where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
chim said:
i just did a low light video test, this is in a dark parking lot with all indirect light (no direct overhead lighting) on a 24 1.4 with no post processing. I am impressed by the low noise and the minimal rolling shutter. This was manually focused.
Thanks for posting that! What was the primary source? There's an apparent light source coming from the side/rear of your subject. Storefront lighting?
gelu88 said:
. . . from my reading of the manual, it seems that the A/V out (standard def) outputs during live view. Is this true?
I don't know--I hope so! I can't exactly verify this from just reading the brief reference to this topic in the manual (p. 191). I also have an application which would benefit from having the option of an available standard-definition video output, one which still leaves the D7000's LiveView LCD active.
On page 191 of the D7000 user manual, it states, "The supplied EG-D2 audio video (A/V) cable can be used to connect the camera to a television or video recorder for playback or recording. During playback, image will be displayed both in the camera monitor and on the television screen."
I'd like be able to supply my Steadicam's standard-definition monitor with a "live" composite video output from the D7000, while still keeping the D7000's LiveView display active (I don't need an HD signal, since it's mainly just for framing reference). In other words, I'd like to see the image I'm shooting, both on the D7000's LCD, and on another, SD monitor, simultaneously.
Does anyone know if this is possible? Thanks.
studio460 said:
I don't know--I hope so! I can't exactly verify this from just reading the brief reference to this topic in the manual (p. 191). I also have an application which would benefit from having the option of an available standard-definition video output, one which still leaves the D7000's LiveView LCD active.On page 191 of the D7000 user manual, it states, "The supplied EG-D2 audio video (A/V) cable can be used to connect the camera to a television or video recorder for playback or recording. During playback, image will be displayed both in the camera monitor and on the television screen."
I'd like be able to supply my Steadicam's standard-definition monitor with a "live" composite video output from the D7000, while still keeping the D7000's LiveView display active (I don't need an HD signal, since it's mainly just for framing reference). In other words, I'd like to see the image I'm shooting, both on the D7000's LCD, and on another, SD monitor, simultaneously.
Does anyone know if this is possible? Thanks.
I don't know if it would work for exactly what you're asking, but I did easily manage to hook up the camera to our tv with the supplied cable. The image was displayed on both screens, so that's a check mark there. They both displayed Live View and playback. Audio plays fine as well. I guess as long as you use the same type of cable, you should be able to do what you want it to.
Hope this helps.
It's nice to see some excitement here. To the guy talking about Strobist and the AI-S department... Canon already beat us to it. Everyone that shoots video on 5D/7D's seriously has a horde of Nikon manual glass w/ adapters.
I also sent Katzeye an email last week:
"Thank you very much for your inquiry. We have not actually been able to
examine the D7000 camera yet, so is only speculation at this point; but
based on my experience with Nikon's designs, I think it is quite likely that
the D7000 will share a focusing screen with the D5000. If that is the case,
our development period will be quite short once we can get a camera in -
we'll just need to run some tests and update our website and documentation.
An all new screen could take considerably longer though, depending on the
complexity and challenges involved. Nothing is certain until we see the
camera though, so there isn't much point in too much speculation. We do
hope to support the D7000 as quickly as possible and I will keep your email
on file so that I can notify you as soon as there is any news..."
Hopefully we'll have some focusing screens coming out soon.
padlockd said:
I don't know if it would work for exactly what you're asking, but I did easily manage to hook up the camera to our tv with the supplied cable. The image was displayed on both screens, so that's a check mark there. They both displayed Live View and playback. Audio plays fine as well. I guess as long as you use the same type of cable, you should be able to do what you want it to.Hope this helps.
Thanks! So, just to be clear, you're saying that you can see the LiveView image on both the camera's 3" LCD, and the external standard-definition monitor, while recording in D-Movie mode, right? If so, that's great!
pher said:
Hopefully we'll have some focusing screens coming out soon.
Good to know! I was initially going to get a Katzeye screen for my D90, but never got around to it. A Katzeye focusing screen (to assist in making manual focusing easier) for the D7000 would be great!
On another note, I was talking to a shooter from MTV last night--he had a Canon 7D with a Zacuto LCD magnifying loupe on a Cinevate shoulder mount. He let me try it out--it was awesome. The Zacuto products are good stuff, but very expensive--I'm going to go with the Red Rock Micro baseplate, 15mm rail system, and follow-focus instead. The announced Red Rock Micro HDMI EVF should be an awesome accessory for filmmakers, when they finish inventing it (as reported by NR, Zacuto is also making an HDMI EVF).
studio460 said:
Thanks! So, just to be clear, you're saying that you can see the LiveView image on both the camera's 3" LCD, and the external standard-definition monitor, while recording in D-Movie mode, right? If so, that's great!
Correct, the image displays on both the camera and the tv. The tv will display anything that you see on the camera's LCD (including LiveView). I'm guessing it'll work with any display with a composite video input.
Judging by the photokina video where they hooked up the D7k wirelessly via HDMI to a monitor I don't think you can get rid of the overlays.
@Studio - I think the Redrock EVF is going to be the way to go. It costs about as much as the Zacuto style loupe, and actually makes ergonomic sense. There has been a lot of competition in the last year for this gear. I think they'll keep pushing hard coming out with innovative stuff and in a couple of years the prices will be more reasonable.
There's always the chinese clones that are one step behind all the new stuff, too.
padlockd said:
Correct, the image displays on both the camera and the tv. The tv will display anything that you see on the camera's LCD (including LiveView). I'm guessing it'll work with any display with a composite video input.
Thanks, padlockd--really appreciate you testing that out for me! Having a down-sampled composite video output available from the EVF output is a pretty handy thing, and an impressive feature for such a low-priced camera.
pher said:
Judging by the photokina video where they hooked up the D7k wirelessly via HDMI to a monitor I don't think you can get rid of the overlays.@Studio - I think the Redrock EVF is going to be the way to go. It costs about as much as the Zacuto style loupe, and actually makes ergonomic sense. There has been a lot of competition in the last year for this gear. I think they'll keep pushing hard coming out with innovative stuff and in a couple of years the prices will be more reasonable.
Yes, I've been admiring the design, ergonomics and styling (their products just look really cool) of the Red Rock line-up ever since I began to get excited about shooting video with a Nikon DSLR. I agree, the Red Rock Micro EVF looks to be an excellent product, solving a very crucial ergonomic issue for using a DSLR as a cine camera, and surprisingly, it's affordably priced (very affordable, for what you're getting).
sorry, please delete this one...
a short film that i put together, shot with the D7000, pretty impressed so far, need some better glass, and it is golden. Shot with Nikon Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX. Best watched in fullscreen HD on vimeo.
| [+] Embed the video | Video Download | Get the Flash Video |
stevendean said:
a short film that i put together, shot with the D7000, pretty impressed so far, need some better glass, and it is golden. Shot with Nikon Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX. Best watched in fullscreen HD on vimeo.
Incredible-looking sets/location, Steven! Looks awesome! Nice music supervision!
Hi all,
With all the supposed problems of video in the D7000, and the unveiling of the Panasonic AG-AF101 this Winter, which I'm reasonably sure will be yet another game changer, perhaps using Nikon lenses on this camera will be the simple answer.
My best,
Mike
Mike Gunter said:. . . the unveiling of the Panasonic AG-AF101 this Winter, which I'm reasonably sure will be yet another game changer, perhaps using Nikon lenses on this camera will be the simple answer.
The AG-AF101 has an excellent feature set and is definitely equipped for pro use; however, Panasonic's puzzling decision to go with the smaller micro-4/3rds format results in a whopping 2x crop-factor (as opposed to the 1.5x crop for the D7000) when using Nikkor lenses. Now, what I'm really looking forward to is Nikon's next FX-body with 1080p24 capability (although, I'll still be buying a D7000 when one becomes available).
studio460 said:
The AG-AF101 has an excellent feature set and is definitely equipped for pro use; however, Panasonic's puzzling decision to go with the smaller micro-4/3rds format results in a whopping 2x crop-factor (as opposed to the 1.5x crop for the D7000) when using Nikkor lenses. Now, what I'm really looking forward to is Nikon's next FX-body with 1080p24 capability (although, I'll still be buying a D7000 when one becomes available).
Hi Studio,
The 24fps would mean something to the video-to-film transfer crowd, something that I suspect affects a very rarefied portion of the crowd reading this; I don't know that anyone here has transferred their video to film. OTOH, broadcasting frame rates would be far more interesting at 60fps or 30fps progressive or even 60 interlaced for more smoother action footage for NTSC or 25P or 50P or 50i for PAL, something many would really be able to sink their collective teeth into. I have had several shows on several different networks, and nary a one has cared a twit about 24P, but all have cared dearly about broadcast specifications. I know that NTSC is going the way of the dodo, in favor of ATSC, and that 24P is one of 18 specifications (of which standard definition is one), but more frames will yield smoother results, as will interlaced frames, too. The only reason I would really 'urge' someone to shoot 24P is for film transfer.
The Panasonic camera has multiple rates plus some variable rates many more options, too, plus professional audio and much more.
The Micro 4/3rds is still larger than standard 35mm projection film gauge, and would easily mimic the look if transferred. Naturally, one would have to use lenses at the focal length to the gauge sensor, but that's where the 4/3rds makes a lot of sense. There are dozens of lens choices available right now, and of course, adapters for Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Panasonic, Contax, Lecia, Zeiss, and Arri, the PL mounts, and "C" mounts, and more that I'm likely leaving out.
Getting great control is a matter of matching the lens to that smaller sensor. It may not be that terrific 50mm f1.2 that you have, but it could be just at a slightly different distance, and greater f-stop.
Interestingly enough, I think the real choices for DOF control need to be in normal and beyond. DOF isolation becomes particularly nice there; most wide choices are less demanding in routine film making.
Don't get me wrong, I would like to see all this and more on a DSLR, and that to have a Nikon label, but it doesn't seem to be happening. I'm not advocating that we don't, as a market, let up on Nikon, we should demand more from them, but I am suggesting that at some point film makers get realistic that there are much more economical good choices available to them that will do a better job than cobbling up a product that, at the end of the day, will likely cost much more and do much less.
My best to you all,
Mike
Mike Gunter said:
The 24fps would mean something to the video-to-film transfer crowd, something that I suspect affects a very rarefied portion of the crowd reading this; I don't know that anyone here has transferred their video to film.
It's true, only if your project has been picked up by a distributor, would anyone even consider the expense of a 35mm film-out. However, fIlmmakers prefer 24p-acquisition more for its mimicry of how motion-picture film cameras capture images, rather than for its ease of transfer to film.
More specifically, it's the persistence-of-vision and motion blur characteristics produced by the 24fps framerate (combined with a shutter speed of 1/48th of a second), which allows a video camera to more closely emulate the look of film. This is more an aesthetic choice than a technical one. While higher framerates may be more appropriate for news-gathering or sports coverage, higher framerates are generally not desired for narrative filmmaking (with the exception of high-speed, slow-motion photography, i.e. "overcranking").
Most, if not all, 24p video cameras acquire 24p "over 60i" (e.g., DVX/HVX/100/200, SDX/HDX900, HPX500/2000/3000, DSR450, 24p-capable XDCAM models, HDW-F900, etc.). Meaning, that while the camera acquires at 23.976 frames-per-second, progressive (i.e., "24p"), it records it into a 60i signal (otherwise, it wouldn't be compatible with conventional NTSC recorders and displays). This is achieved by employing either a 2:3 or 2:3:3:2 in-camera, inverse pulldown (2:3:3:2 is preferred).
Video acquired in 24p certainly looks more "filmic," and in contrast to 60i-acquired video, looks less "live." While I expect the difference between 24p and 30p is somewhat less dramatic than the visual difference between 24p- and 60i-acquired video, the slightly higher framerate of 30p would tend to make such footage look slightly more "video-ish."
As for broadcast use, normally, most of the footage where I work is acquired at 60i (I work at a major broadcast network). However, we supplement our 60i-acquired video with 23.976 progressive (24p) video for B-roll use on a daily basis. Promos (for affiliates) are often shot at 24p on our F900s, and commercials (for network insertion) have been most recently shot at 24p on RED. All of our 24p-acquired assets are recorded "over 60i," and are regularly ingest into our 1080i60-based network.
Thankfully, both the D3100 and the D7000 record at 23.976 fps (rather than a "true" 24.000). Most NLEs are equipped to handle 23.976 progressive video with ease these days, and as I witnessed myself, the D7000's .MOV files drop right into FCP without a hitch.
Hi Studio,
I get all that. I don't work at a studio, but my projects show weekly on PBS, Discovery, the Outdoors Channel, and others.
I just don't subscribe to it. In most of what you're doing you're putting 24p over a 60i time line, which is really redundant. If you were shooting 60i content in the for that timeline,it would be full of original frames throughout the timeline.
Someone a long time ago, in a discussion about the "Film Look" convinced everyone that "Cadence" was nearly as important as story and everything else.Then he passed around the Kool-aid and convince everyone to take a drink.
It's just weird that 24 frames looks more 'filmy' because it 'it just had to with the rate 24fps of film, isn't it?' Before proejectors had electric motors there were several standards that were common place, and different gauges had different rates for the 'talkies' for years. So the answer is 'Well, not really.' _It is but one aspect of filmic quality_. And a minor one at that. You can get as much by good color management and audio control and mixing. Rate is nothing to hang your hat on, unless you're really jonesing to project your project as a film. Action will suffer for it.
Again, I don't have any clue to how many here reading this have converted their video to film.
ATSC accounts for 18 resolutions and within those resolutions differing rates. I wouldn't count out 30P or 60P or 60i.
I dearly hope that firmware pushes the D7000 for the more usable 30p, 60p and 60i for NTSC and 25P, 50P, and 50i for PAL.
A lot of films at special houses go at different rates and different rates after the digital houses are up and running will prevail. Multiple rates in the same film will be common in the future.
My best,
Mike
I have a question about hardware. I have a Mac Quad G5 with a Radeon X1900 and it can not play the Nikon D7000 1080p. I can play 1080p from apple.com trailers with no problem, but not the Nikon once, any idea why?
PabloSRT8 said:
I have a question about hardware. I have a Mac Quad G5 with a Radeon X1900 and it can not play the Nikon D7000 1080p. I can play 1080p from apple.com trailers with no problem, but not the Nikon once, any idea why?
Try updating your OS and downloading the most recent version of QuickTime. The D7000 writes H.264 in a .MOV wrapper, so it should play in QuickTime on a Mac.
I'm sorry, I should have explain my self better. The Mac can play the files, but they skip alot, very choppy video. I have all the latest updates, running Leopard too.
Sorry, I'm just not that familiar with QT playback issues on older Macs. Could it possibly be your display adapter's driver? Try also asking in a Mac forum, or in a more video-oriented forum like DVXuser.com, DVInfo.net, or possibly even the Canon-oriented filmmaker site, Cinema5d.com. Good luck!
What initial "Easy Setup" settings should we be using in FCP?
I'm guessing this (but unsure of the codec)
Format: HD
Rate: 23.98 fps
Use: HDV 1080p24 Firewire Basic
ferfey said:
What initial "Easy Setup" settings should we be using in FCP?
I'm guessing this (but unsure of the codec)
Format: HD
Rate: 23.98 fps
Use: HDV 1080p24 Firewire Basic
When I dropped a D7000 .MOV into a new FCP v6.0.6 timeline and allowed FCP to automatically conform the timeline, it set it to:
Format: DV/Panasonic DVCPRO
Rate: 24 fps
Use: Custom Setup
I know that the D7000 is reportedly shooting 23.976, so I changed my settings to:
Format: HD
Rate: 23.98 fps
Use: Custom Setup
But, then this required a re-render. Usually, allowing FCP to auto-conform the timeline is a "safe bet," but I'm in uncharted waters here, so I'm not exactly sure what's best.
The D7000's compression scheme is definitely not HDV (it's AVCHD-compressed H.264 in a .MOV wrapper), so I definitely wouldn't use the HDV setup. I haven't really spent any time using D7000 clips in FCP yet, so I'm still unsure of the optimum set-up. If you allow FCP to automatically conform the timeline for you, you should be able to scrub and playback the clip without a re-render. This is what I did the very first time I tried it (the first set of automatically applied settings), and I was able to playback D7000 clips and create a simple dissolve.
There's been some discussion on other forums about some caveats to editing in an H.264-native timeline. Someone suggested using Compressor to batch-transcode all of your D7000 .MOV clips to ProRes first, then drop all of the converted files into a ProRes timeline (rather than an H.264 timeline). Don't know what the best method is yet.
Any benefit to converting? I love the fact that I can drop the source files into a timeline and start editing right away, such a big improvement from having to "re-capture" the media to my hard drive.
ferfey said:
Any benefit to converting? I love the fact that I can drop the source files into a timeline and start editing right away, such a big improvement from having to "re-capture" the media to my hard drive.
Yes, I believe the thinking is that ProRes is a far more robust CODEC than H.264, and that editing in an H.264 timeline adds unwanted recompresses. I'm no FCP expert, this is just what I gathered from an FCP thread at DVXUSER.
You must log in to post.
