The first two videos are a "must see":
More videos of the D3s (not from the D3s) after the break:
More videos available here.
Nikon just can’t get video right, canon will beat them every time. Don’t get me wrong I love my d300 and for photos the canon wont beet it. But for video it fails
And why is that?
They just don’t flow as nice as the canons. And the compression they use it horrid. And this is a d3s it should of had 1080p to have a 5k camera with 720p is a slap in the face
I think the 720p are the least problem of the Nikon video functionality.
Hmm… who has the problem with Nikon’s video? Is it actual users of video or spec junkies like populate this site?
I do a lot of video production, and while I will always go back to a stand alone video system, there are times when having that functionality is nice. Also the interchangeable lens thing is pretty nice as well to get the artistry right.
That being said, 720p pretty insulting. If they are going to put video with a pro level camera the video needs to pretty close to professional. Also, the compression has horrid artifacting. JPEG video is also a big ugly problem. Frankly there are better ways to create a high quality video that are just algorithms.
Oh, it is also irksome that there is no way to put a decent mic onto the thing. Even if it was through an external unit, it would be nice to plug a real balanced mic system into it.
The D3s has a mic in jack. So just connect up a Beachtek box to it like we do for prosumer camcorders that don’t offer XLR balanced inputs either.
The 720p is limiting, but lets face it, most HD broadcasts are in 720p at the moment, so it is not a show stopper.
@Stephen: You say you do a lot of video production. Do you do enough to realize when you’re watching a YouTube video, that you can’t blame the camera for the compression artifacts your seeing?
I wasn’t watching the youtube video. You can download samples at full quality from various reviewers. Yes, there could be some issues with the compression codec they used in the video editing suite, but they shouldn’t be as bad as they seem.
No, I wasn’t making this judgment off of the samples provided. As well, they are still using the same codec in the D3s as they have used in every previous s type camera.
As for the mic issue. I know there are a lot of ways around it. My issue is that it is a pro-level camera, if they ever intend this to be anything more than a gimmick, then they need to step it up. Also, I don’t produce video for broadcast. Most of what I produce is corporate promotional stuff. So, I would like 1080p, It looks good when it is presented to clients and it looks good for their clients.
I’ll post again once I find the links to the full quality again.
Looks like nikon usa has put up some full quality samples. You can see some of the artifacting in that, look in the blacks. There is not the subtle quality of blacks that should be there.
Anyway, I guess I just want see Nikon do something great. They are so very close. They just need to step up their game just a little.
But there in lies the rub. Would I ever use this for anything other than an occasional hit it and quit it shoot. Those times when I am not looking at obtaining a permit from the local jurisdiction. Though, it is just limiting enough that it makes it difficult for even that.
I just love the idea of a huge sensor, with full 1080p, and interchangeable lenses. If it could provide me an easier option for balanced audio, all the better. It would probably become an important tool if it has just those two things.
I’m rambling. I guess I want to stop using Canon equipment for film and video. I run into the “Canon Sharp” optics issue there as well.
I think it’s so funny when people say how much better the video is on the Canon DSLR then on the Nikon DSLR. Of course Canon is better, they have been making video cameras for many, many years and Nikon does no make video cameras. For a company that has just started in video I think it’s very good and will get better in the coming years.
Good perspective. Although, on the other hand, Nikon can buy help in this arena — at least for its most high end cameras and pay a royalty.
I’m not into the video features much at all — but I sure know that if you were gonna use one at a wedding — you’d want it to be the best.
Just saying. It does seem compromisey for no reason. At that price, the a small per unit royalty fee of a slightly better video system wouldn’t make a dent.
this royalty would mean a price increase on the cameras, you already hear lots of trolls crying because the D3s MSRP is the same than the D3 MSRP when it was launched 2 years ago, now with the royalty it would be even worst.
The D3 is aimed to PJ´s and most news websites don´t have 1080p videos must run at much, much, much lower resolutions than 720p…
Now of course the whining comes from uneducated masses that want to play indie movie maker… sincerely if this is what you want get a 5D MKII, but don´t mix markets and the features of the cameras aimed to specific markets.
Well why can my little $1100 Pentax do 1024p? They have had no experience with video either. And the old D3 even HAD a 1080 live view output, what the heck were they thinking???
Go to the cinema if you want thrilling movies…!
Wait till they make the next batch of D700s then.
I wouldn’t expect it to be more than a couple of months off. The D700 is the D3 sensor with the D300 electronics. So it is really rather unlikely that Nikon could make more of the D700 bodies unless they had botched their Just In Time and built up an inventory.
The D700x is another matter. The x is for experimental and there is no logic to delivering an experimental sensor in a D700 body.
No ‘x’ is NOT experimental. It is used to designate high resolution – maybe “x-tra resolution” if you would really like to make the x fit somehow.
Case in point? The D40x. A D40, with the 10 MP sensor that was already proven in the D200 and D80.
Another counter-example? What was the technology of the D3 sensor derived from? Work on the LBCAST sensor from the D2H, of course.
It has no pop-up flash, and it has no dedicated zoom-in zoom-out buttons. But it has video! Yeeeeaaaaah!
why do you need pop up flash ? no sense when you can shoot at 12800 iso !
Pop-up flash should be standard. Its very helpful time and again in a pinch. That’s in fact why I opted for the D700! If D3s aren’t going to have pop up flash, there should at least be an SB400 or whatever low-profile flash that can stay on cam without much weight and plug into the camera body for power. A modular view is fine (“use what you need”). It just needs to make more sense than clunky things that run on separate batteries.
Does anyone else think that the pro-bodies and mid-pro bodies should at least have standard power ports for accessories…… these battery run gizmos are going crazy.
If there was a standard power port you could use any number of accessories without having any number of batteries on hand “just in case”.
I haven’t used a pop-up flash for years, but I do appreciate the brighter view and 100% coverage of the viewfinder that comes from having a larger prism in the camera.
To put a smaller prism in the system, resulting in leaa coverage and a darker view would be a step in the wrong direction, especially just to add a pop-up flash.
there is also no direct print button!!!!
Please go back to Canonrumors.
Dedicated zoom button, so funny.
Err, actually, a power zoom feature is actually usual on a pro video camera – and quite useful.
Should “dedicated zoom buttons” be the next camera feature if “hybridization” of these two industries continues the way its doing?
AF -> AF-S -> AF-Z
Minolta use have power zooms but they drained the battery pretty badly.
I was thinking that the power zoom feature would be most interesting under computer control.
There is no camcorder on the market at any price that has an API. Nikon has an API.
I think that alone is going to be huge for the use of the Nikon cameras in special effects and animation work.
As for photojournalism, which is the only pro application I can think of where a D3 body might be necessary for robustness, imagine you are a photojournalist out to snap pictures of some event. You are not sure about getting the perfect shot holding the camera over your head, so you turn on video and hope. Or you are taking pictures of Obama giving his next big speech. You have the prepared remarks, you know where he is going to deliver the punchlines, you take a clip of video at that point rather than only taking stills.
I think that the real long term impact on video in the DSLR form factor is that the job of photojournalist will stretch to encompass stills and video.
Stills can be photoshopped, photoshopping video is much harder. So there is an additional layer of authenticity you get from video.
If you are a police photographer photographing a crime scene, a video mode would be hugely useful. It would be even more useful if Nikon had a genuine image authentication mode rather than a crap one that no professional cyptographer could defend in court as an expert witness as it stands.
A pop up flash would compromise the weather sealing. And unless they engineered the flash to rotate and bounce upward, pretty darned useless anyway, On ANY Dslr. Get a real unit.
good job Nikon
The video sure look good but it was made by a professional team and with alot edditing.
Look carefully, some parts of the video are made from still picture.
You can get the same result with a D5000 if you do it the same way.
Yes, something is better than nothing but I still wonder why Nikon put video in a pro camera.
the video was shoot à 12800 for some parts . Can you do this with a D5000. Vincent Meunier was alone , not in a team for shooting. You don’ t need a team to bring a 1,2kg camera lol
Sure….I am now thinking about buying a HD camcorder and use it to take professional pictures.
maybe a stupid question…
is there full manual video control?
The D300S features a aperture and manual mode for video, as far as I know. Not sure about choosing ISO speed.
And my best guess is that the D3S won’t be worse at that point.
Liking the Vincent Munier video. Shot in July this year!
And what is up with WHICH? ? it looks like that guy has no skill in Pro photography whatsoever, sorry to say this, and they put the old 70-200 on there, while the people in the other movie got the new 70-200 but they are doing nothing with cam+lens whatsoever.
720p !!… Shame…
Impossible to use with a broadcast work.
Lot of still pictures are included in these examples.
Most broadcast video is 720p. At least in North America.
They might be *NOW*. Just give them anther year or two and you won’t find 720p anywhere.
By then though, you’d be hearing about research into ultraHD that has four times or bigger resolution than HD, etc.
There is no chance that we wil see 4K on over the air or cable TV for decades.
I would expect a full 1080p video body from Nikon long before that and 4K and 8K bodies for cinema use.
Don’t just judge by the performance today, take a look at the size of Nikon’s bodies compared to ‘pro’ video cams. You can stick a 400mm f/2.8 lens on a D3s and still end up with a lighter package than some pro end video gear. And last time I looked, the ‘pro’ video cams were about four years behind consumer cams on features like using solid state media.
I think it is pretty clear where Nikon plans to go with video. They are going to take that video headset and pair it with a dedicated video body. So instead of having to carry 19lb on your shoulder you can hold a 4-6lb device wherever is appropriate to take the shot.
Thats not something they have fully worked out today, but it is clearly going to come. The main reason they can’t do 1080p at the moment is a shortage of processing power. They can always add more.
I absolutely love Nikon instead of Canon. Build quality, IQ, and lens sharpness are unmatched. I use a D700 and love my results, and I am not a pro, nor do I shoot for money. Nikon simply cannot beat Canon (or Sony) when it comes to video. Canon and Sony have R&D that comes from their video cameras (and Leica/Panasonic), where Nikon and Olympus don’t. Sadly they are going to be left behind in this category.
All the people whining about switching to Canon, stop being babies about it and just move on. Nikon will never be where Canon is in the video category. If you want to take great pictures, then stick with Nikon . . . I don’t think Nikon will catch up to Canon in video even when the D4/D800/D400 is released . . . sorry.
That said, I am sticking with my Nikon . . . even though the announcement was a disappointment, I was looking forward to more lenses, I don’t need a Pro camera. A DX Micro was not what I wanted.
Get the 105mm f/2.8 VR, it’s the sharpest lens ever.
Had the 105mm Micro and got rid of it. I have the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm (and pre-ordered the VRII) and the 50mm 1.4G. I think I am set on lenses for a while . . . althought the 105mm is sharp, but I thought the 105 D wasa sharper.
You must had a bad one, I tested it (I sell test charts on Ebay) and the 105mm macro is the sharpest lens I ever seen.
The VR is not very helpfull as I use the flash for macro but It can help for portraits in low light.
Something funy about the 105mm Nikon: if you look carefully through the lens (try with different focusing distance) you will see alot of dust, and even bubbles inside the lens elements !
Nothing wrong about it, it’s just that when you look through it, it acte like a real microscope, the dust you see inside are actually extremely small with no effect at all on your pictures quality, and the bubbles are inside every lenses elements.
You also need 200-400.
I shoot nikon for their zooms.
Canon for their primes.
stupid. most of the whining here is dumb.
Journalists, & pro photogs will buy it in droves. The rest of the people that want a pro camera to take pictures of their toddlers, squirrels in their yard, or yet another picture of their cat will scream about how they deserve 1080P video and 20+ mega pixels.
95% of all the whining on NR is dumb. People just dont know what they are talking about.
No kidding. They couldn’t tell 1080 from 720 from SD if it were run in front of them. They should just switch to Canon and quit bitching and moaning.
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but I agree all the same.
Most people not only can’t tell the difference between 1080p and 720p when they see it, but most probably don’t even have the computer power to edit 720p, let alone 1080p video.
Most people can’t tell even many more things….
But it is great that Nikon manages to come out with a camera that can be used by Stevie Wonder or Ray Charles. Both would agree that there is not much difference between 720 and 1080p. On the top of it Nikon tested the device under rigorous circumstances and took pictures with it in middle of the night in a coal mine. All of these without flash and in the hands of the above mentioned two artists.
I love that they introduce a camera with a lens that actually really work together. (A DX lens on an FX body).
Thom Hogan got it wrong again. Where is the 24mm 1.4 lens?
NR rules! Thanks for the great coverage Admin.
I have been a pro Nikon shooter for 25 years and I am very disappointed over the lack of 1080p & 30fps . What were they thinking?
They were probably thinking quality is more important than specs. I tend to agree. Tell me why you need 1080p or 30fps, especially given that movies are 24fps and nobody complains.
BB – I assume by your comment that you enjoy watching crap. 30fps looks like amateur home video soap opera crap daytime tv footage that only kiddies and grannies think looks good. 24fps is king. Don’t believe me? Take a look at 95% of Canon VSLR shooters. They’re all conforming their 30p footage to 24p. That can’t be a coincidence.
for documentary purposes 30p looks better than 24p :p
well Nikon probably were working their butts of to make the greatest still camera instead of making a video camera. If you need video that hard buy a Canon 7D with a lens converter to fit you Nikon lenses.
the video from vincent munier was amazing!
No, it can’t be amazing because it’s not 1080p, just look at all the whiners, I mean posters, who say 720p sucks and is an insult. CLEARLY stunning video CAN’T be shot at 720p, there fore these terrific D3s videos don’t exist.
amen. Kill the 720p’ers. That’ll show em.
Don’t you guys get it? It’s like buying a Ferrari with a yugo engine it.
Unfortunately in this world perception is important. Nikon came out with a top camera including a mediocre feature that should not happen above the price point of 5000.
I know it’s hard to comprehend it but at least try to understand others.
video is really good! look at the smooth motion blur from the variable shutter speed, it has a very film-like appearence.
NR Admin: can yout delete some of the really stupid comments above? it seems to me all morons from dpreview forum moved here.
Till now I was just talking about it, but now I will really start to delete meaningless comments. The good thing is that they will fade away in a day or two – it is always like that around release time.
Hi NR Admin,
I seriously think that you should prohibit people from posting using “Anonymous”.
That way, you can cut down some irresponsible comments.
Cannot enforce people to use their real name, if it is not anon it could be anything else… This will just last another day or two and then everything will be fine until the next announcement… we had similar discussion after the last announcement… I can enforce registration in order to post but this will not improve the quality of the comments.
Thanks for your reply.
As long as you feel it’s manageable.
It’s your territory after all. Your website.
You’ve done a wonderful job. Keep it up.
I should say, keep the rumors coming !!!
Now this is a real video – don’t worry about the D3S when you have the D300S ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAGS3d4i-DE
Thanks for sharing the link. It’s a wonderful video clip. It tells a lot…
LOL… I Don’t Care Wat Anyone Says I Think This Camera Is Fantastic & I Will Definitely Be Buying It!!
Heck with the new D3s camera. Can I have just 5 percent of Vincent’s talent?
Admin – nice job on all the D3s info pre release. I was hoping the new 70-200mm would be in my bag before Nov 3 since Calumet said that should be approx delivery date. But, this site tends to be closer, if not right on, on when Nikon will deliver product.
Who liked those slanty trees when panning chasing the running bears?
Didn’t notice, really. Probably wouldn’t unless I was looking for it.
That was a fast pan – CMOS sensors (even Canon’s) are going to have that limitation.
D3 s is a fantastic camera for a special purpose – stunning. Also, video is fantastic – all the discussion seems to be theoretic, I think it’s just amazing. I will check out video with my D90 (never tried) and find out whether its worth buying a D300s. In terms of still picture quality, D90 still rules. Give me a 12 or 14 mm prime and I am happy (until D400 rumor is coming).
I don’t know but would a 1080p taken video have the same noise at high ISO’s like a 720p video? Is that perhaps the reason why the use only 720p??
great videos, great stills. but as most of the scenes are filmed steady / shot from a tripod, it seems nikon still hasnt improved all the auto white balance / rolling shutter etc issues from the d90. that might be even worse than the lack of 1080p. glad i have bodies and all relevant lenses from both nikon and canon, so i never care if one of the two is behind for a while.
So.. no more jello effect or what?
There is absolutely nothing in those first two videos that makes me sit back in awe.
When it comes to video: Nikon did it first.. Canon does it better.
Have to agree with you here. I like the look and feel of the Canon output better. But I appreciate the incorporation of video by Nikon.
As far as “no awe”, yes, you have it there as well. It’s nice, it’s well done, but there’s nothing here that employing professional production standards with any current DSLR technology wouldn’t give you. People kvetch about shaky video and bad sound, but they fail to employ the proper measures to mask or eradicate those deficiencies. You can put a $3000 dedicated video cam into the hands of some and you’ll still get crap video.
indeed, nothing incredible in these videos…
Canon 5D Mark II is able to do that :
It is an other kind of quality level !!
Yes the Mark II can do it. Many cameras can do it. But is it really the camera that makes the video?
I am sure there are people who shoot on D40s and the old Rebels who take much better pictures than some people with higher end cameras.
Yes, spec-wise Nikon video might be worse, but I don’t think specs make a video. A videographer makes a video.
Uhm… that video shows nothing. The Nikon video looked fantastic in a near dark environment. Show me a Canon video in that kind of environment.
what are you talking about ? look on vimeo theres tons of examples my gosh.
my god… unless you are making pro movies, you don’t need 1080 HD video. How many of you are going to take a DSLR predominantly made for still photography and make a professional video with it? Seriously.. Jeez oh man. I don’t care who you are or who you think you are, you do not need a dslr that produces 1080 video. If you are someone who actually NEEDS 1080 video, then you have the ability to shoot with REDs or some other high end video camera that will far surpass the quality of DSLR video of 5 years from now. 720 is fine right now for any photo journalistic video, home video or even low budget indie movies. Sure canon has the edge over nikon with video becuase they already make dedicated video cameras. Canon is also shooting themselves in the feet because they are trying to offer the best video in DSLRs, and now people will buy less of their dedicated video cameras. If the low light performance of the d3s actually lives up to the specs on paper, that alone should impress you guys. From the 5dII videos i’ve seen on youtube, the everyday video comparable to what 95% of people will make looks just as bad as nikon’s video. Guess there is a reason why high end video cameras cost well above 5000 dollars just for video.. Should we expect to see the ISO and still capture performance of the d3s in a Video camera? I don’t mind seeing video in DSLRs. I would never actually use it, but who cares if it’s there. My problem is that there are so many people knocking the d3s because of a slightly lower quality non-primary add-on function, while the primary function looks to be tremendous. ugh. If i had the cash for a d3s i’d buy it for the high iso and improved controls alone.
wrong…some of the top event videographers are using the 5d mii and rocking it ….if you are not a good shooter than yes….dslr video can look like crap
also….you can not get the quality and look in ANY HD video camera like u can with the canon dslr without spending TONS of money.
1080p should be a standard when you are paying over 5k. I am a professional photographer and amateur videographer. I like the choice of shooting stills and video simultaneously, but when I go edit I have to downgrade my stills to fit the 720p video. If the video was 1080p it will look that much sharper and harder to tell a difference between a still and a video. I don’t see how Nikon be the first to introduce video to DSLR and be the last to upgrade. FF sensor that have the same video quality as the D5000. Nikon will sell more units if it said it records in 1080p.
I totally agree with you !!!
“I don’t see how Nikon be the first to introduce video to DSLR and be the last to upgrade. ”
Uhm… that’s generally how it works. Company A introduces technology. Company B introduces a little better, then Company A makes it better the next time.
What will all the whiners say when the Nikon D4 has 1080p video?
I’m a video professional and disappointed with Nikon’s 720p release. I have a canon mark 5d mii and was hoping to get rid of it and replace it with the d3s (i already have 2 d3 for photography). The 720p 24f is with JPEG avi is just not the standard for pro video—they obviously geared the video completely towards news journalism and not the event shooter. I have not seen anywhere about the spec for the length of HD clips either (which was 5 min i believe on the d300s). 5 minutes is super short….why the limitation if canon’s can film 12 min in a higher quality?
I was hoping to have 3 new d3s in the next few months but with a list price of $5200 and video that does not look as good as canon, there is no reason for me to get this camera. The d3 already has SICK iso, and i’m sure this is better but not enough to trade out my d3’s. Plus on the video side of things, since i shoot weddings, i am not impressed whatsoever by these sample videos. The clarity, color, etc is nothing compared to my 5d mii. After this disappointing announcement i just put my self in line for a new 7d so i have two dslrs that shoot video for my weddings. The clarity and everything with the 5d is ridiculously good. I just wish i had the canon glass…i have all g series nikon glass which is my problem at the moment…no good canon glass!
i hope they change the D4 to better suit creative event video pro’s. I can tell you by experience at WEVA last month (worldwide video conference) the canon 5d mii and the 7d was the “biggest thing going on” and almost every videographer who can afford one is buying one..Nikon is losing out on that market for sure.
You’re comparing Youtube upload quality to your own videos on your computer?
Shame on you for even coming to a conclusion based on that.
And yes, no surprise that they geared the video towards journalists – that is exactly whom they aim to please with the Dx series non-‘x’ cameras. Considering that most HDTV broadcast is 720p and it is also the standard for online content, this is exactly what the majority of D3s users will want/need.
Of course there are others that will complain – most of whom will never touch a D3s – but Nikon is solidifying their stance with their core market. Things like improving high-ISO performance, a ‘quiet’ mode, in-camera NEF processing, and a much larger buffer will actually make a difference in how the camera works in field use.
More D3s pictures:
has anyone seen, how big the buffer for continous shooting still images is? The brochure doesn’t go to that level of detail.
Since the camera has a new sensor: does anyone have information, if IR images are possible with the D3s?
Thanks & regards
The specs on dpreview say 48, so it appears to include the buffer upgrade.
Actually, if you look at the specs on Nikon’s website you’ll see that it has been upgraded even further to 82 JPEG fine or 36 14-bit NEF photos.
Hot, but too bad canon will top it like it did with the 5dmkii release…… the later releaser always wins…. and nikon will be stuck with 720p…
True. Us Canonites had to sit sulking in a corner when Nikon announced the D3 and D700 just after the Mk III
Check out these videos where we couldn’t move the camera, and could never let any subjects move closer or further away from our pre-selected focus point! $5,200 please.
great execution me thinks!
Jello is still here. See fast movement at 2:08 in first video.
The Bill Frakes video is not as good as it should be, seems like Nikon is not choosing more appropiate photographer for this job. Why do you need D3s while D300s or competitor Canon 7D (thousands cheaper) might as well those type of photography.
The Peter Munier video is awesome, it really shows what the camera can do in low light condition. Although, it seems the quality especially video mode is really lacking here. Panasonic GH1 video ($1500 only) can beat it easily.
totally agree, looks like he just threw it all together… no coherent and very random at times like with the dancers…. wtf????
I love how many of you crying that you dont need 1080p are also the ones weeks ago proclaiming how great nikon is that 1080p will be in their next camera haha. I own both canon/nikon and the amount of fanboism here is LOL.
Show us your evidence for this post:
1. Correlate the posters who are “crying” about 1080p against those that proclaimed Nikon will release 1080 in their next camera.
2. Prove that “many” of those correlated persons suddenly switched sides.
You know what? You can’t. Your post was utterly imbecilic; trying to draw conclusions where there were none. If you can’t back up your ridiculous statements with fact, turn off your computer and go away.
your my proof fanboy lol. Watch as the FB gets angry and grunts and demands proof for everything… do you want charts ? lol.
I mean seriously go look on nikon forums even NR forum and you will see some people dissapointed in 720p and you people making excuses for it… like – “Why do you even need more than 720p are you a pro or something half the people here complaining cant even buy the camera” some pros here have expressed the need for 1080p and they can afford the camera so stop making excuses for nikon.
I agree that NR rules…this site is a great source of info.
As to the critics of this new camera: how many of them could actually afford one? How many would be fortunate and thrilled to have one?
This is an amazing piece of engineering if one thinks about it, and no doubt many professionals are going to have this in their bag.
Although a lot of you are despising the video recording of the camera, i actually think it is a great feature and is one that worth a lot of investment.
Video on a dslr is here to stay and has become a must-have feature.
There are many pro’s using dslr video to make great product. Saturday Night Live has shot some of their opening sequence and some of their skits using the 5dii and the 7d. DP’s all over are raving about the 5dii….including the DP for the show 24 as well as the DP for Terminator:Salvation.
Some commercials and music videos have been filmed using the 5dii.
Pro’s are also now creating content from weddings, family shoots, etc that combine both stills and video.
Read the online reports from all sorts of recent conferences on videography; the dslr/video combo is all anyone wants to talk about.
This is not some passing fad or some novelty feature. DSLR’s w/ video can offer up features not found except in high end pro video rigs costing several times as much. Video opens up all sorts of creative possibilities.
If you don’t like shooting video…then fine…don’t use the feature. But don’t dismiss this important development in the history of the dslr, just to try to look like your better than others.
Nice post Gary, Video is here to stay.
Well, video in a DSLR is a tremendous thing but Nikon’s target market will be happy with 720p.atleast that is what Nikon’s marketing decided.
I’m not so sure it’s wise to make any kind of judgment on a camera that was just announced considering there aren’t any in depth reviews. Specs are not everything. All that matters is the end result, so until we see more of the kinds of photos and videos this camera can produce, I wouldn’t get too carried away. I know this is the internet, but we can try, can’t we? lulz?
I’m amazed that most every comment here is only about 1080p. 99.9% of the population doesn’t have the equipment to resolve 1080p over a standard DVD let alone find differences between that and 920p. What really impresses me is the quality at very high ISO’s. I say job well done by Nikon making significant improvements while keeping a competitive price. if the D700 replacement (update) comes close…… I’ll be one happy man.
On further thought, I forgot that I was reading the post with the videos. I makes sense that everyone is talking video capabilities instead of ISO performance. …carry on. : )
Oh My God What A Bunch Of Cry Babies & Whiners. I Don’t Understand Anyone Who Says The D3S Is Crappy Or Even A D3 For That Matter. You People Are Either Crazy Or Very Spoiled. Period Point Blank Either Invest In What Nikon Has Done In The D3S Or Shut Up & Handle Your Business As A Photographer With The Equipment You Already Have & WAIT.
I didn’t know we had this many crappy photographers in the world.
If your can’t create great pictures with any model of D3 you are in the wrong field.
oh no, but i can only create good images from a d3 type sensor (or better) IN a d700 body(and it has to be a d700 type body no exceptions!), so yah…
That’s a preference not a need. Performance wise the D3 is a better camera, we’re not talking about price, we’re not talking about the size of the body, or whether you prefer some buttons to be on the right than the left. Strictly Performance the D3 wins plain & simple. Preference is for you whiners. But hey Nikon cares & sooner or later they will produce the body that many want the preference of using but you will just have to wait like everybody else.
Do you always capitalize every word in a sentence? Just curious.
Yes So That People Can Separate Me From The Whiners Lol. JK.
I enjoyed these many posts of whining!
Seriously though, if that perfect camera was released, a lot of ppl will start arguing why it’s so expensive… we all know these people exist! Even NR Admin expects a high percentage of pure speculators using this channel for venting out, just hoping it doesn’t get too out of hand…. it’s all part of the fun, to some extent.
The D3s is a great camera, although I won’t be buying one (I own a D700, D5000, FM2n and a 5D2). For those of you expecting something more, can either be happy with what you have, invest in what you NEED or pick up the cheapest DSLR and be the best photog you can possible be! Seriously, are you all really looking at this level of camera? (rhetorical question) -end-
Nice videos, great tool also for nature photographers.
And to all those who still aren’t satisfied, 720p is very good quality, size optimized also, and with such high ISO is a dream to amateur photographers and ocassional video shooters.
By using motion JPEG you get a complete stream of whole pictures. MPEG4 or H.264 is an efficient encoding for film, but if you want to use one frame you may have a problem due to the inter frame encoding…
Both JPEG and MPEG uses component subsampling and DCT so the actual quality is not that different, if you tweak the parameters. H.264 will ofcource be a more efficient encoding regarding bandwidth, in loss of the quality of the frames.
But in this case the 720p resolution is a pity, much nicer to get at least 2MP still frames instead of 1MP still frames.
You can (and do!) get each and every frame when using a modern motion compensation codec like H.264, it just requires more processing power and smarter software. Countless electronic devices and computer programs do it, it’s not magic.
Also, H.264 does not mean ‘a loss of quality’, quite the opposite! At the same file size / bandwidth, H.264 will provide _much_ better video quality than M-JPEG. M-JPEG is an old and very outdated codec, the only reason for using it is not having the know-how and processing power to use a more modern codec. H.264 has been designed with a wide range of applications in mind, including very high quality applications such as digital cinema, it’s capable of delivering top quality video in very high resolution way beyond what M-JPEG is realistically capable of. If you’re a camera manufacturer with JPEG compression hardware in your camera and little to no experience and know-how regarding the newer and more complex video codecs, you may chose to use M-JPEG, but if you’re looking for the best technology available and have the processing power required in your camera, you will most certainly go for a state-of-the-art codec like H.264.
H.264 is a delivery format that has been hijacked for recording purposes in consumer video cameras. H.264 is a terrible format for recording and editing.
Hopefully Nikon will not pursue H.264. Much more would be gained by developing some kind of RAW video format like RED has done.
RAW video + motion jpeg for video
NEF + jpeg for stills
This make more sense than trying to make H.264 work.
Jane – this is incorrect. M-JPEG offers vastly superior for high quality video capture than H.264. H.264 strength lies in streaming, but not certainly not capture. H.264 can and often does mean “loss of quality” – we see evidence of it here in our studio everyday.
Thus M-JPEG can in no way be referred to as an outdated codec. It is also not limited to resolution constraints such as HDTV.
In a nutshell, H.264 is more “bandwidth efficient” than M-JPEG simply because it discards a lot more detail. In its current format, it can and will never provide the frame-for-frame detail and quality that JPEG delivers. H.264 is very unforgiving in lower light conditions and capture in varying frame rates. M-JPEG is far more robust.
D3s: for sports, press and paparazzi – a perfect tool for this segment – bravo Nikon
D3x: for stills, landscapes and studio – a perfect tool for this segment – bravo Nikon
I don’t need any of these, but I think D3s is a fantastic camera making me curious about video. So I will exploit my D 90 even more and wait for a D400 to come next year.
Admin: Thank you, great job!
D3s looks really nice, hopefully the D400 will bring similar sport photo-oriented features (for DX)
Great job admin! next rumors please….
Loved the video by Vincent Munier.
I know one of the loactions well and have shot there myself both on film and digital.. next spring I think I´ll bring along my large format there, thats more like 1 frame per hour!
Usually, I am a video editor for wedding clips, sometimes for events. We use dual 4 core processor with 32 gigs ram, with dedicated mediums (not your average computer you can buy) and at rendering 1080i, the computer crawls like a baby… and that is only a 10 second clipped area. Now, when we process 1080p, a 5 minute clip takes up to 15 minutes just to render. And any movement of sound tracks, clipping, and you have an increased load and needs rendering again.
These people complaining about video quality… I don’t understand. Most of the complainers out there do NOT have the processing power to create anything close to those youtube videos. And if you say you can, you are a liar, a beginner, and cannot use a camera, let alone have any knowledge of video editing.
And for those that are interested in video creation like the youtube one, something at least Canopus is good. Anything less than that, and your renderers are noticeable to the eye at 720p.
just saw that the D3s has the same 5 min length limit as previous nikon cameras. this is dissappointing…i was hanging on to the hope of still getting a d3s possibly (for video purposes) (even with the 720p dissappointment) but now this totally makes it impractical for creative event films (artistic style wedding production). I can handle the 12 min canon limit, but 5 min is just not really workable.
hopefully next body they goto 1080p and extend this short time limitation..in fact i would love to see this in the d700s since that price level is more comparable to the 5d mii. oh well i was holding out to sell the 5d..now i add the 7d and go canon for video dslr reasons. but still have 2 d3’s and nikon lenses shooting photography…thanks canon and nikon im broke cuz i have both!…maybe sony will rise out of nowhere and create the ultimate cameras that is a 5d mii and D3 combined..haha
Video sucks – period. Never in 40 years as an SLR user have I seen a less useful gimmick. The F Photomic FTn I bought in 1970 had nothing in the way of frippery, now DSLRs even at D3s level are awash with it. I watched the first minute of the first D3s video, and it’s rubbish – that promo wouldn’t sell me anything. Ghastly music doesn’t help. I’m sure my next DSLR – probably a D300s – will have video, but I’ll never use it.
I see someone doesn’t appreciate cinematography very much…
I wasn’t that interested in video until living down the hall from a friend who is producing his own short film (to very high standards). Then, as a working photojournalist I realized the power of video in online content.
The world is changing and the combination of video, web 2.0 applications and increasing portability of devices has changed content delivery forever. YouTube is the #4 most visited site in the world (and probably uses the most bandwidth overall), compared to Flickr at #32 and Photobucket at #42.
This doesn’t mean stills will go away – they won’t. The power of a single frame, a photograph, is definitely unparalleled. A video doesn’t stick in your mind like a photograph does. It just means that photographs and video will have to share a place in the visual media world.
By the way, I really liked that video by Vincent Munier. The music set a great atmosphere to go with some superb wildlife cinematography. That he used ISO 12,800 for some of the scenes is absolutely amazing – I don’t think there is another video camera available that could have gotten the same shots as this.
I think this is an amazing VDSLR for the price! I have a Canon XLH1 cost $8 grand, a Letus Adapter for the film look cost $1200, and my Nikon D700 Cost was $2800.
Put those all together and the cost $12000.00 dollars.
Now for $5000 I can now get the film look w/ out all the other crap, and a kick ass camera! I love it!
Enter your email for daily blog updates: