisheye, TS lenses, macro and more....
--
must watch: http://www.climatecrisis.net/
My Latest Gallery: From Peru to Chile: http://www.pbase.com/salim/peruchile2005

 

[Suntan]

DSLR sales are a very small % of sales for both Canon and Nikon.. I
believe in the 10-15% range for each company. The market for this
type of thing is ALREADY being handled by the point and shoot market.
Even if 25% of the people who use DSLR's would be interested in this,
thats a TINY portion of their market share and total revenue.

Besides, this is just stupid.. If you want a movie camera buy a
camcorder.

then why do you think nikon put it on one of their SLRs if the SLR is such a small market to begin with?

-Suntan

 

[Suntan]

I know some of you might say, who cares about video. The fact is,
journalism is changing and every outfit is asking their journalist to
carry a video or become familiar with it. Single images will always
be special in their power, but the world wants to see video.

I agree, how many times have they shown the ATM (or possibly Quicki-Mart security) footage of that bridge in Minneapolis falling because that was the only footage available of it?

Ok so now a few years down the road you have a PJ caliber SLR that is also capable of taking 1080P broadcast quality clips ready for the opening sequence of the national evening news and you are presented with a once in a lifetime sequence of events that unfolds right in front of you.

Do you switch it to stills, or video?

-Suntan

 

[Rowbear]

Great post.
--
Robert
http://www.pbase.com/rgravel/mes_photos

 

[jmaditto]

Will a moderator please grow pair and start moderating this forum please.

 

[maxz]

what about sensor size. Yes you can attach different lenses to pro camcorder but your DOF control is still very limited by sensor size, the holy grail in imaging biz.

You can buy a cinevate lens attachment for $699 canon hi def
camcorder which allows Nikon lenses to be attached for shallow depth
of field.

You get a much higher quality video, 1920x1080 frame, far superior
audio and multiple frame rates. All features that when compared side
by side will not have indie film makers running for the D90.

All that for well under $2000, not $10,000.

--
Michael James - DigitalCoastImage.com - Destin, FL U.S.A.

 

[stevielee]

YouTube is becoming a real crossroads of world culture. And many
commercial website are using YouTube style videos for information and
sales. People to people contact. Face to face. It's called face time
and both consumer and commercial websites are buying into it big
time. Meet the staff. Meet the consumer who is satisfied with the
product or service.

During our photo shoot first of the week using models, customers and
staff as talent, if I could have used the modeling lights and shot a
little light video it would have been great. Then we would have had
all the great shots for the website, ads and brochures, plus some
video testimonials and pitches to use through YouTube on the website
as well. With the talent up and primed after the stills, we could
just flick a switch and grab some quick video without changing
lights, set-up or camera

Your example is exactly why the OP rightly noted that Nikon's D90 is "a game changer". and some of these old crusty, 1D series luddites don't like it one bit.

If they have to suffer through sub-standard AF on their 1DIII, or pay through the nose for a hi-rez DSLR (8K), that should sell for 2-4K less than it does, why on earth should a 1K, entry level DSLR from a competing company be taken seriously - especially in the 1D forum?

Canon is getting whomped in all directions from Nikon. Who would have thought that in just a little over a year, "the little company that could": Nikon, would be leading the pack in almost every major innovation - now including video?

Canon could have offered Hi-Rez LCD's before Nikon, but they didn't, because they felt they didn't have to - being number #1 and all. Now, their hand is finally being forced by Nikon. They just released their first Hi-Rez LCD on the upcoming 50D.

Canon has thus far, ceased being proactive in introducing and including state-of-the-art technologies on their DSLR's. They are in FULL reaction mode, as is apparent with the 50D. And as another poster rightly stated, Canon is most likely "holding back" offering Hi-Def Video in their DSLR's, so not to step on their Camcorder business. Nikon has no such restraints, and so they are the first to offer it. This is really embarrassing for a company like Canon, who specializes in Video.

Talk about being caught with their pants down. Who's running the show over at thier DSLR division these days? Hopefully he or she is looking for another job very soon!

 

[stevielee]

Will a moderator please grow pair and start moderating this forum
please.

And what would you have them "moderate" out..this whole thread perhaps?

This is a very pertinent subject for all Canon DSLR users. You not liking the fact that
another company (Nikon) other than Canon is being discussed is irrelevant.

The big question is: why is Canon holding back on their customers a technology in which they specialize in?

 

[jmaditto]

Just keep the Nikon stuff there and the Canon stuff here. This forum is about Canon 1D gear and about future 1D gear. That is all I'm posting about. This post thread should moved.

 

[semorg]

Great question. In the example, I would go with Video!

For two reasons. One, sure Wee all want that 12mp image that might get on the cover of times. But let's face it. The same video might be seen with 100 million viewers vs. 10 million on print.

Two, stills are great for capturing human emotion and in the example you provided a video might tell a better story. Now if was shooting the aftermath, then I might stick with stills. The same with if I was shooting the Olympics. For One, I would not be able to shoot video (which could raise another issue) and two stills will be great for capture that moment of victory or defeat. Joy and sadness the way a motion picture never can.

I know some of you might say, who cares about video. The fact is,
journalism is changing and every outfit is asking their journalist to
carry a video or become familiar with it. Single images will always
be special in their power, but the world wants to see video.

I agree, how many times have they shown the ATM (or possibly
Quicki-Mart security) footage of that bridge in Minneapolis falling
because that was the only footage available of it?

Ok so now a few years down the road you have a PJ caliber SLR that is
also capable of taking 1080P broadcast quality clips ready for the
opening sequence of the national evening news and you are presented
with a once in a lifetime sequence of events that unfolds right in
front of you.

Do you switch it to stills, or video?

-Suntan

--
must watch: http://www.climatecrisis.net/
My Latest Gallery: From Peru to Chile: http://www.pbase.com/salim/peruchile2005

 

[semorg]

Exactly, that's why we should put a context in the discussion of what we want to see in the next 5D or 1D by comparing it to other products.

All you have to say is that as a user, you would prefer xyz over video and you would keep it relevant.

Just keep the Nikon stuff there and the Canon stuff here. This forum
is about Canon 1D gear and about future 1D gear. That is all I'm
posting about. This post thread should moved.

--
must watch: http://www.climatecrisis.net/
My Latest Gallery: From Peru to Chile: http://www.pbase.com/salim/peruchile2005

 

[bgbs]

Canon is a huge enterprise they produce Video and photography equipment. Nikon's D90 is a way getting some canon's video market. And I say, this is a smart move by them because now you get High definition video, with interchangeable lenses (that provide great depth of field) and sensor technology that beats any camcorder in lowlight circumstance. This is a killer in my opinion.

This is like a semi-professional camera with superb image quality you will not get with consumer based cameras.

--
Ben
Design is all I do.
bibikova.com

 

[Matt Cham]

If you've ever watched a behind the scene setup, you'll see how much
prefocusing is done. With ability to view the output on a monitor and
combing with prefocusing I think that limitation can be overcome.

Why bother with video if your subject does not move?
If the subject moves, then you must re-focus manually.
If you are just going to manual focus, that would
be the equivalent of 1970's camcorder technology.

Many new pocket cameras can record 720p movies
while autofocusing. This feature in the D90 is not that
useful IMHO, but it's a feature that will improve in time.
Specifically, integrating video AF into future DSLRs.

--
Matt Cham

My Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/mattcham/

 

[bgbs]

I dont think 5D II will be a life changing event. No nikon D3, or D700 user is going to jump for 5D II. ISO range, AF range, and other bells and whisles is enough and overexceptional already. Next 5D will not be a killer, it will maybe slightly better on one or two features, but not all. It will be like 50D but full frame, and I don't see any huge excitement over 50D

--
Ben
Design is all I do.
bibikova.com

 

[bgbs]

Carrying one camera that does both functions for PJ business is better than having two different.
--
Ben
Design is all I do.
bibikova.com

 

[bgbs]

You are missing the picture. D90 already does everything better than D80. On top of that AS A BONUS, it comes with Video mode. WOW. Instead of carrying to equipments at once, you can carry one and do both things. With the video as a bonus, the camera does not sacrifice IQ, or other things. IQ is better than D80, ISO is much better than d80, metering, AF, LCD, ...etc is all better.

I think this camera is a winner.

--
Ben
Design is all I do.
bibikova.com

 

[delete]

Wrong forum. Go Nikon.