Nikon D800 hacked with 50Mbit/s high bitrate video option

[dahlfors]

Reflashed my D800 with the 54 Mbps patched Nikonhacker firmware now. Didn't brick my camera :)

[Andrew Reid]

5dmarkIII with RAW is the best DSLR that shoots video at the moment. The image is gorgeous, the colors are great and lowlight is wonderful.

 

I also think it has a lot of dynamic range (always been a bit skeptical about the 11.7 stops that keeps floating around). You can get great results when applying a bit of neatvideo (works wonders with RAW). Processing time is quite intense but that's part of the experience.

 

The d800 was ok when I used it on a shoot but it had usability problems (couldn't take stills during filming and settings were different between still/movie modes etc.) H264 was maybe a bit sharper but 720p is useless on the d800 while slowmo on the 5d is still quite workable. 

 

p.s How come everyone is railing against the mirror? It doesn't hurt or even interfere in my shootings and it's great for photos. What's the big problem with mirrors? Unnecessary dead weight? Like what is that supposed to be?

 

I agree on the 5D3.

 

Today I took the D800 back to the shop. I just couldn't quite get excited about it enough to write that mini-guide.

 

It was interesting tuning the image in post and seeing how close I could get it to raw but in the end, it wasn't so much the video quality that turned me off it... I wanted it more as my stills camera actually... but realised the quality of my shots was actually suffering compared to when I am composing through an EVF or articulated LCD on a mirrorless camera.

 

The optical viewfinder just doesn't give you an accurate representation of the image. It looks lovely in and of itself. That's about it. Time and again I was misjudging manual focus and exposure because of it. Focus meter is horrifically inaccurate with manual glass and non Nikon CPU lenses.

 

The live-view implementation is absolutely horrid on the D800 compared to the 5D Mark III unfortunately. The exposure of the shot never seems to match up with what the live-view screen gives, and this was despite putting the lens data in when using a non-CPU Leica or Nikon lens on the camera. I had a bunch of Leica R lenses converted to Nikon (very easy to do, a DIY mount change) and with these the camera just doesn't want to meter properly, whereas the 5D Mark III had no issues.

 

When I went back using a GX7 I immediately felt I was taking better shots from being able to judge the image 'as the sensor sees it'.

 

Sometimes I yearn to get away from the electronic gizmo crap and go back to an old-school DSLR.

 

I have learnt that this is actually counterproductive and I've left the D800 even more of a big fan of 'electronic' shooting than before.

[giostrante]

Clearly you've never shot or processed RAW video so I'll forgive your ignorance - I've been shooting raw since May of last year.  With Adobe ACR / After effects workflow, one grades only ONE image - the first in a sequence - then outputs the file.  Huge difference between that - which is computer intensive to render - vs. having 500 raw 74MB files to process one at a time in Lightroom.  Raw video has gotten much simpler over time, and now even the audio syncs up.

 

Raw video workflow - Run MLVbrowsesharp - point to mlv sequence - unpack .wav and dng to folder - open in After effects, ACR first image, output file of choice.  Now tell me how much work you have to do to grade all those 36MP files from the D800.

 

Definitely you should read a couple of times what other user writes before posting something, trust me.

 

I was talking about iso and dynamic range in the h264 files, nobody was talking of raw video, especially in the d800, because there's no raw video on the d800, so there's no video workflow with 36 mp file, it' s pretty simple.

 

You complained about "the hassle of ultra-large files" of the d800, so a matter of disk space. So talking about raw video, where 64 gb is 10 mintutes of footage, well, it make no sense. Also this is pretty simple.

[giostrante]

The optical viewfinder just doesn't give you an accurate representation of the image. It looks lovely in and of itself. That's about it. Time and again I was misjudging manual focus and exposure because of it. Focus meter is horrifically inaccurate with manual glass and non Nikon CPU lenses.

 

When I went back using a GX7 I immediately felt I was taking better shots from being able to judge the image 'as the sensor sees it'.

 

Sometimes I yearn to get away from the electronic gizmo crap and go back to an old-school DSLR.

 

I have learnt that this is actually counterproductive and I've left the D800 even more of a big fan of 'electronic' shooting than before.

 

 

The optical viewfinder, the only viewfinder of the last 100 year and more, a hole to another world, the photography, something so mysterious, so charming, it "doesn't give you an accurate representation of the image"?????

 

 

How could you kill a myth?? For an EVF and articulated LCD!!!!!!

 

Noooooo!!!!!

 

:o

[Appleidiot]

The optical viewfinder, the only viewfinder of the last 100 year and more, a hole to another world, the photography, something so mysterious, so charming, it "doesn't give you an accurate representation of the image"?????
 
 
How could you kill a myth?? For an EVF and articulated LCD!!!!!!
 
Noooooo!!!!!
 
:o

Are you being facetious, or in agreement, the Nikon D800's viewfinder isn't accurate? Personally, I don't use a viewfinder to shoot video, so what about the LCD screen, is that a true representation?

[dahlfors]

I shoot a lot of stills with manual focus in dim lighting (concerts) with D800.

 

It is easy getting focus right even in those conditions at f/1.8 or so. The D800 has a large lovely 100% viewfinder for stills. If you think a 100% viewfinder through a mirror could be "inaccurate", time to think again...

 

However, for video there is no optical viewfinder while shooting due to the mirror locking up - so you're left to use the LCD as-is, or LCD with z-finder, or monitor / EVF through HDMI.

 

Myself being a still shooter coming from the analog world, I'm not so used to shooting with live view on cameras, so I can't comment on the accuracy of the live view compared to other cameras.

What I've found though, is that it can be pretty deceiving depending on what brightness level you set for the LCD. But keeping live view on while showing a histogram I find gives good enough information to shoot with. For some reason there is no button setup for immediate 1:1 zoom for checking focus on D800 by default - but you can set it up in the menus and bind it to a button, which aids in focusing. 

 

That being said, it would sure be handy to have some kind of EVF/monitor which you could keep positioned differently, since the LCD isn't articulated, preferrably with peaking.

[Andrew Reid]

I come from a digital world and the analogue way is just unnatural to me. When I look through the optical viewfinder I can't really judge accurate depth of field, accurate bokeh, accurate brightness, proper rendering of the lens especially wide open. Don't get me wrong, the viewfinder on the D800 is one of the best optical ones there is but it bares little relation to what the sensor gets. It's an out of place analogue part in a digital body, indeed a digital world. Time to move on.

[maxotics]

I was just out today shooting with the d600 and realized late that I hadn't turned AF back on and was not in perfect focus.  

[Andrew Reid]

I also found the D800's video output looks strange in terms of colour. Sorry but despite initial excitement, I don't rate it that highly...

 

Archaic as a stills camera.

 

Surpassed by 5D Mark III raw for video.

 

Like the Italian styling job though!

[Nikkor]

You have to press "OK" in live view, to change between exposure preview and the automode which is not the actual exposure (this later mode is the one that is on normally). You also have to check what kind of picture style you are using, if you have one with the birghtness,contrast,etc... pulled down you won't be able to check your exposure in liveview. You can even set a different white balance for the liveview which won't affect the one set on the top screen when taking jpgs.

 

The viewfinders will tend to dissappear once EVFs stop lagging, I also prefer viewing the actual scene rather than a cooked 8bit signal. The problem with fast lenses is obviously not so great, for slower apertures there is the dof preview button on the front (although it gets darker).

 

On the other hand real viewfinders are a big pleasure in medium format.

[Andrew Reid]

Soon EVFs will be 14bit 4K OLEDs.

 

Then the flippy mirror will say bye byes.

[Appleidiot]

I don't know, for myself, after seeing a fair amount of video shot with this camera on Vimeo, I'm really liking the image I see from it. I really can't imagine this not being a good enough camera for anyone's use, I mean how good is good enough, what are you shooting that needs something better? Most people that read this forum post their work on the internet, and this camera far exceeds that platform. Personally, I learned a long time ago to never wait till tomorrow, because tomorrow may never come. Don't waste your time waiting upon perfection.

[giostrante]

Are you being facetious, or in agreement, the Nikon D800's viewfinder isn't accurate? Personally, I don't use a viewfinder to shoot video, so what about the LCD screen, is that a true representation?

Don't ask me, that was a comment to the Andrew words about the d800.

I love optical viewfinder for stills, it's super accurate and to me it's the classic and only way to go for stills.

 

It is easy getting focus right even in those conditions at f/1.8 or so. The D800 has a large lovely 100% viewfinder for stills. If you think a 100% viewfinder through a mirror could be "inaccurate", time to think again...

 

However, for video there is no optical viewfinder while shooting due to the mirror locking up - so you're left to use the LCD as-is, or LCD with z-finder, or monitor / EVF through HDMI.

 

Indeed, the d800 has one of the best optical viewfinder in the world and it can't be used for video. The lcd can be adjusted to match the output files, I use it without problem with a cheap viewfinder as I said.

 

 

[giostrante]

I come from a digital world and the analogue way is just unnatural to me. When I look through the optical viewfinder I can't really judge accurate depth of field, accurate bokeh, accurate brightness, proper rendering of the lens especially wide open. Don't get me wrong, the viewfinder on the D800 is one of the best optical ones there is but it bares little relation to what the sensor gets. It's an out of place analogue part in a digital body, indeed a digital world. Time to move on.

 

I understand that you come from a digital world, but personally, speaking about photography you can't say that is "time to move on", it's blasphemy to me. 

My two cents, the analogue part of the digital dslr's is the link to the real and pure photography, see in a evf or lcd what your photo will be before doing it it's like killing one of the finest art. 

What about the ability to choose the right parameters of a shot? What about learn to shoot? What about skills? What about be a true photographer? Come on!

You want a screen where you can adjust all in real time until you got your photo, but thats' too easy, a flat and useless experience, where's fun? Where's learning form mistakes? Where's mystery of shooting? Where's photography????

Years and years and years of history, myth, art, magic, all through a glass hole, is something unique, really I don't understand all of those complains. 

You can't say that one of the best photographic tool out there is "archaic" because is a real photo camera and not a toy for tourists with EVF.

So no more real painting, just touchscreen and photoshop? Cause you can fix your mistakes, push undo button, use presets and plugins and so on? That's the same logic of what you said for photo!

You should read Susan Sontag, On Photography, it's a great book to understand the real meaning of photography in the past and in the future.

Speaking respectfully, I totally disagree with you. 

But I understand, that's a video blog, we should speak just about video.

 

I don't know, for myself, after seeing a fair amount of video shot with this camera on Vimeo, I'm really liking the image I see from it. I really can't imagine this not being a good enough camera for anyone's use, I mean how good is good enough, what are you shooting that needs something better? Most people that read this forum post their work on the internet, and this camera far exceeds that platform. Personally, I learned a long time ago to never wait till tomorrow, because tomorrow may never come. Don't waste your time waiting upon perfection.

 

I'm with you, I think that it's real time to move on, a cut with all this technical stuff, better think to make something beautiful and artistic that following the technological perfection.

[dafreaking]

Andrew did you get around to using an External recorder with the D800 before you gave it back?

 

EVF's are definitely the way forward, OVF's were great and they still are for the pros but with the way technology is changing the EVF is the way to go. In any case almost all pros use RAW and Photoshop so what is wrong with an EVF? 

[maxotics]

Below was shot on a d800 (with Atomos Ninja) and I don't believe it could have been any better.  As you pointed out, Andrew isn't primarily a stills photographer, so if he wants to have fun dissing the optical view-finder why should we begrudge him ;)  In the end, I think we all agree, ALL viewfinders are limited.  There are pros and cons.  In the end, the viewer doesn't know what viewfinder was used, if any! 

 

What I love about the video below is how it demonstrates the a perfect transition from photographer to filmmaker.  Jacek Dylag obviously started out, and is primarily, a stills photography.  If he had used Blackmagic cameras, or any other non-still camera, would he have been comfortable working?  I wonder.

 

My epiphany this morning is DSLRs are perfectly capable of giving professional results to the stills photographer, and should be used by them.  However, artists starting out IN film should work with RAW or Panasonic.  We have to give credit to Andrew for looking into the d800 again.  It shows a very open mind.  I loaded the hack.  It won't make me switch to the d600 as a primary video camera, but it did improve it and that wouldn't have happened if Andrew didn't pave the way.  I don't want to sound like I'm a fan of Andrew, that would be going too far! Yet credit must be given where credit is due due. :)

 

[Andrew Reid]

The problems I encountered mostly had a lot to do with getting colour to look right and grading the weak codec.

 

Lots of banding in the shadows and a weird electronic look to colour.

 

I tried everything to get it to work, but just not for me.

 

You have to mega crush the blacks... loses you so much dynamic range... otherwise image looks odd.

 

When I went back to the 5D Mark III I knew why the D800 looked so 'off'.

 

When I then picked up a GX7 and started grading the 28Mbit/s 1080/50p MP4 codec in that I was really surprised. It holds up and I have got it to match / intercut really well with 5D Mark III raw footage.

 

I am not against small file sizes and compression or 8bit but it has to look 'right'.

 

GX7 will replace my Pocket Cinema Camera. That isn't getting any use since it still lacks too many features and Blackmagic have shown little interest in updating it.

[maxotics]

GX7 will replace my Pocket Cinema Camera. That isn't getting any use since it still lacks too many features and Blackmagic have shown little interest in updating it.

 

Interesting you say that.  Try as I might, I am never confident that I have the BMPCC properly focused.  The focus assist only works in a general way.  If I go into zoom mode, then I don't know how it's framed exactly.  The ONE update they could have easily made is to stop that OK button from bringing up the slate menu, or reverse it, make one click focus zoom and two clicks slate.  When I don't double click fast enough that slate screen is very jarring.  As much as I want the DR, I don't want it enough to sacrifice focus.

 

I'm curious your opinion.  I find the ProRes nice, but NOT as nice as the DNGs.  Resolve is having some problems lately and ProRes is the most dependable.  So if the ProRes isn't quite as good, then I'm one step closer to the GX7/GM1.   In good light, my GF3 takes a very pleasing image.  And still the file size, it just slows everything down, from copying, to grading, to editing.

 

As for the d600, two nights ago my Niece wanted a quick video of her playing guitar.  I had the BMPCC with me, but knew I wouldn't be able to get it on Youtube that night (didn't have my pc with me).  Lots of the moire in the d600 footage.  Was okay for what it is.  I did shoot some BMPCC, but when I got home realized she wouldn't have seen the difference and the audio was BETTER on the d600.  So...

 

Then there is the crop factor of the BMPCC.  It is really challenging.

 

You nailed it right on the head "isn't getting any use since it still lacks too many features."  I've been using it to do my silly tests, but in the real world, it works against me shooting creatively (obviously, it has benefits in post).  All that said, think it a great camera for a film-maker who is going to spend time setting up shots.  For a run-and gun fart like me...I think you're right.  It's too "raw" for me to use in the "real world"   :(

[Don Kotlos]

D800 produces adequate video for my needs. Yes I would welcome better quality but shooting with the BMPCC was a pain in the ass and I agree with maxotics that it takes the creativity away. 

Andrew pushed me to the EM1, which eventhough it has a weak codec with its IBIS allows for amazing shoots. I can now move the camera! 

For camera-static shots D800 with the patch is still much better.

 

I only wish either Olympus gives a firmware update with improved rates and focus peaking in video or somebody hacks this camera. Because em1 can be the next GH2/5DmkII. 

[Nikkor]

Soon EVFs will be 14bit 4K OLEDs.

 

Then the flippy mirror will say bye byes.

But we are still a few years away from that (14bit screens...)

 

Anyway, today I took my German aunt to some sightseeing and she gave me her compact camera (some canon) to take pictures. Was defenitly fun but the lattitude is horrible. A compact viewcamera would be nice.