where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
Make my number a 5. Nikon has got a really important feature going with video on DSLR and a number of D800 orders have been placed JUST to do video. We have about every Nikon DSLR DX made. I keep stalling on the D800 purchase. With approx. 18 video cameras in our fleet for three photographers who do many other jobs too.....we are very sure some subjects cannot be depicted as well in just stills. I knew Ansel Adams. He took great pride in his sequence photos with view cameras and I was also doing the same thing in 8x10 view cameras. Fast forward to today. I sold my D700 as it was not getting used as much as a D90 and a D300 (size is not a plus in some field work) and it was not capable of doing video and we were pretty happy with the D7000 to do stills and video. But for just stills I am not sure I would rate the D7000 ahead of even a D90. They are both good for stills. But since the D7000 does BOTH very well, But not perfect.
Looking back through the comments here Mike Gunter's comments from a year ago sure look accurate today. I do think Nikon DSLR video is getting better quickly......well.....maybe just getting better and too slow in coming for some of us. I wager AGAIN that you will NOT see DSLR's from Nikon and Canon WITHOUT video. They need it for sales today. Whether it is for you depends on how you see things. Many I know are used to seeing good movie images and indeed many in the regular public (not photographers) are surprised to see stills for some subjects. Bottom line I think we need both.
Maybe crizman in this last post will see a subject some day and find it was better in video than still. I do think though that it is still up to the eye and goals of the person taking the picture. Since I use them both in slide sound shows it is easy to pick between the two to depict topics. Usually a mix of both are best. Good luck to you all.
DSLR video is suffering a pretty crushing blow with products like the Black Magic Cinema Camera coming out at under $3000 and giving you 2.5K video. I don't see DSLR's catching up to this, sadly. And by the time they ever did I'd wager that there'd likely be a 4K camera available for roughly the same price.
Hi all,
@Daveyj "I knew Ansel Adams." So did I. He'd be all about this technology. We used the D7000 for 3 videos in the last 4 weeks. Two national commercial shots (Yahoo and Groupon), and inserts for a PBS series. We have used it for CNN coverage, too.
@SquamishPhoto BlackMagic's camera looks terrific, but since it's sensor is a 4/3d-size, it also comes with some built-in DOF and bokeh concerns. You'd really _want_ to use the Zeiss optics they are showing on the camera that cost almost as much as half of the camera. A D800 with HDMI out has impressive HD 4:4:4 video, too. Ultimately, where and how the video will be used is what's important. A minuscule number of users will actually benefit from the terrific resolution of 2.5K (although marketing to a large number is something else entirely - it reminds me that only one wins a lotto jackpot, but millions will buy a ticket). Lots of content will be shot in 2.5K only to be resized to HD, where in many cases, it could have started its life just as well. I won't, nor do I want to suggest, that not marketing that "2.5K advantage" is trivial; even a nose above water prevents drowning.
My best,
Mike
Great points, Mike. Im only familiar with the video world because of my landlord who manufactures cable camera tells me about all the latest gear news. He seemed pretty excited about a unit of that quality appearing for such a low price, but I think you might be right that, in most cases at least, that its going to get resized to HD anyway.
TaoTeJared said:
Something tells me down the road DSLRs will always have video but something will emerge (2-5 years+) that is predominantly focused on video but can use DSLR lenses for the same price. I think all the "rigs" people are selling to make DSLRs a usable dedicated video camera indicate the direction or the opportunity for companies.
I said that a year ago, looks like I was off by 1-4years ;)
Canon, Sony, Red, Black Magic, and I saw some rumors Panasonic is planning a primary use video camera to use their m4/3rds lenses as well - maybe they already have. There will be more - and soon with their smaller MP sensors, someone will create one that can have clean video way beyond any DSLR can do now. With all the accessories, it seems pro videographers are trying to turn DSLRs into video cameras. From what I keep hearing, many just want the lenses and the limited DOF. Few care less about the body style.
Video is limited by much more than photography just by the TVs available to video formats the broadcast system and handle that will determine their course. 4k TV video is just coming on-line (4096 × 3072) and that is only a 12.6mp sensor image. By last count, every DSLR released in the last 6 months has not been below 16mp. Where everything gets interesting is that MP count is still rising which would seem to limit clarity of high iso video where Dedicated Video systems can continue to refine 3/6/10/12mp sensors and produce cleaner images.
DSLRs will always have video and there will be a use for it, but I'm sure more affordable primary video systems will become available that can use DSLR lenses, have similar or better IQ and better audio controls and people will flock to those. Then we will see the separation again, but never exclusivity of just one or the other in a system.
Maybe I'm way off, but that seems the direction everything is moving from what I have seen.
DaveyJ said:
Make my number a 5. Nikon has got a really important feature going with video on DSLR and a number of D800 orders have been placed JUST to do video. We have about every Nikon DSLR DX made. I keep stalling on the D800 purchase. With approx. 18 video cameras in our fleet for three photographers who do many other jobs too.....we are very sure some subjects cannot be depicted as well in just stills. I knew Ansel Adams. He took great pride in his sequence photos with view cameras and I was also doing the same thing in 8x10 view cameras. Fast forward to today. I sold my D700 as it was not getting used as much as a D90 and a D300 (size is not a plus in some field work) and it was not capable of doing video and we were pretty happy with the D7000 to do stills and video. But for just stills I am not sure I would rate the D7000 ahead of even a D90. They are both good for stills. But since the D7000 does BOTH very well, But not perfect.Looking back through the comments here Mike Gunter's comments from a year ago sure look accurate today. I do think Nikon DSLR video is getting better quickly......well.....maybe just getting better and too slow in coming for some of us. I wager AGAIN that you will NOT see DSLR's from Nikon and Canon WITHOUT video. They need it for sales today. Whether it is for you depends on how you see things. Many I know are used to seeing good movie images and indeed many in the regular public (not photographers) are surprised to see stills for some subjects. Bottom line I think we need both.
Maybe crizman in this last post will see a subject some day and find it was better in video than still. I do think though that it is still up to the eye and goals of the person taking the picture. Since I use them both in slide sound shows it is easy to pick between the two to depict topics. Usually a mix of both are best. Good luck to you all.
wait: d90 better than D7000? why would you say that?
You must log in to post.
