Emanuel

  It is not mine, the author is identified on vimeo: Tom Beal   And he also says that has tried to post on these boards but once his account is newbie it is waiting for prior approval, so I am only the pigeon post over here :-)

aside where the automatic shutter speed is effectively a problem, here you have the most recent 4K RAW Nikon (for 190 euros) posted on vimeo:   https://vimeo.com/67656132      

    V1 is a waste of money for motion picture considering the automatic shutter, when we have the V2 just for more 360 euros. Hopefully, we'll be saying the same about V2 considering the limit of 40 frames when V3 will reach the streets with 4K video but not only. Longer burst mode going with RAW is very likely to happen and would even be much more interesting than 8-bit video whether be higher rezzed or not.

I concur kenuck, such claims are nothing more than mere FUD, nothing you can't handle plenty of half-full glasses...   http://www.photozone.de/nikon1/699-1nikon10303556v1?start=2   ...against a pack of 8-bit combo with shitty codecs instead as alternative ;-) Bah! :P and yes, lower resolutions in disguise of 1080p world unable to other than addressed to crappy youtubes in PressPausePlay age, DR screaming video by everywhere. Worthy still photography use at the same time, then... it is to forget.   *Sigh*   This is the first real 4.6K motion and still photography system really pocketable. It does include the cheap glass, yeah. Call it cheap, as you want. Who cares? Who pays says thanks. And it won't bother artists to produce great work and with professional usage. It doesn't matter if only for 1.67 second @24fps from post for motion. As same as the whole RAW process BTW. I mean yet, V1 is a PITA with the automatic shutter and the fully V2 only for more 360 euros... Going more wrong than with an automatic shutter, it is impossible if you'll end with flickering in the end.

And here is another example of the merits of the outcome developed by the participants here, whether natively based on the purpose sui generis of this thread or not:

Andrew, I don't like bans, actually, I've supported you many times on dvxuser when you were attacked there by a few of the same people in the past. And I guess you've responded in the best way to become eoshd.com in one of the most interesting sources available online for affordable motion picture acquisition. But the fact is: what the hell wants who can disagree with such unique place where it is possible to find 4K RAW moving image capture for 200 bucks?! *Sigh* A shot is not measured in seconds, minutes or hours but in what we can do in such units of time from a fps standard, whatever length we have in hands. Just it. There are A-cameras, B-cameras etc, choose what your skills fit best, if any. Be quiet if nothing you have to add. You did it in the right way. This thread is already a milestone per se. I, for example, am used to come here in a regular basis. Stick it! Kudos for your attitude regarding the dream of Coppola we all should share, if the art is actually the sake of it (not any troll in disguise whoever he/she is :P) Emanuel :-) PS -- I can't wait to expect and probably buy V3 Nikon Series 1.

But there is still the double size of sensor nearby 16mm film, rather than the videoish TV-like of a 1/2.3" (do not confound with 2/3") sensor size.

I hadn't read it yet. Answered it now. Thanks.

And also with 40% more resolution... Any idea on how faster is to write it for card?

Man, I've always defended you on dvxuser for some reason ; ) Well said :) Who doesn't understand it, they have no clue what's going in this business ;-) I've been helping to shoot a feature with a partner of mine. And I've been using the GH series' burst mode (very different of these small Nikons for sure) for 4K establishing shots.

(OK, I wanted to commented that quote but some bug is avoiding to add anything other than inside the quote, so, here's this new post here:) In the same way, people shot in 35mm film to deliver VHS. This argument is nonsense. Proper 4K downsampled to 1080p, 720p, SD, etc is miles away of anything natively shot lower, as for instance, in the same resolution to deliver. Period. *Sigh* :-)

But, V2 is higher resolution 4,608 x 3,072 against 3,872 x 2,592 (V1). I guess the same difference in burst mode, correct?

[quote author=HurtinMinorKey link=topic=635.msg4742#msg4742 date=1335455132] [quote author=cameraboy link=topic=635.msg4735#msg4735 date=1335431641] i like Jeff Cronenweth style low key and lot of scenes light with practical lights... but his best work is Fight Club ...he is not DP who can work with digital ...he and David Fincher should back to shoot with on film... [/quote] I think he's awesome, and clearly Fight Club looks the best. But the social Network looked good too.  I think the choice of camera has been more of Fincher's choice, because he likes to shoot 100 takes of everything. I wouldn't be surprised if Jeff is dying to go back to film. [/quote] Are you sure? «[i]I miss shooting film, but I don't miss not sleeping at night. I like going to sleep knowing I have a job in the morning rather than calling the lab at 5 and asking, "Is there an image there?" I think we're in the infancy stage of it. So a lot's going to change.[/i]» http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/24/showbiz/movies/qa-jeff-cronenweth-oscar/index.html ;-)