Nikon say "we will make our stills cameras for videographers"

[Andrew Reid]

[html]

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/nikongold.jpg[/img]

[url="http://www.photographyblog.com/news/new_limited_edition_nikon_gold_dslr_rigs_from_redrock_micro/"]Above: Marketing ploy alert! RedRock Micro’s new ‘Nikon gold’ branded rig for shooting video on the D800[/url]

In an interview with the [url="http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2157603/interview-nikon-bets-d4-d800-grab-lead"]British Journal of Photography[/url], Nikon are really talking sense. It has taken a few years! Let’s listen to what Nikon group marketing manager for the UK, Jeremy Gilbert has to say about the company’s direction with their DSLRs and video.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/?p=7694/"]Read full article[/url]

[/html]

[Simco123]

Werent video on the D4 suppose to be load of rubbish ???
D800 HDMI out is only 8 bit. Looks like the first impression of the 5DIII handed Nikon some PR bonus points but we all know Canon has got something up its sleeve as Phil Bloom has just unleash the 5DIII video's potential. And if push to comes to shove there is always the firmware option to uncripple clean HDMI possibly 10bit and better.

[Patlaser]

I´ve seen some footage of the D800, and honestly it´s much sharper in comparison over the softy 5d markIII.
Moire is not a big deal (when viewing proper HQ files, not 720p youtube) and the low light performance is promising with no noise at 6400 iso. And as for stills it kicks some ass too. I´m a Canon fan boy but i want a fullframe capable of capturing wide detailed nature shots, and don´t tell me that softness is cinematic because it´s an easy excuse. Canon is playing chess with us, don´t be fooled. I´m pondering FS100 vs D800 right now, but let see waht NAB 2012 as to offer.

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=Simco123 link=topic=484.msg3124#msg3124 date=1332940148]
Werent video on the D4 suppose to be load of rubbish ???
D800 HDMI out is only 8 bit. Looks like the first impression of the 5DIII handed Nikon some PR bonus points but we all know Canon has got something up its sleeve as Phil Bloom has just unleash the 5DIII video's potential. And if push to comes to shove there is always the firmware option to uncripple clean HDMI possibly 10bit and better.
[/quote]

8 bit isn't a problem. C300 is 8 bit!

Yeah the D4 isn't very good apart from in crop mode. D800 however...

The D4 is Nikon's offering for stills, the D800 is more of a convergence thing. It is a huge improvement for Nikon in video. Don't forget where they were last year. Nowhere.

10bit clean HDMI from a hacked 5D Mark III. You're optimistic. 9 tenths of this is about the will of the manufacturer to provide it. Don't forget there is only so much hacking existing functionality can do. Canon has clearly no intention to provide proper video in DSLRs now as they have their Cinema EOS range.

[jindrich]

More and more D800 videos are showing up, and looks like it's got noticeable more resolution than the 5D3.

Nikon video isn't free of aliasing or moire, but it's very very tiny and appears quite rarily. That's on 1080p. Nikon's 720p video is terrible, quite useless, unfortunately.
D800's DX mode video looks very soft as well, in fact just as soft as D4 video. I wonder if the 36MPx are making the difference there in downscaling.

Waiting in my D800 test unit from my pro local shop.

If D800 delivers, paired with a Pix.220 it might be just the ticket.

[Simco123]

[quote author=Patlaser link=topic=484.msg3126#msg3126 date=1332941341]
I´ve seen some footage of the D800, and honestly it´s much sharper in comparison over the softy 5d markIII.
Moire is not a big deal (when viewing proper HQ files, not 720p youtube) and the low light performance is promising with no noise at 6400 iso. And as for stills it kicks some ass too. I´m a Canon fan boy but i want a fullframe capable of capturing wide detailed nature shots, and don´t tell me that softness is cinematic because it´s an easy excuse. Canon is playing chess with us, don´t be fooled. I´m pondering FS100 vs D800 right now, but let see waht NAB 2012 as to offer.
[/quote]

I also saw some sharp 5DIII video much sharper then D800. 5D2 is sharper than 5DIII straight out of camera but it is not as good after grading. That were the real deal is.

Philip Bloom had changed his mind and now raves about the 5DIII video
[url=http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/]http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/[/url]

[Axel]

[quote author=jindrich link=topic=484.msg3131#msg3131 date=1332942084]Nikon video isn't free of aliasing or moire, but it's very very tiny and appears quite rarily. That's on 1080p. Nikon's 720p video is terrible, quite useless, unfortunately.[/quote]

There is an anti-aliasing-filter built-in, but it can be put out (+ 900 bucks, price of a GH2 standard kit), if anybody likes to use 36 MP indeed  ;)

I hope this test was with the filter removed.
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZeM9ofnm4I#ws]Nikon D800 - Of Bricks and Crazy Colored Moire[/url]

[Andrew Reid]

It is weird, I have seen very detailed brickwork shot with the D800 and it has come out fine, and I have seen stuff like this which is terrible. The problem seems to be limited to very fine horizontal striped patterns rather than all fine detail.

I've been talking to Mosaic Engineering about a possible filter and they say if there is enough interest they may do one - so contact them and request it, show them how many people would potentially buy one. It is certainly doable and would help a great deal without majorly softening the superb resolution the D800 produces.

[Axel]

I must correct myself: The difference between the two versions is ~ 300 € only.

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=484.msg3134#msg3134 date=1332943565]The problem seems to be limited to very fine horizontal striped patterns rather than all fine detail.[/quote]

You are talking about noticeable moire and when it shows. But moire means poor resolution, whether one sees it or not. The commonness of moire [u]OR[/u] the extent to which it is visible are indicators of how much of the seemingly good resolution is aliasing. And a softening filter? Helps against moire. Doesn't enhance resolution.

EDIT:
On the other hand, who says the videographer didn't dial up sharpness to plus nine (or whatever)? With that, you'd get a free acid trip with almost every camera, in this situation. Doesn't prove anything (perhaps the filmmaker now buys a softening-filter to fight the sharpening and sharpens the mud in post).

On the other hand, don't you find a lot of Nikon videos in the net are a little too sharp? Yesterdays unfavorable comparison of the 5D M III against the 800D now must be seen in a different light. On YouTube or Vimeo, one can easily confuse sharpness and resolution. If people look so sharp you almost hear them sizzle, they might not survive serious grading.

[jindrich]

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=484.msg3134#msg3134 date=1332943565]
It is weird, I have seen very detailed brickwork shot with the D800 and it has come out fine, and I have seen stuff like this which is terrible. The problem seems to be limited to very fine horizontal striped patterns rather than all fine detail.
[/quote]
D800 videos shot at 720p or at 1080p in DX mode look terrible, are soft and are filled with moire and aliasing. On the other hand, the ones that look great are those shot at 1080p/ FX by people with some experience in video, with the camera properly set for such a task, 180 degree shutter, basic shaperning and contrast etc.

The D800 might be better or wore than the 5D3, we'll only know when tested by some of us.

[tungah]

Low light in the D800 looking really nasty in this comparison with the 5D3. And moire. LOTS of moire.

[url=http://gizmodo.com/5897098/d800-vs-5d-mark-iii-which-shoots-better-video]http://gizmodo.com/5897098/d800-vs-5d-mark-iii-which-shoots-better-video[/url]

[eosjames]

I think there's going to be tradeoffs in the d800/mkIII comparisons. Areas where either cam out does the other.
But, the most important thing to me is 1) Resolution. 2) Price. And these are 2 areas that Nikon looks to have taken it.  Still think Canon will release a higher mp cam and that will be a better comparison to the d800.

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=tungah link=topic=484.msg3142#msg3142 date=1332950026]
Low light in the D800 looking really nasty in this comparison with the 5D3. And moire. LOTS of moire.

[url=http://gizmodo.com/5897098/d800-vs-5d-mark-iii-which-shoots-better-video]http://gizmodo.com/5897098/d800-vs-5d-mark-iii-which-shoots-better-video[/url]
[/quote]

I like Gizmodo but they need to put more effort and knowledge into DSLR video. That was a really bad test, unexposed by several stops and with several stops difference in between the camera in the ISO test above 12,800.

[Maxine]

I just watched gizmodo Nikon D800- Canon 5D III resolution comparison.I am sorry but both cameras failed miserably on this test.Terrible moire on Nikon and soft 720p image on Canon.Looks like it's really difficult to provide perfect video scaling when you have more than 12-16 mpix sensors.The GH2 and even HX9V will easily outresolve Canikon.

[Shawn_Lights]

Sorry I think splitting the market makes more sense. Videographers need certain features and Photographers need certain features. Providing a balance means you're paying for features you don't need. Unless you just want decent video and good photo capabilities.

I think this is the route Canon is going. The 5D3 provides decent video but it's mainly for stills. They'll release a cinema dslr to cater to videographers.

If you take out some of the photo features you can provide more video features for cheap. 

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=Shawn_Lights link=topic=484.msg3148#msg3148 date=1332959620]
Sorry I think splitting the market makes more sense. Videographers need certain features and Photographers need certain features. Providing a balance means you're paying for features you don't need. Unless you just want decent video and good photo capabilities.

I think this is the route Canon is going. The 5D3 provides decent video but it's mainly for stills. They'll release a cinema dslr to cater to videographers.

If you take out some of the photo features you can provide more video features for cheap.
[/quote]

I disagree with you on two quite big points here sir...

A lot of people DO want both pro stills and pro video in one body. Carrying just one camera as opposed to juggling two, plus lenses makes a lot of difference if you are shooting on foot in the real world outside of a comfortable studio.

And then there is the issue of price and that full frame sensor. Name a video-only pro camera that does full frame for $3000 and I will buy it in a flash!! Oh... It doesn't exist. This is why so many videographers will be buying the D800 for video even though they have no interest in stills.

[Shawn_Lights]

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=484.msg3154#msg3154 date=1332964150]
[quote author=Shawn_Lights link=topic=484.msg3148#msg3148 date=1332959620]
Sorry I think splitting the market makes more sense. Videographers need certain features and Photographers need certain features. Providing a balance means you're paying for features you don't need. Unless you just want decent video and good photo capabilities.

I think this is the route Canon is going. The 5D3 provides decent video but it's mainly for stills. They'll release a cinema dslr to cater to videographers.

If you take out some of the photo features you can provide more video features for cheap.
[/quote]

I disagree with you on two quite big points here sir...

[color=red]A lot of people DO want both pro stills and pro video in one body. Carrying just one camera as opposed to juggling two, plus lenses makes a lot of difference if you are shooting on foot in the real world outside of a comfortable studio.[/color]

[color=blue]And then there is the issue of price and that full frame sensor. Name a video-only pro camera that does full frame for $3000 and I will buy it in a flash!! Oh... It doesn't exist. This is why so many videographers will be buying the D800 for video even though they have no interest in stills.[/color]
[/quote]

[color=red]Then in that case get one of the current DSLRs. I said this in my initial post. However, if you simply are a filmmaker and stills isn't as important to you, taking out those photography features for video features will keep the price down. DSLR body but a video camera.[/color]

[color=blue]Name a DSLR that is simply for video...you're right it doesn't exist. This is what I been saying. Make a DSLR that is simply for video. Take out the photography features for video features and you can keep the price down.[/color]

I honestly don't see how you're disagreeing with me. You said exactly what I said :/ If Canon made the 5D3 the way filmmakers want it, photographers will be paying for features they don't necessarily need. This goes vice versa. Solution: Make DSLR cameras that have decent video but is mainly for stills and make DSLR bodied cameras that are mainly for video.