Quirky

Your preferences, your timetables, your money, your decision. Apart from the usual nerdy-nam-nam, ( a social need), I see very little point in recommending cameras that no one (V3) or hardly anyone (A5000) owns, let alone has had a chance to use for long enough a period yet. Especially in some specialist environment like aerial shooting. After NAB comes Photokina, and after that comes 2015 and CES, and the whole cycle starts spinning another round again. So buy a camera whenever you actually need one. If you don't need one, don't buy one yet. There'll always be a new better model after you've just bought yours. Whichever camera you end up buying, you'll have to work around some shortcomings, anyway. Very few of us have cameras custom built for our particular needs and wishes. All those models mentioned are relatively small and lightweight, but are they good enough for your needs and your workflow is up to you.

For starters, and the most important thing to realise; It's your wants, your needs, your personal preferences and your money, so it's your decision. No one else should make the decision for you. But other than that, here's a slightly 'unorthodox' but still working sugestion; If you're just stating out with video assignments and plan to carry on your stills shooting gigs as usual, why not just adding a standalone video camera into that mix, without having to sell anything? Something like the Sony RX10, for example. It's not nearly as bad an idea as it may sound at first, so please read on. Selling the D4 (of those three Nikon bodies) for an older model would make very little sense to me. Especially when you're just starting with the video stuff. It appears that like many others in that position, you are attempting to climb a tree with your butt first. Why wouldn't you sell the other two cheaper bodies as quickly as possible, when you still can get some dough from them? That situation won't last much longer now, you know. I'd sell those, and use the money to buy something like the RX10 and a mic, for starters, and maybe even an Atomos Ninja 2 recorder, too. Or, if you've locked your mind into (Nikon) dSLR's, use the money to buy a D5300 body, an audio recorder and a mic. Or, sell all three bodies and get a D800 and some other camera as a backup video camera. The video quality off the RX10, especially with the Ninja 2, is good enough for weddings and other such client stuff, and the rest is up to the shooter. By going that kind of route, you wouldn't have to get rid of your precious stills gear (apart from those cheaper bodies), and you could practise and shoot decent video alongside your existing gear. You wouldn't have to invest heavily in video rigs right away, either, as long as you've got a monopod or a tripod, and maybe an inexpensive flash handle. Carrying the stuff around would be much easier, too. Then, if you later on wish to go for something like the GH4 or even the Blackmagic, along with a lens adapter, the money invested in the RX10 wouldn't be wasted, because sooner or later you'd need a B-camera, too, anyway, and the RX10 would work just fine for that. The reasonably good stills it can make would come as a bonus. Or, if you later on happened to realise that video isn't really your cup of tea, after all, your stills gear would still be intact, and getting rid of just one camera would be much easier. Unless you decided to keep it as a holiday snapshooter or backup camera, after all. Well, just a thought, with minimal need for expen$ive gear shuffling.

I'd say forget about the extra gear and rigs for now, and forget about the 50mm, too. For now. Instead, start with a proper wideangle prime. In mFT terms, that would be something between 7 and 12mm. A 50mm Nikkor without Speedbooster would be an equivalent of 100mm tele, which would quadruple your focusing woes. But a good wideangle lens will be much more forgiving with both focusing and camera movement. Sometimes you don't even have to focus the lens during shooting, as long as you prefocus it for your shot and anticipate the action within the focus range of the lens.

...and that the company in question is very bureaucratic organisation with a stiff, heavy and very slow turning carriage. That's just spraying and praying on steroids, isn't it. It sounds more like a solution looking for a problem. Now that you've got your shiny new 4K hammer, every "problem" you see has to look like a nail, doesn't it. ;-) However, the secret sauce behind most great portraits has very little to do with high frame rate shooting, or even resolution. I'm not anti-4K, nor do I disagree with your thoughts on this article in general, but some of your agruments just seem a bit, um, binary. Making great portraits (yes, making, not taking) has never been about resolution. Take two well known portrait photographers like Sue Bryce and Peter Hurley, for example. Their work and reputation are known worldwide, and their fancy Canon cameras would already allow them to take both rapid bursts of shots and video of their subjects and shoot like you described above. They could also easily afford a C300 if they so fancied. Both of them do and have already made their "Making Of" videos of their photo shoots, but they still prefer making their client portraits the "old-fashioned" way for a reason. Not because they don't know any better, or wouldn't know how. They both have been making great portraits with less than 4K resolution, too, since the days of film. Apart from a handful of gadget geeks, it's really a non-issue. You either have the skill or you don't, and being able to pick an image from a stream of video wouldn't change that. Nor are there any significant problems in making portraits with stills cameras, either. Stills and video/cinema are two different genres of art. Again, I'm all in for the arrival of the reasonably priced 4K cameras but to me not every every photo session is a nail that needs a 4K hammer. I do see the benefits of picking a still frame off a high quality video stream in general, of course, but that's another story. I've been shooting photo-video fusion (I don't fancy the hybrid moniker) for a while now, but I tend to prefer having two different cameras, anyway. Whenever I can. For the best results, you're likely to concentrate on just one or the other at the time, anyway. At least I am. Neither has the stills image quality, at least in their consumer level (APS-C) models. A typical 18-megapixel Canon dSLR is not a valid reference for top image quality, and hasn't been for a good while now. I know quite a few stills shooters, both online and IRL, but I've never heard of, let alone met a stills shooter who is "anti-video." I may know some stills shooters who are indifferent about video, though, but that's something very different. Thus I have never felt like such imaginary curmudgeons could be able to "hold us back" in any way. If Canon choose to ignore the video enthusiasts and the prosumer market, unlike some other brands, I believe the ones that hold us back can be found somewhere behind those ridiculously long job titles mentioned in your article. Fortunately like Nikon, Canon are not the only option we have now. Agreed, an EOS-M line with decent video features would be very nice. Some other manufacturers are already doing some progress with such models, but for some reason Canon don't, and apparently won't, any time soon. You can't really blame those alleged "anti-video" guys for that. But all in all, let's hope Canon will do something beyond their Cx00 line, and that they'll be better motivated about prosumer video than, say, Nikon. We'll find out, eventually. Meanwhile, one thing came to mind about the Asian culture and Japanese in particular. I've heard/learned that the Asian/Japanese corporate heads aren't too eager to give us a blunt "no" where a Western one could do so with ease. I believe they'd rather use a polite euphemism to express the negative answer. In other words, sometimes a Japanese no may not necessarily sound like one literally.

The ancient wisdom says, "The best camera is always the one that comes right after you've just bought a new camera." Therefore, buy a camera, any camera, when you need one. If you don't need one, then wait until you do. Simple as that. Nevertheless, as long as Blackmagic cameras and their recent track record are concerned, waiting for a while has turned out to be a good policy. First with the BMCC and the delivery issues, then the price drop, then with BMPCC and its orb issues, and now BMPC and its minor teething issues, along with a price drop. Even if the price won't drop any longer, they may still tweak some performance issues, pretty much like they did with the Pocket. Just my 2c.

I think it's a bit early to start guessing the spec sheet(s) of the coming new model(s) but still, if they really are to come up with a dSLR-format camera with a z-axis sensor and a hybrid mount fully compatible with all those three lens types, the body is likely to be a large-ish one. I'd think adding a 5-axis IBIS into that would be quite challenging, too. But why speculate, when we know so little about the real thing(s), for now, and there's NAB, there's Photokina, etc. Patience, young Luke, patience. :P I tend to agree about the stills side in general, and the notion that stills and video shooting are two different crafts and forms of expression to begin with. Nevertheless, think about all the millenials and the new breed of "geekier" shooters who have grown up, or learned the craft with all digital cameras and spray and pray shooting style. In fact, there are already quite a few people who share that sort of thinking, and therefore the notion of extracting stills from video frames may become the new norm, like it or not. I don't think it will totally replace traditional stills shooting any time soon, though. In fact, a change like that may again first start from the consumer side of things, rather than the pro/prosumer side. The (kind of) camera(s) Sony apparently are up to aren't really intended for stills shooting to begin with, despite Andrew's personal views, so don't worry. Horses for courses. Sony will carry on making stills cameras next year, too, and most of this is rather premature, anyway. Speculating for the heck of it. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but don't let mere speculation upset your piece of mind. ;)

Yup, it does just that. Please find the info in the TMR page and in the iTunes product page. All the key info should be there.

Top Model Release I may be slightly biased, but the app does pretty much what it says in the tin. You can also customise the default text to your liking, if you wish. After all, in some places the legalities may be slightly different, and some clients may be hardcore layers, or married to one. Or you may need a multilingual version in some places. If it wasn't relatively quick and easy to use, I wouldn't have it in my iDevices.

Manfrotto 561BHDV-1, but that model seems to be hard to find these days. Again. There's also a newer 562 model which has the same flexible foot downstairs but there's only a quick release plate holder upstairs. I played with one briefly a while ago, and looks like the plate holder is removable. Haven't actually shot with one yet, though. Looks like there are also other similar looking alternatives for the 561 these days, at least from Benro and Sirui, but I haven't had a chance to check those out yet out in the field. Why don't you go and check it out in Scandinavianphoto's brick&mortar shops and let us know what you think. I'm actually considering buying another, rather different monopod soon, and I've checked out two somewhat quirkier alternatives made mainly for camcorders, but which might work with certain dSLR gear, too. I'll let you know if I stumble on something that's actually cool and useful.

I use one once in a while, whenever I have a chance and a need, and whenever I can haul my gear in a car. I don't consider it either a must have or meh. To me it's just another useful piece of kit, among other useful pieces of gear. It's one of those questions for which the answer is it depends. If I had to hike really long distances with light shooting gear, I probably wouldn't take my regular slider with me, unless absolutely necessary. I'd rather settle for a monopod with a video head, with which you can sort of simulate short slides. Just don't make the same mistake I did, get yourself a proper video monopod right from the beginning. You won't regret it. Yup, whether you're sliding with a slider, monopod or a dolly, something in the foreground is indeed a good idea.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2014/02/26/nikon-d4s-our-questions-answered/ Some video questions answered by Mr. Hiro Sebata. Doesn't seem to change or help much, though.

Okay fine, it is not literally an editor, it's mostly a shooting app with rudimentary 'editing' capabilities. I used the term very loosely. But for an app that works in a cellphone, too, it does have some useful features. When you can trim the footage after shooting it, adjust and choose several shooting modes and resolutions, add effects, adjust the bit rate, and then upload your piece to Facebook of YouTube, to the average cellphone point and shooter that's like 'editing.' My focus was on doing the shooting with the device, too, which I believe would be the likely choice for the majority of the target audience, not just the editing, which is still a bit awkward, IMO. Regardless of one's skill level. I was aware of the iMovie for iPad, but like said, not quite my cup of tea. Yet. The limitations of the device and workflow make it a bit clumsy and awkward. A laptop would be handier. For now. But shooting with the device and then editing that footage within the same device is another matter, IMO, and for the shooting and preprocessing part the FilmicPro is a nice option. Worth giving it a shot, to find out whether or not video with the iPhone/iPad is worth pursuing in the first place. That is, apart from the usual wireless monitoring and triggering. I for one found shooting with a large-ish tablet sort of funny, but suppose one could get used to it. Especially when there will be more 'rigs' and clipons for the iPad, too. There already are some. Who knows, perhaps after phoneography, the next big thing will be cinematabletography,. :)

And? The point was, if one has no idea, one can try shooting and then editing that footage with the FilmicPro app, all within iPad or iPhone. There are plenty of edited sample videos online, just google the name. Same goes for all the other video related apps for iOS. It's easy to figure things out oneself, so there's no need for guesswork. The FilmicPro app, for example, is not that expensive, and a nice to have app in anyone's mobile device. Agreed. On the other hand, those who know what they're doing with their NLE's would probably be able to tell what works and what doesn't in a mobile editor, too. Hence the choice of forum. He did mention he's looking for feedback from the amateur video artists "to help them focus on the features that would be the best value to users." I think that makes sense, and it was a fair request. So why not giving them a hand. I just wonder why the first questions in that survey are our contact info, with no obvious way to opt out and carry on with the actual survey. People tend to be a bit wary about such things these days.

You're quite right, obviously, but be careful with the N word. :P I have no issues with that unmentioned brand, but when you take a look at this forum alone, let alone elsewhere, you cannot help but noticing how much attention that one brand is getting, for some reason. Even though it's not that special as a video/filmmaking tool. Time and again, every topic that has the N word gain umphteen pages in no time. Heck, even in a recent topic titled with the latest new CSC from another brand, four out of six first comments in that thread were about the N word, rather than the camera on topic! Weird, isn't it. Surely we must be dealing with something larger than life here. Apparently some people not only care, but do so with vigour. In other words, Thou shalt not mention the N-word in vain, or Thou shalt face the wrath of the Knights Who Say Ni-kon! :) Disclaimer: this is not intended to be taken seriously, let alone personally, so don't. Seriously though, and putting the N word aside, I don't think the GH4 and BMPC are the only cool new toy for video enthusiasts, advanced and professional filmmakers this year. The opera isn't over before the fat lady has sung, and I believe the fat lady will not finish singing until the end of Photokina this year. Looking forward to that. I wish I could be there this September, again after a long long break.

In case you own an iPad, why don't you find out yourself. FilmicPro works in an iPhone, too. I've got it, and even though I think it's a nice video shooting and quick editing app, I haven't really used it that much. Filming and editing with an iPad/iPhone hasn't been my cup of tea, after all. But I'll give it another shot at some point, for the heck of it. I understand that the 'ammersmith has a slightly different goal in mind, and I do find that somewhat interesting, but probably again not quite my cup of tea. I also have the FCP app for iPad, which is just a remote control for the desktop app. After a few tries in the beginning, I haven't really used it that much, either. Now I'm dreaming about the mightiest MBP as a more mobile editing station. However, this is not to discourage the people behind the Hammersmith, quite the contrary. I hope it will become something cool and usable, eventually. Maybe they will make an app that makes the concept of editing with an iPad more compelling.

Quite. That is indeed one of the easiest and surest way to multiply the page count of a given thread in no time. Concentrating on the irrelevant, picking on the messenger and bickering about metadata, and so on. Apparently that is what some people enjoy doing. I won't apologise for my deliberately un-PC tone, as the comment wasn't even aimed at you, and blaming capitalism for Nikon's uninspiring product line is still bollocks. The main perp to blame is watching you from the mirror. Of course you don't. You feel the need to defend your own view of the world, and you're just trying to use Andrew's name as a mental (authority) leverage. Like said, everyone from kitchen sink manufacturers to Nikon are touting their products as tools for professionals. Nikon make no exception in that. Besides, the D4s is a photography tool aimed at the professionals. A pro photo camera with some video features added. Which in the usual marketing lingo turns into an asset, obviously. A pro photo camera + some video features = pro camera for photos and video. Basic advertisementspeak. The curious thing is why have some aspiring photographers, video enthusiasts and filmmakers put Nikon on such a high pedestal, especially given their recent track record. The lemming force is still surprisingly strong with Nikon. One sure doesn't need to underestimate the power of the Dark Side. That's perfectly fine. No one has claimed otherwise. I have not suggested that Andrew was "wrong" in his latest rant. I mostly agreed with his usual arguments, and there really was no problem until you felt compelled to make one up. What Nikon are doing is neither right nor wrong, either, they're just doing their thing. The meaning we give to these things is always subjective. Their (in)actions have no meaning per se. The meaning we give, and the way we react to that is up to us. There's plenty of space for all sorts of meanings, opinions and tones in the world. It's not a right or wrong, either or, I/O kind of thing. Of course you don't. ;) Now, I believe this is enough clutter in this thread. Time to move on.

Feeling extremely bored? Way too much idle time to spend one way or another? :P Well... duh. ;) ...and it will. Don't worry. Online arguments are the closest thing we've got to an actual perpetual motion machine. Because there are so many different types of people around. Especially all the geeky types. The internet also tends to amplify the differences, as well as expectations, both reasonable and unreasonable. It's a social amplifier of a sort. A fair request, but unfortunately not likely to happen. Not on the internet. That's just how the cookie crumbles online.

The chest beating and belittling are merely products of your own imagination. You also seem to be responding to a comment aimed at the use of the term capitalism, a comment that has nothing whatsoever to do with Andrew Reid. Apparently you either haven't even read the entire comments you are criticising, or you haven't quite understood them. But you are of course entitled to your opinion, and feel free to skip my comments if you don't like or understand them. As for Mr. Reid needing your defending his "honour," don't worry. He has proven to be verbally talented and witty enough to give me a proper reply, or even block me, in case he actually felt somehow belittled by me. Which is unlikely. I also believe that he's both thick skinned and smart enough to see (unlike you, apparently) the actual point of my first comment. It wasn't really about him, it was about Nikon, and the over-inflated image and market inertia the brand still seem to be enjoying, for some reason. Many of us here are more or less frustrated with the fact that some cameras have one or two nice features for the filmmakers and video enthusiasts, but none of the camera makers are offering all the essential features inside the same enclosure, and for a reasonable price. Time and again Nikon have proven to be the least likely to offer that proverbial holy grail to us. The latest case in point, the D4s. As for using words like "professional features" in their marketing copy, oh please. From paper tissue to camera manufacturers, every mainstream company are using those buzzwords and then some. Nikon are no exception. Most of the likely buyers of the D4s are smart enough to take those buzzwords with a grain of salt. Being overly pedantic is not good for one's health. My point, in case it's still unclear to someone, was to make the argument that being angry or frustrated with Nikon because of (missing) video features is energy wasted. You'll be banging your head against the brick wall for a good while longer. All that energy could be used for something more constructive instead. Like concentrating more positive energy to those who deserve it, whilst ignoring those who don't. Concentrating on the ones who seem to be less phlegmatic and who at least make an attempt to deliver us the goodies we want, even if they're not quite there yet. Like Panasonic, Sony, Blackmagic, Digital Bolex and even Olympus. Apparently the most effective way to get the message through to the Nikon board is to start ignoring them. Attention deprivation. If/when enough people started simply ignoring them, they would have to react eventually, or become obsolete within certain market segments. After all, we do have the choice, and so do they. But I'm sure all this was quite obvious to most readers the first time around, so surely this is enough repeating the same talking points over and over again. By all means embrace, love and use your beloved Nikon for anything you wish, and just ignore my comments. I won't mind, nor will anyone else.

OK so it looks like a Toshiba Camileo + design cues taken from an old Bell&Howell 8mm cine camera + marketing campaign aimed at hipsters and voilá; the Bellami, the new hipster camcorder. It does look sort of fun and somewhat interesting, though. Without the poser. With the usual luck, it turns out to be as bad and limited as the cheap Camileos, and with some incredibly good luck it might turn out to be as good as the Nikon 1, or better. If it even gets released on the global market. Could be aimed at the Asian hipsters alone. Hence the lack of specs and teasers in Eigo.

I'm sorry if I sound blunt, but that's just plain bollocks. Like it or not, but capitalism (in its original form) is the very thing that makes it possible for us to have a choice. It makes it possible for us to choose another brand and have nothing to do with one particular milking system. So go choose another dairy. Choose a purple cow. It's not the fault of (traditional) capitalism if the masses still keep behaving like lemmings and buying the same old stuff from Canikon year after year, even though there are other alternatives around. Even though they're free to choose otherwise. If we were living in a global communism and Nikon was the official camera maker approved by the People's Politbureau and owned by the state, the Nikon products would be the only choice you have, and you wouldn't even know about anything better, let alone have a chance to get it. So if you are one of the people who keep on buying those products, blame yourself, not some alleged milking system. If you want something to change, vote with your wallet and choose another product from a manufacturer with a different milking policy. Oh and about the Nikon D4s, it's is a niche product rather than a mass market product. There are no doubt plenty of people to whom the new model is just fine, more or less everything they hoped for. Nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of different models to choose from. Even within the Nikon line.

Maybe to a hc Nikon luddite. To the rest of the population that sounds like a strange excuse, because [a] The Nikon model with the best video features within the Nikon line, the Nikon 1, has an Aptina sensor The Nikon model with the second best video features within the Nikon line, the Nikon D5x00, apparently has a Toshiba sensor. [c] Panasonic GH3 is using a Sony sensor, whereas the GH4 is using a Panasonic sensor. That doesn't stop Panasonic from giving great video with both models. Surely Sony are not able to dictate the sales of all other sensor plants, let alone their usage in other manufacturers' products. It simply wouldn't make much sense. Sounds more like a fanboy conspiracy theory than a proven fact. That is, without any obvious enough evidence. Besides, the Japanese camera makers are competitors, but they aren't really at a bloody war against each other. They do cross-license and allow each others' tech being used in other brand products all the time, without a need for any drama. Meanwhile, no doubt this Nikon related topic will go on for a good four pages at least. Previously I predicted that the latest Nikon topic would go on for six or nine pages, but it's still going on after thirteen pages to date. Perhaps this one is likely to reach at least six, too, within a few days. Carry on. ;)

Why is that, Andrew? Why is the D4s a disappointment to you? After all, it's Nikon we're talking about. Surely the D4s is exactly what was to be expected from them. Just get over it, because... 1. It's a Nikon. 2. It's first and foremost a stills camera aimed at a small-ish niche of pro stills shooters. 3. Not every camera is supposed to, nor does every camera need to be a state of the art video camera, too. The only dSLR I have left today has no video features whatsoever, and I'm totally ok with that. Apart from an odd short fusion clip once in a while, I wouldn't want to shoot video (regularly) with a dSLR, anyway. Too clumsy, too awkward. There are better tools for video shooting. Convergence is just another buzzword, not an imperative. Forced convergence is likely to produce compromises rather than state of the art all over. Nikon have chosen to aim the D4s (and the Df, ftm) for the stills shooting audience, rather than doing an expensive compromise which, from their existing preconditions, wouldn't be perfect for anyone. The D4s doesn't look anything like a serious video camera in the first place, does it. The usual marketing jargon doesn't change that. If pros fall for the usual gimmicks and jargon, they can blame themselves. ...and the list of whys is pretty pointless. The D4s is, after all, a Nikon, and a Nikon dSLR for taking photos. It's not intended to be a high end video camera. It seems to be doing a rather fine, and rather expected job at being a Nikon. Ah, finally you're asking the right question. The only "why" that matters. ;) But unfortunately the only people who can answer that sit in the board of Nippon Kogaku Ltd, and they're not likely to answer it. Indeed, and that's one of the options the filmmakers are likely to go for automatically. Unless they are really hardcore dSLR and Nikon luddites. Picking something like the D4s for (state of the art) video wouldn't make much sense. The remaining bunch of Nikon pros and wealthy enthusiasts who still shoot mostly stills will no doubt upgrade their D3s's and D4's to the D4s, and no doubt it's a fine tool for that niche. Horses for courses, and whatever floats one's boat. Well, that's just basic laws of business physics. Nikon are still the market leader along with Canon, and they still have enough marketing inertia to get away with it. Nikon will carry on doing their thing, from their current premise, as long as they can. The price of the product is irrelevant. As long as the masses follow them more or less blindly, Nikon won't have to come up with a "purple cow," to use a Seth Godin term. Lucky for Nikon they still have some time left, before the underdogs come up with their purple cows powerful enough to turn the tide. Or until the market will change course and bypass them completely. But surely Nikon, too, are designing something different behind the curtain by now. They're just taking their time, because they still can. If they weren't, they'd be pretty short-sighted, or dumb, and one day they'd be in a hurry to survive. The likes of Sony and Panasonic are already busy with their purple cows, and they are doing some progress. So... with my best Elmer voice, trotting around the Nikon booth; Move along, move along, nothing more to see here. A-thee a-thee a-th... that's all, folks! :P

That's what it was. K30 and K-01. I just thought there was K5, too. As for the K5, I'll take your word for it, because I've seen good enough footage shot with it, by shooters who know what they're doing. Often in such cases the IS doesn't really matter that much, anyway. Yes, that indeed sounds interesting, but I don't quite see the point in that. Unless they've put some serious processing power into that thing, the larger sensor would just mean more lines to skip, and more focusing problems to deal with. The colours and dynamic range of the 645D stills are great as it is, but for high quality (4K or HD) video with a reasonable price tag, surely a smaller and lighter system would be more practical. Something with a new mirrorless and electronic mount with shorter flange distance. But we'll see what it's all about soon enough.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, and now it has no doubt been noted by everyone. Now, back to the gut-wrenching heights, as the nationality of the daredevils, not to mention the perceived traffic culture in their home land, is totally irrelevant to the exciting view they're giving us. I remember seeing a clip much worse than that, by a bunch of workers working on a TV/com mast somewhere that was as high as that building, or higher, in bright daylight. You could really feel the height and the wind in that video, especially on a big screen. It's weird how those climbing videos makes your tummy wiggle, but flying or skydiving videos don't.

Thanks for the interesting link, although I don't think it changes anything. In a way it sort of confirmed how the productions are being done these days. It's more about the practicalities than the spec sheets. I believe you may be reading a bit too much into the details and DxO spec sheets, and fail to see the bigger picture. They aren't really saying that the D800 is superior in every way, they're saying it happened to fit into the Dexter imagery and mood nicely. How these dSLR's and other "inexpensive" HDSLR-type cameras end up in production sets has more to do with practical things than some spec sheets, and they're kinda saying it in that article, too. They just happened to have the Nikon gear there, because some of the crew members were Nikon shooters, and after they managed to get the look they're after with a small and relatively inexpensive tool, of course they'll want to use it. Those productions have enough motive and resources to work around the shortcomings of any given camera they use. So Eric Fletcher started using a Nikon D800 as a cheap crash cam first, then a hard angle mobile cam etc. in Dexter. Back in 2010 (or so) Gale Tattersall started using a Canon 5D in House alongside the Arri. First in one episode in the murky tight spot scenes, then more often in the next season. One of Johnnie Behiri's clips shot with a Sony NEX 5n was apparently good enough for the BBC, and if I'm not badly mistaken, some a99 footage has been deemed good enough for some high production value TV commercials, and so on. Does this mean those cameras mentioned are the best cameras around? As good as the Alexa in every possible way? I doubt that. It just means they happen to be capable of producing just the right (or usable) look for the production in question, with the fraction of the cost of the usual gear. And, they just happened to be available on the set already, as the filmmakers brought their existing photo gear along, and decided to give them a try. Then, when they managed to get a nice enough look that suits the mood of the production out of them, the producers were of course delighted. A 5D3 or a D800 costs way less than an Arri, and you can put them in tight spots and even crash them without breaking your heart or the bank. For a given look the post production is also easier and cheaper. Of course they're happy with them, at least as B-gear. If either of those cameras were somehow superior for any scene and any production, they'd all be using the same camera, wouldn't they. But in reality, Gale and Vincent Laforet, for example, just happened to be Canon guys already, whereas mr. Fletcher is apparently a devoted (sponsored?) Nikon guy. Therefore the 5D was "perfect" for House, and the D800 was "perfect" for Dexter. So who cares about the dyno sheets, as long as the footage looks like the production team wanted, and the audience is not complaining. Sometimes that does not require the best gear you can get with money, or the ones with the highest DxO scores ever. I also think that Andrew does have a valid point above. The D800 is first and foremost a stills camera, and the holy Bible of the Pixelpeepers is measuring the dynamic range in stills. What the camera does in video mode is another story. But the bottom line is, all the DxO worshipping, fanboyism and the inevitable bickering that follows is pretty pointless. I'd say instead of arguing about the spec sheets with Anrdew, the case is good enough an excuse to do your own experiments with the D800 and whatever other camera you fancy. Perhaps you'd come up with some compelling footage, too. That's the only thing that matters, isn't it.