Should HD video user stay with Nikon?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon V-DSLR

Should HD video user stay with Nikon?

(37 posts) (17 voices)

Tags:

12 Next »

Jarmo

junior member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 7
offline

What will Nikon do with videos? Collapse out of business or shine and gain market share?

I am a one who has invested Nikon gear some money and ceased all purchases as I wait what Nikon will do with videos. At the moment Nikon is behind Canon and as Canon is improving it's video capability, Nikon could'nt even improve it's video on the new flagship, D3S.

Will Nikon do what Panasonic did with G1 to GH1... first dissapoint everyone when there was no video and then make everyone happy when it took lead in it's class.

I'm thinkin this purely because I'd like my SLR to have an excellent HD video too. I am waiting what Nikon will do and therefore haven't jumped to Canon, at least not yet.

So what's holding Nikon? Lack of proper SW resources? Lack of vision? Something else? Nothing, it just takes some time?

If you are in same situation... tell what you think!

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Nikon is a small company. The have limited resources but put the resources they do have to very good use. Give them time. If you can't/don't want to wait then you have plenty of options. More Nikon's for the rest of us :^)

Welcome to the forum Jarmo

Posted 3 years ago #
valonqe

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 171
offline

Hello Jarmo !

I have been feeling like for sometime my self as well Jarmo. I have been using Nikon for a long time and I have been following their development for nearly 14 years. They use to be one step forward from Canon not to mention other manufactures which they got inspired by Nikon to develop their cameras.

For some reason, in last 3 years Nikon has lost it's touch and fallen behind even in their flagship cameras. While other cameras are shining with full HD video, different frame rates, manual controls and even more megapixel Nikon just sits silent.

I am sure that their are cooking something very nice for us but it's taking time to serve it. I thing good thinks come to those who wait( NikoBody ) smile

Lets hold on to those lovely Nikon gear that we have and stay loyal to our Nikons because very soon we will have something to be happy.

Regards
Valonqe

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Nikon has the highest ISO in a DSLR(D3S), the highest dynamic range in a DSLR(D3X), the just plain awesome D700 and the D300/S is so good canon was forced to make the 7D to challenge it. If you guys are so interested in HD video, you should be thankful you don't have a closet full of Minolta lenses and Sony DSLRs!!!

This reminds me so much of the "crying" and threats of switching people made when Nikon didn't have any full frame cameras. Boy did they all come running back when Nikon shipped the D3/D700 :^)

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

The reality is that even if my next Nikon DSLR had a full featured HD video mode I would properly not ever really use it. I have problems getting all my pictures sorted out and surely the highend video mode would only add to the things to get done,

I think people get blinded by the lack of topnotch video to the fact that Nikon make a few of the best picture shooting DSLR you can get, period, like Niko mentioned above.

But why is that Sony(maker of our sensors) have no video feature and Nikon have only a bandage video feature. Is it that the current Sony sensor design can simply not increase frame rate to 60/sec or higher and have the other recording problems

Anyway we can only hope that they get it figured out and give us future video modes that is on par with what Canon is offering

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
Gentoo

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,538
offline

I think Nikon is working on things a lot. They tend to take their time and do things right. One thing Nikon is not going to do is allow the video to take over the camera. Nikon's cameras are cameras first and foremost. As mentioned apples to apples, Nikon cameras do the best work as mentioned. Nikon is apparently developing their own sensor so perhaps this will have much better video function?

Posted 3 years ago #
Willis

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,123
offline

I've been trying to come to terms with the video DSLR market for a while now, and I have to conclude that I have no freaking clue who you people are that shoot cameras AND want video.

I'll start with the markets I get:
1. Indie Movie Guys - I've actually helped with some of my friends film projects. They are fun to shoot and I would guess they are fun to create. With all the lens options, I can see how this would be a very compelling niche market for creative work.

2. Parents - Most of my friends bought their first DSLR when they had their first kid. They want something to capture all of the moments. Parents love making movies of their kids. So a video DSLR makes sense.

The problem is that its never these people who turn up in threads like this. Its always some guy who holds himself out as a long time pro photographer that is furious because Cannon does better video than Nikon does.

Am I the only person on the internet that doesn't care? Are all photographers secretly vidiographers whose camera's frame rates are just to slow? To me, making movies is just such a different process that I don't see anybody that is serious about photography having enough interest in it that they would switch brands just to get to 1080p. Until about a year ago no SLR had video, now the entire web knows what a rolling shutter is. Sheesh.

OK... sorry for the rant... to answer your question, Yes, Nikon will eventually produce a great video SLR. They will do so because everyone else is doing it and it would be a shame to waste all that amazing glass on just stills.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

You are right Willis, I also use my Camera to take pictures, but on the other hand it would be fun to record video clips, I could see myself record BMX rides in HD video, and if I was going to try to do this new thing, why not get the best video, incl slow motion, better control of exposure etc
I also think Nikon will have it figured out on their next releases

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Willis said:
2. Parents - Most of my friends bought their first DSLR when they had their first kid. They want something to capture all of the moments. Parents love making movies of their kids. So a video DSLR makes sense.

That's me. Good post, willis.

How quickly we forget that a nikon was the first to offer any flavor of video on an SLR, let alone HD. Call me a cynical physicist (actually, all my friends do), but I'm pretty sure most people would not be able to tell the difference between 1080p and 720p video. Don't hate me—if you're thinking of writing some spiteful comment about what I just said, you're probably one of the few who can tell the difference. Besides that, I crunched some numbers using the resolution of the human eye for my dad who was trying to decide whether to get 720p or 1080p resolution in a 50" HDTV this year (specifically, I think I was using the rayleigh criterion for diffraction-limited resolution with a wide open pupil—I forget). Here's an excerpt from the email:

The exact numbers are that you can't resolve pixels on the 1080 display unless you're closer than five and a half feet, and you can't resolve pixels on the 720 display unless you're closer than 8 feet. So, the eye is the limiting factor for both resolutions for distances greater than 8 feet—meaning that you can't tell the difference between them unless you're closer than 8 feet. Just for fun, I put in the mammoth 150" screen from panasonic to check the same thing, and with that one you could see the difference at 24 feet. That monster has about a 2mm pixel pitch! That's just to give you some ideas for the future. You might have to take the top of the house off to get it in, though.

At a viewing distance of 8 feet you can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 50" display! Makes you think twice about caring whether a 32" display has 720p or 1080p, since you probably won't be watching it from 3 feet away.
How many people recording video on their SLR will display the movies on a bigger screen than 50" or have people stand closer than 8 feet from the screen? Not many, I'd guess. The 720/1080 debate is so much less important to me than whether they can get rid of the rolling shutter 'jell-o' effect. If there needs to be a debate (doubtful), that's what the debate should be about—noticeable quality problems and not numbers. Not that I'd complain about 1080p. Or, for that matter, 30fps. That is a real limitation not to be able to switch between 30fps and 24fps.

Posted 3 years ago #
nau

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 266
offline

I think this might be a right topic to "lol" about video
=let me just say that Im not a big fan of video on DSLRs(at least of what it is right now)
=secondly I have nothing to do at work so I'm gone write this post (I even went to KR's web site already, so now even Leica doesnt do it for him?er?)
- friend of mine just got his 300S and I decided to play with video feature...........he had 50mm 1.8 on it...
- let me just say its a pain in a a55 to use it as a video camera - u have to hold it with one hand and try to manipulate focus with the other ... its pretty damn heavy after few min and starts to be a little bit shaky... and we are talking about 300s+50mm lens (pretty much smallest lens) I cant possibly see using it without tripod on d3s and 70-200 lens unless you are Termi-governor of some sort.
- quality vise I cant really complain it looked very nice whn u look at something that doesnt move much
- sound, for anything thats more thn home video of you kids (good luck trying to put them in focus whn they run around) MIC is a must, it just picks up all the sounds and I tend to move my finger near where MIC is... not the best placement I think

In short, I was not excited about the whole vidoe from day one
trying it on d90 and d300s year later - Im still sticking with my opinion on the whole thing -

IF YOU NEED CAMERA FOR THE VIDEO - GET VIDEO CAM - FOR HOME SHOTS ANY REZ WILL DO
pure IMHO

Posted 3 years ago #
ddg

member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 12
offline

jonnyapple said:
That's me. Good post, willis.

How quickly we forget that a nikon was the first to offer any flavor of video on an SLR, let alone HD. Call me a cynical physicist (actually, all my friends do), but I'm pretty sure most people would not be able to tell the difference between 1080p and 720p video. Don't hate me—if you're thinking of writing some spiteful comment about what I just said, you're probably one of the few who can tell the difference. Besides that, I crunched some numbers using the resolution of the human eye for my dad who was trying to decide whether to get 720p or 1080p resolution in a 50" HDTV this year (specifically, I think I was using the rayleigh criterion for diffraction-limited resolution with a wide open pupil—I forget). Here's an excerpt from the email:

At a viewing distance of 8 feet you can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 50" display! Makes you think twice about caring whether a 32" display has 720p or 1080p, since you probably won't be watching it from 3 feet away.
How many people recording video on their SLR will display the movies on a bigger screen than 50" or have people stand closer than 8 feet from the screen? Not many, I'd guess. The 720/1080 debate is so much less important to me than whether they can get rid of the rolling shutter 'jell-o' effect. If there needs to be a debate (doubtful), that's what the debate should be about—noticeable quality problems and not numbers. Not that I'd complain about 1080p. Or, for that matter, 30fps. That is a real limitation not to be able to switch between 30fps and 24fps.

I can tell the difference between 720 and 1080.It is not that hard, and I am not sure why everyone thinks that having video on a still camera is a bad thing. It would be wonderful to be able to take some really nice photo's and then bring in a clip of what you just took. I think with this feature added, many people will find uses for quality video.

I have personally held off on buying any camera in hopes that Nikon will bring 1080p in their next release. I have a D300 that I will use until then. If they keep neglecting video, I will switch to a canon. It is not like canon's IQ is greatly inferior, and the new 1D mark IV may be a strong unit.

I have a year before I will make my final decision, and I do think Nikon will come on board, and when they do, I think many people who claim that they will never shoot any video will start putting their creative minds using a wonderful feature.

Posted 3 years ago #
Jarmo

junior member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 7
offline

Just like you johnnyapple, I video my kids. Therefore I disagree with your logic of todays screens... those videos will be watched also after 40 years. Do you still think that screensizes will be what they are today... No they won't. They will so big that anything you video today will be pretty small in the future.

I also disageee with you nau, the "homeshots" are the most important shots for me. I want maximum quality that I can get with my time, gear and skills. I use much more time for shooting single picture about my kids than those rare work -pictures I take. For work -pictures "good enough" -methods works.

I fully agree with you all who say "wait". Nikon was years behind Canon in ISO and then they announced D3, D700... Hopefully same will happen with videos.

I am just learning videos but I do see that "720P or 1080i" is not the whole story. Just like with still cameras.... a mobile phone with 12 megapixels is not the same as D3S with 12 megapixels.

I sometimes smile to "still fanatic's" comment "get videocamera". It's like saying "sell your SLR and get the cheapest P&S, it can take all your pictures".

I have a HD videocamera, but I want same challenge and fun I have had with my path to learn how to take still pictures. In my view DSLR with excellent HD video is what I need.

Jarmo

Posted 3 years ago #
Bland

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 883
offline

Maybe it's just me but I feel having video on a high end DSLR makes a mockery out of the true intent for a camera. To me, it's like buying the best camera in the world and then hanging an umbrella and cup holder on it.

It would be different if they put a $5000 video process inside of a $5000 DSLR but this isn't the case. I can understand video on a D5000 because it's an all around family type camera but the high end stuff needs this video garb taken off of it. jmo

Posted 3 years ago #
Jarmo

junior member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 7
offline

What is the "true intent for a camera". Technically it is only a lens & sensor & cpu & software & user interfaces. Why should we limit it's use only to still picture? You do have a one PC for all websites in the internet, not one pc for each site. It is very economical and practical to use one camera for both, videos and stills.

And weather we like it or not, future is video & still hybrids. Mobile phones, P&S cameras and consumer videocameras are there already. Now it is time for SLRs to evolve.

Posted 3 years ago #
vhtran

new member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 2
offline

I know video is a plus but how many of you bought a DSLR to shoot video? Or any of you even touch that video mode for the 2nd time?

Posted 3 years ago #
vhtran

new member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 2
offline

Bland said:
Maybe it's just me but I feel having video on a high end DSLR makes a mockery out of the true intent for a camera. To me, it's like buying the best camera in the world and then hanging an umbrella and cup holder on it.

It would be different if they put a $5000 video process inside of a $5000 DSLR but this isn't the case. I can understand video on a D5000 because it's an all around family type camera but the high end stuff needs this video garb taken off of it. jmo

+1

Posted 3 years ago #
valonqe

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 171
offline

Vhtran !

I bought my D300s for videos and then shoot some photos if I want to. I do understand when you say DSLR are only for taking pictures but why not have that extra feature when you buy the camera. If you don't want to use it don't us it. I also agree with Jarmo that two things in one doesn't hurt. Video cameras are large and heavy to carry when you are on the field, sometime they are to big ti fit them in small places.
On the other hand DSLR shooting video has open a different perspective in terms of film-making. Just the other day we finished e short film shot on RED, during the filming a brought my D300s and filmed the same scene with it. TO be honest with you you can't tell the difference. I know quality wise DSLR are way behind but boy I was so happy that I could get that look.

Any way a lot of people would argue the fact why DSLRs are shooting video but in time we will accept it and move on. It's only e feature that sits inside the menu for whenever you want to us it.

But one thing for sure, filmmakers around the world are very happy with this new feature because you can get some amazing footage.

Regards

Posted 3 years ago #
moog

new member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 1
offline

To offer my POV.
I'm the guy who's primarily a video shooter, with an interest in photography. Last christmas I bought my Nikon D60 and i ADORE it.

A few years back, I bought a panasonic HVX200 to shoot video, and it's served me well, but I've always whished from the get go, that I could change the lenses - then it would be awesome. That's the market you're going to get. There are LOADS of people who want to make films. And until now it's either been a case of spend £2/3000 on a decent camera, then another £1000 on a lense adapter to get the results you want, or settle for less.

I very nearly sold up all my current equipment for a Canon 7D. I'm glad I didn't because it's just not quite there yet, plus, I'd really love to stick with Nikon, I'm a brand loyalty kind of guy, so if something grabs me, I'll stick.

What you can't do though, is bury your head in the sand and mumble about 'video not being for us Nikon folks' because what it comes down to is market share. If Nikon do NOT produce a decent 1080p, variable frame rate DSLR with decent control, they will be forcing themselves out of a market and damaging their brand for the future. Siple as that. If they don't keep up, maybe...just maybe... there will no longer BE a Nikon.

If a 16 year old kid wants to make movies (as I said, there's loads, and it's increasing) - then what will they (or their folks) buy? The one that's the best all rounder - guaranteed.

I love Nikon cameras, but i'll have to jump ship if nothing happens in 2010.

cheers

moog

Posted 3 years ago #
monty11

Member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 798
offline

Why are you guys bickering over the video subject again?
There are those who like the video option and those who are categorically against it. For those who want/need video and still at the same time but don't have the resources to buy equipment for both or don't want to carry around all that gear, a video supporting DSLR is a perfect option. As this is the trend there isn't really anything any of us can do to stop it.

Those who don't like the video options that Nikon is offering, by all means switch to a brand that does have what you are looking for but do stop with the drama of being a lifelong Nikon user and now having to switch.

Posted 3 years ago #
bmxdad

preferred member
Joined: May '09
Posts: 1,864
offline

monty11 said:
Why are you guys bickering over the video subject again?
There are those who like the video option and those who are categorically against it. For those who want/need video and still at the same time but don't have the resources to buy equipment for both or don't want to carry around all that gear, a video supporting DSLR is a perfect option. As this is the trend there isn't really anything any of us can do to stop it.

Those who don't like the video options that Nikon is offering, by all means switch to a brand that does have what you are looking for but do stop with the drama of being a lifelong Nikon user and now having to switch.

You are so right, and video will carry on, like it or not, even Sony will have it, properly sometime next year. Actually I would not be surprised if Sony will enter the Video DSLR arena with something wild when they finally are ready, Maybe Nikon simply have to wait for that something that Sony is working on, to be used in future Nikon video DSLR also, But if some you can not wait, then sell your Nikon gear, most of us here at NR honestly could not care less if you jumped, I did not cry and complain on Canon Rumors about lacking AF and poor exposure performance when using my 40D and 580 Flash, I simply decided that it was time to move. Since that the AF performance has improved with the 7D, but I don't think that the flash performance is any better, I like Nikon and have actual become a Nikon Fan, that is something I newer did before with other brands, I tried with Canon, but it did not happen

Pete

Posted 3 years ago #
PacificEagle

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 105
offline

Should the HD Video user stay with Nikon???

Bluntly put...."Having a DSLR that does Video does not Make it a video camera" Lets face it, its another gimmick that they have put into "Digital Cameras" to sell more to the consumer.
Yes its a convienent little extra, yes it can produce decent result, but its in no way meant for anything other than short videos for the general consumer.
This discussion is through each and every forum on the internet, and the discussions are always the same. Most complain about Nikon not having 1080P, or make statements like if Nikon doesn't make 1080p soon then maybe there won't be a Nikon.

Nikon is a first and foremost a camera company!! They make some of the best photography gear there is on the market, Most Serious photographers and Professionals could give a @#%@ about video. Those that are serious about Video have real videography gear, and none of them would classify a DSLR as a Video Camera.

I'm an original Videographer, I have all the video gear, and I still do video professionally, and no matter what nikon does to include video into a "DSLR" it isn't a Video camera.
If you want real functional Video buy a Sony HDR Video camera(they start around 1800 cdn) the price of a 24-70 f/2.8, and are so much better then Nikon DSLR's.

Posted 3 years ago #
Jarmo

junior member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 7
offline

Interesting bmxdad. Could it be really that Sony sensors are limiting video -performance of Nikon DSLRS.... That's why Nikon has only 720/24 and Sony does not have video at all it's DSLRs?

Pacific... you can call hybrid DSLR anyway you like. I have money I and I will buy one. There will be others too, so there is demand in the market.

I already have Sony HD videocamera, price was about "24-70/2.8". Still I want a hybrid DSLR.

Monty11. I have money to buy both gears and I often carry all them with me. I am big and strong so the weight is not the issue. Still I want a hybrid DSLR.

I do not know why this video issue heats always the conversation. Is it because some users do not have a glue why someone wants video DSLR? Or is it that inevitable developments puts them out of confort-zone. They are excellent still photographers but the future video-centric culture won't care.

Posted 3 years ago #
valonqe

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 171
offline

I do not know why this video issue heats always the conversation. Is it because some users do not have a glue why someone wants video DSLR? Or is it that inevitable developments puts them out of confort-zone. They are excellent still photographers but the future video-centric culture won't care.

JArmo: I don't understand ether why the video issue is becoming like a taboo every time somebody opens up a new discussion. I to am a video maker which has access to any camera you basically want and can get it for free but like taking photographs for hobby. I to own a Nikon D300s which I bought only for the reason that shoots video.

The problem I see or at least I feel with some of photographers here in news groups that they feel that we film-videomakres are wasting their time with this discussion over photography because all they say we don't give a @@@@@ over video, or who cares, something like that. To be honest I ma tired of their comments.

It is simple, if you don't like to use video on upcoming DSLR don't use it, or if a firmware becomes available for Video options don't update it. But PLEASE have a courtesy of at least supporting us on our concerns.

If I had the money, and I think I can speak for a lot of people on this issue that we all would buy any camera that is need it for the job but unfortunately we can't afford it so we buy what we can.

A lot of people are commenting by a proper HD camera if you want to shoot video, hello do you thing that we don't know that. I tell you and I put my head to it that none of professional ENG camera Sony, Panasonic etc don't come closer to the LOOK that DSLRs are offering with this new D-MOVIE mode.

Of course that the quality of the picture in DSRL is not even close to that of the ENG cameras but to be honest with you nobody will notes it put side by side even projected on the big screen. I know a lot of people are thinking yeah right I can tell the difference because of this or that pixel, color, resolution etc. Trust me, find the right subject and tell the story from you're heart any camera would do, that's goes same with pictures as well.

Isn't this a site where we can discuss ideas and concerns over our liking and disliking about our NIKON gear. I personally feel a bit let down on Nikon for taking so long to releasing those Firmwares that people are rumoring around that they are coming out soon.

Rumors said it that it will be out before Christmas but it didn't happen so now we have to wait and wait. Nikon should at least post a note on their web site saying that we are working on the matter and give a time frame as supposed to not say anything at all.

They are so many reasons that some of us can predict as to why Nikon is not able to fix this problem, one of them being that is still using a Sony sensor which a lot of people say that they are restricted on the frame rate.

I tell you any DSLR camera manufacture can produce the ultimate camera which they can even surpass any professional HD cameras but they have to thing for other products that they sell.

Example let's discuss Sony alfa DSLR series which a lot of people are saying that it doesn't have video because of the chip restriction. Don't you thing that SONY is not able to write a simple software and make the DSLR record video as well but whats going to happen to its SONY F35 digital HD camera which as far as we know might use the same chip as any SONY DSLR. But of course Sony is not going to say it because F35 costs over $100k and It's DSLR is only few grand.

Same goes with Canon as well, they have a contract with Sony, Panasonic etc to produce HD lenses for them and Canon to turn around and produce a cheap DSLR which is able to compete with any HD camera they will loose the contract and that's is a major draw back financially.

To summer up my thoughts is that what ever comes up in DSLR or HD video cameras we are always going to as for that extra bit to make us happy.

So asking for that video mode in DSLR is not going to hurt NIKON, on contrary it is going to make it stronger in the market and a lot of filmmakers will buy it and shoot movies with it. Same with what they are doing with 7D which they are using ARRI cine lenses on 7D. I to can benefit if Nikon had the different frame rate and manual exposure. I would be bale to rent my camera to the local market to shoot music videos and TV commercials but because of that I have to sit and wait whiles the production market is using the 7d.

I will you all Happy New Year. May this year be the year of happiness in you're lives together with you're families.

Valonqe

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Valonqe I'm not against HD video, I welcome it! However I don't understand why people are crying about not having full HD or full manual control in current Nikons. It will happen when Nikon's good and ready to make it happen.

Rumors are just that... RUMORS until Nikon makes an official announcement nothing is certain. So just because there is a rumor of a firmware update doesn't mean it will actually happen.

If you need full manual and 1080p video today, right now, then you have other choices at various price points. However remember that a little over a year and a half ago you had ZERO options!

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Well Nikon just announced their firmware updates for the D300S/D700/D3/D3X!
No manual control for D300S video so... all hands abandon ship? lol

Posted 3 years ago #