Here is another hot topic - shoot your comments here.
Video in Nikon DSLR: the good, the bad and the ugly(10 posts) (10 voices)
Good just need to triggger it remotely
its just a beginning, few models from now it might be actually good and useful
I would love to have video on my D700 as a perk BUT having video and sacrificing any of the actual camera features not gone work for me
I think video is just the way things will be now. What gets me are those who complain about an DSLR having video. That would be like complaining that it support AF. If you don't want AF then manually focus. Same with video, don't want it, don't use it.
currently the best video implementation has been the 5DMII, and given it leave sooooo much to be desired, I hope the d400 fixes most of the issues. however my biggest 3 beef are:
silly experts say the 5DII beats a 100K video camera. wrong. just pan the canon or take a tele shot w/o a tripod. ugh, hello jello-vision. congrats, you just ruined a movie sequence. go get that 100k camera now. hell a $300 camcorder doesn't jello as bad as the canon.
-lack manual controls:
please nikon let me pick the iso, wb, exposure etc. leave auto for the soccer mom.
ok film students you like this. good. now move aside. can we have at least contrast dectect or God forbit, phase detect!
1 and 3 are tough problems. 2 is easily doable.
I would prefer that they not concentrate much effort on the video functions. A much better option would be a dedicated digital camera that can accept Nikon\Cannon Lenses.
I have video on my D90 and I've used it once... just to try it out.
The process\mindset of shooting video is fundamentally different. I don't have a mind for it.
its hard to read but does the D5000 do any autofocus? it says autofocus for live view but not specifically for video unless i missed it.
That would be amazing if it had an autofocus motor. . . . I miss that feature on my D40. But I doubt it does. As far as D-Movie goes, I think it's useful when you just want to record something on the spot, but if you were going to make a film or something, it would be far more practical to use a real motion picture camera.
My Sony SD miniDV camcorder has much better video quality than HD video in my D90. Even forgetting the "jello" efect, coding quality makes it useless for something serious. JPEG artifacts are so visible that the highest "HD" resolution in D90 looks worse than SD video of simple camcorder.... I'm not going to complain that I have possibility to record movies with my D90 but I will complain that the quality of that video is on such level that should prevent nikon from using hd logo...
You must log in to post.