Just watched this video comparison between d800/5d3 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NuozUxh_tOU

i think he is pretty much spot on - each camera has it's strong points and both of them aren't too far away from each other. Make your decision based on which of those points are important to you.

Maybe since the movie probably started production 2+ years ago?

You are kidding yourself if you think movies studios are not shooting at low ISOs and with full lighting set-ups that probably cost as much as most people's homes.

That is just a slightly different than what most people have laying around. ;)

It is interesting to see what tools people use, but I rarely take it as "one system is better" and just take it for what it is - that is what they had and used for their own reasons that we will rarely ever hear about. I saw one clip for a commercial that used Panasonic GF1 - because it fit in the glove box of a car. No other reason, but that it fit. Sometimes it is as simple as that. Other times it just comes to cost and availability.

That being said, Canon has been doing video- for what, 40 years? Digital since it's beginning. Not surprising if it is better or at a minimum more preferred to work with. Same with Panasonic and both of those systems seem to be preferred by many videographers.

heartyfisher said:
"I just read the Canon post where the Avengers used the Mark II and EOS 7D to shoot several scenes, and in several other cinema movies. Why are all these movies using Canon and not Nikon?"

D800 was not out when they bought the camera gear :-) .. The Canon cameras did have an advantage over the nikon for a few years.. but the D7000 has more than caught up except for the lack of 60 fps.
The D800 has well and truly over taken the current crop of canon cameras .. but who knows what the next crop of canon cameras will be like.

check out this web series on video shooting with DSLRs note that it is a few years old now. http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

Canon still have the advantage though, no doubt Nikon have beaten Canon in some areas.

"I just read the Canon post where the Avengers used the Mark II and EOS 7D to shoot several scenes, and in several other cinema movies. Why are all these movies using Canon and not Nikon?"

D800 was not out when they bought the camera gear :-) .. The Canon cameras did have an advantage over the nikon for a few years.. but the D7000 has more than caught up except for the lack of 60 fps.
The D800 has well and truly over taken the current crop of canon cameras .. but who knows what the next crop of canon cameras will be like.

check out this web series on video shooting with DSLRs note that it is a few years old now. http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

msmoto said:
I mean "Joy Ride"

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/07/joy-ride-the-nikon-d800-promo-video-is-out.aspx/

Watch this, full screen, sound up a little. And as a girl who used to ride a clipped Hayabusa (no top end governor) I can attest, this is one H... of a ride. Lane splitting in ChiTown is terribly illegal, and the wet streets and sport bike mean one's rear wheel is constantly fighting for grip. The rider is obviously a well accomplished pro.

Wow! Great video, absolutely fantastic. Also watched the behind the scenes, and it was all shot with the D800. This makes me want to get the D800 even more. I'm so jealous! :P

The body in EU is too expensive (3,000€) compared to US (2,350€). I find it ridiculous :( It's either I get the D800 and no fast lenses / extra equipment, or get a Mark II / 7D / 60D with fast lenses / extra equipment, and the Mark III is anyways overpriced.

I have recently read, there is a Magic Lantern Firmware for Canon cameras. I haven't read much about it yet, but it seems like it's some sort of extra feature for Canon cameras. Is there anything similar like that to Nikon?

TheMonster said:

You mean the I am Nikon ad?

I mean "Joy Ride"

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/07/joy-ride-the-nikon-d800-promo-video-is-out.aspx/

Watch this, full screen, sound up a little. And as a girl who used to ride a clipped Hayabusa (no top end governor) I can attest, this is one H... of a ride. Lane splitting in ChiTown is terribly illegal, and the wet streets and sport bike mean one's rear wheel is constantly fighting for grip. The rider is obviously a well accomplished pro.

I just read the Canon post where the Avengers used the Mark II and EOS 7D to shoot several scenes, and in several other cinema movies. Why are all these movies using Canon and not Nikon?

msmoto said:
@Mike Gunter... Yes, I agree the quality of video from the DSLRs is phenomenal... the D800 pre-release commercial of the motorcycle in Chicago...an example of the very best.

You mean the I am Nikon ad?

@Mike Gunter... Yes, I agree the quality of video from the DSLRs is phenomenal... the D800 pre-release commercial of the motorcycle in Chicago...an example of the very best.

I suspect the issues arise in the servo zoom, focus, eye level viewing and general handling features. There must be some reason for those $50,000 and up cameras... But, for me, I cannot think of one, ha, ha, ha...

HI Monster

Do be aware. If import, you MAY have to pay additional taxes and you MAY have warranty issues

sevencrossing said:
The D400 IMHO may not ever happen

One type of equipment that does differ are radio triggers ( pocket wizards) as they use different frequencies

I edited the post and meant D600, not D400. The D600 is most likely coming out before photokina, which is something to consider, since I would be able to invest into good lenses that I would need for filming.

Thanks for the info about the radio triggers. The issue is that the D800 is 3,000$ in US which would convert to about 2,350€. But if I were to buy the body here in EU, it would be straight up 3,000€+ which is annoying, since I would only be able to afford the D800 if I were to order it from the US. Besides the Radio Trigger, is there anything else? I don't want to have to buy all accessories from the US while just one extra (radio trigger) isn't a problem.

The Monster said:
r either the D800 (which sounds beautiful) or possibly the Canon,,,,,,,

Now with the Nikon D600 in the picture, you guys think it would be better to get the D400 along with a nice 2.8 lens? Or straight for D800 and play with a 4.0 lens?

Does anyone know, if there are any differences between US and EU models?

The D800 is indeed beautiful
The D800 is available but in very short supply
The D600 is just a rumor and may not be available till next year
The D400 IMHO may not ever happen

Stop sitting on the fence order the D800 you might just get it by your target date of June,

f2.8 or f4 ? For stills I find f4 just fine, but videographers seem to prefer f2 or f1.4
I am not aware of any difference between US and EU camera or lens models . One type of equipment that does differ are radio triggers ( pocket wizards) as they use different frequencies

Thank you everyone for your input.

TaoTeJared said:
Sounds like you are getting rolled into the marketing hype of numbers a bit.

I think that might have been possible, and that I might have been worrying a bit too much on that. It was that every well known videographer that used a dSLR (example Devin Graham, Episode for House, etc...), used a dSLR from Canon.

After doing some more thorough research and going through your comments and suggestions, it really seems like that I might aim for either the D800 (which sounds beautiful) or possibly the Canon EOS 7D.

Now with the Nikon D600 in the picture, you guys think it would be better to get the D600 along with a nice 2.8 lens? Or straight for D800 and play with a 4.0 lens?

Does anyone know, if there are any differences between US and EU models?

As to the Nikon vs. Canon question, I wouldn't worry about it to much.

When the D90 came out, Nikon DOMINATED the video SLR market (no other camera could do it). After that, Canon got the edge. The primary differences were better rolling shutter performance, quicker to implement 1080P, and apparently a better codec (although I can't verify this as I don't know much at all about video).

With the D800, Nikon bests Canon w/ uncompressed HDMI output (again, I don't know what this is, but my videographer friends say its useful). The D800 also leads the pack in rolling shutter performance, and the ability to shoot stills while filming (somebody correct me on this if the 5DIII does this).

Until 4k video comes of age, the differences between platforms is going to be pretty subtle. At any point since the D90, Nikon & Canon have been within 6 months of each other in terms of features. Just get a modern camera that meets your criteria and don't worry about anything else. If you already have an investment in Nikon glass, I'd stick with it.

The one caveat to this is that Canon makes dedicated Video cameras that are compatible with the EOS mount. Nikon is not in the Video Camera market, so there is no dedicated F-Mount video camera. If you are very serious about video, this should probably figure into the equation. Of course, you can always use a F Mount -> EOS adapter, but if you have the money for one of Canon's pro Video shooters, then managing two systems isn't really going to be a problem for you.

I have a friend who does photo and video for weddings and they are able to fill their schedule months ahead. They have some nice video dedicated cameras (Panasonics), but are increasingly moving to DSLR.

He was showing me stuff they did on DSLR (a Canon crop sensor similar to D7000) for a local winery and a few weddings. The thing he was trying to teach me in those shots was the impact of support. To him the support and the software were the most critical aspects for him in getting the output he wanted (I think they mixed with separate audio from boom poles so they didn't rely on cameras for audio where they weren't just putting music over it). He has used alot of things like different rail systems, tripods, monopods and seemed to shortlist a Merlin for any time you want the camera to move or a Bogen video monopod (like my 561B) for any time you are stationary. His point was yes you can use SW to correct motion but you are trimming your resolution so that is not the right way to get pro results.

Hi all,

@TheMonster Can you share what you are going to do with the camera? There are other options besides Canon or Nikon. Panasonic's GH2 would be handy for video and comes in around $1300 for the body and with an adapter will use any of the Nikon lenses. Arguably a better video camera then either the Canon DSLRs or Nikon DSLRs, but not quite the still camera of any of the APS-C cameras. It may well be what you are looking for.

Your budget isn't stellar, but then none of ours started that way either. I'm happy with my D7000, but I will let the dust settle on the D800 and get one later this year or so. After a through reading of the manual, it sinks in that my DX lenses will automatically work with a DX outline in the Viewfinder, and the metering, and other niceties will also automatically adjust (or should), should I should be able to transition easily.

I bring this up so that you _may_ consider the D7000 as a bridge to the D800 when it becomes more available to you, assuming it meets your needs now, and that you stick to FX lenses that you need, for the most part.

If video is keen to you, you'll be investing in microphones, and perhaps a location audio kit that will include some sort of remote capture, or at the least, a means of getting a feed into the camera. I use both a Tascam recorder and a JuicedLink box. We also have wireless and wired microphones.

Our audio investment is over your total dollar budget.

Happy hunting. ;-)

@msmoto "I just left a bunch of pro videographers at a court house. ..."

It entirely depends upon what kind of video one is shooting and where and how, with what skill level, and what kind of circumstances, etc., one can paint with too broad a brush to categorize everything as all-in-one. I shoot all my video with DSLRs, but then I've given up shooting 'gun'n run' affairs, too, and that matters. Recently I've shot two national commercials and and an insert for PBS documentary with the D7000, so I wouldn't put it in the 20x category, unless age counts, too. ;-)

You are totally right about how something weights and hefts in the hand.

My best to all,

Mike

I just left a bunch of pro videographers at a court house. ABC, NBC, CBS, free lance, many folks shooting pro video. I this is what you are planning, I noted in your first statement "professional" events, then you will need a budget of about twenty times what you have to get started. Not one of these folks were shooting with a small DSLR, but with a large video camera.

However, if, you are shooting amateur footage, go out to the camera store and try some DSLRs out, read the magazine tests, and decide. So much of how a camera works is the way it feels in our hands. And this is what you must do, find out how it feels in your hands. Maybe look at the recommendations on the forums, then go try them out.

TaoTeJared said:
Old manual focus lenses will work on any body. The In-body AF screw drive is only on the D7000 on up - but since they are MF - there is no AF on those lenses.

D90 and up support screw.
D7000 on up support METERING with AI/AIS (Manual Focus) lenses.
For manually focused video, I start running out of hands well before I get to ISO and Speed so Speed Priority and Auto ISO are very useful to me.

Old manual focus lenses will work on any body. The In-body AF screw drive is only on the D7000 on up - but since they are MF - there is no AF on those lenses.

D600- Camera strap was fake - camera in development? Maybe - I wouldn't hold your breath but maybe keep in mind the D800 is still back ordered - that would be for many months if it came out.

TheMonster said:
... the sensor's from Canon's are better for filming, but Nikon has better image quality. Is that all true?...

...but the problem is that I absolutely need the 60fps. I used the term high quality poorly and I apologize for that. I meant mid range cameras that offer 30 fps; 60 fps video with great image quality...

Not knowing what kind of video you want to shoot, I wouldn't focus on the sensors but on the other aspects you need. Sounds like you are getting rolled into the marketing hype of numbers a bit. Knowing what you are going to be shooting would help. Software can handle a lot of things like noise, slow-mo, up-scaling etc. Others know video better than I, maybe they can speak to what software can add to a system.

It doesn't sound like you are focused on Photography much - if not an option could be Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GH2 as well. I know many like that for video and the ability to have "long" lenses in a small package. Depending on your needs, you may end up with two systems as many do.

If 60fps is a must, the D3200 is the only Nikon option less than the pro FF, so if you can't wait for 5200 or 7200 or D400 you are probably better off looking at Canon or Sony or renting (or buy used/refurb and resell when the camera you really need comes out).

@ Monster.

I ended up getting the D7000 mainly for use of old manual focus lenses but when I bought (2010) I was comparing to D5000 and D90 and both were imperfect solutions for video. Buying on e-bay some of the manual focus primes were ridiculously cheap ($100-200 each for 105/2.5, 24/2.8, 55/2.8) so the choice of D7000 in a sense "paid for itself" in my planning. However, this is all primes which is what I need for my application. I think older manual focus zooms are push-pull design and I have no experience how easy those are to focus for video.

First off, sorry for the slow replies, I'm from EU and the time zones are different :) Second, thanks for the replies.

One of my main questions first is, are there any differences between Canon and Nikon video footage? I have read that the sensor's from Canon's are better for filming, but Nikon has better image quality. Is that all true?

As for the D7000, I would have already gotten that, but the problem is that I absolutely need the 60fps. I used the term high quality poorly and I apologize for that. I meant mid range cameras that offer 30 & 60 fps video with great image quality. I would love to have an FX body, but they are very expensive which is why I mentioned D600 & D7100 which would have been beautiful, but my problem is time :(

Exclude other equipment such as extra batteries, lighting, high end lenses, etc... I will be accumulating all of those stuff over time.

@The Man From Mandrem - Which dSLR did you get?

SquamishPhoto said:
To the OP, if you're serious about video then older manual focus primes are actually a blessing for your focussing skills, so you can save some pennies there if you want and gain a distinct advantage.

That will only work with camera's that have an in-built motor, right?

TaoTeJared said:
If you went a similar route and lower the budget, D7000 with a 18-105mm vr ($1,300), keep your 55-200 and flash, add a 35mm 1.8 prime ($200), 85mm 1.8D used ($350) and that leaves you $500 (385€) for everything else or to put towards future upgrades. If you utilize used gear, you would have even more. With mid-range bodies due to be upgraded in the next 12mths, it may be smart to go used, save the cash and buy a new body when it comes out.

This is a great suggestion, and I am looking for answers like these. Instead of the D7000, what do you think I should do? I'm a complete mess, sorry for all the inconvenience :)

Monster,

I'm trying to do same as you but just for amateur. Even buying mostly used old lenses, 've blown way past $2300 (more like $4000 not including lighting, software) and am still at least $500 from getting a setup I'd think is fully functional.
My impression is neglecting software, the support, lenses, and sound have the most significant contribution to the video since the modern round of DSLRs are all pretty good. If you need 1080p 30 or higher I don't think D7000 works, but as Squamish says D7000 allows manual focus lenses - WAY cheaper + smooth, accurate focus. There's some incredible pro video on internet from D90 and D7000.

Pierre said:
Not sure you would find switchig from D3000 to D7000 such a game changing move, I know I would not, not to take anything away from the D7000 but a personal thing.

Thats a huge understatement. The D7000 is perfectly capable of producing professional quality video fit for broadcast and full scale production. If you've got your light right and nice prime on it, you're going to have a hard time finding fault in its video quality, especially for the price. To the OP, if you're serious about video then older manual focus primes are actually a blessing for your focussing skills, so you can save some pennies there if you want and gain a distinct advantage.

TheMonster said:
Edit: I am willing to pay up to around 1,800€ (2,350$)

I'm with Pierre, that is not much to spend on a whole new system for video and photography. So you are looking at mid-range bodies and lenses. Is Canon or even Panasonic any better than Nikon at that level? Not sure. Canon seems to have an edge on the $3,000 Mk III body, but on the DX side? Others may have experience with that. The Glass also makes a difference in the "looks" that you are going for as well as lighting.

Given your time frame, you may want to work out what your immediate Needs are and work out when you can add your "wants" and plan a budget moving forward. The D3000 actually had less color bit depth than any of the newer models. You may be looking at a D5100 as a stop-gap camera (till you can afford more) and focus on glass.

For example of the costs: I'm heading to shoot a 4 day event taking a D300 w/grip, 3 batteries, 24-120 f4 vr, Tamron 17-50 VC, 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, Sb-900, Sb600, Fuji X100, Gary fong light modifier, Thinktank urban disguise, Thinktank speed belt and a slim changer pouch - that is around $8,000. Mind blowing actually.

Now I actually rented the 24-120 and the 17-50 to try them out again for a week (to really see what they can do for me before I buy them) and that cost $200. Renting gear here and there can help you get to where you want to be as a stop gap until you get some more money to put towards things.

If you went a similar route and lower the budget, D7000 with a 18-105mm vr ($1,300), keep your 55-200 and flash, add a 35mm 1.8 prime ($200), 85mm 1.8D used ($350) and that leaves you $500 (385€) for everything else or to put towards future upgrades. If you utilize used gear, you would have even more. With mid-range bodies due to be upgraded in the next 12mths, it may be smart to go used, save the cash and buy a new body when it comes out.

Based on your budget, you can pretty much forget FF unless you get a very cheap used and minimal lenses, perhaps older generation of fixed primes, Canon or Nikon alike.

With that money and buying new, your best bet would be a D7000 and a prime in the 50mm range.

You are also talking about high quality stuff, this is pretty suggestive as not all would agree on what high means. In my book, high starts with the D800 and $4k of lenses.

Not sure you would find switchig from D3000 to D7000 such a game changing move, I know I would not, not to take anything away from the D7000 but a personal thing.

Not sure going Canon would give you better quality at lower price either.