54 mentions of video vs 32 of photos in Nikon D810 press release

[Andrew Reid]

Detail looks pretty good against the 5D3

 

 

Given the 5D Mark III was soft 2 years ago, and can go the extra mile with raw where the D810 can't, this is hardly high praise.

 

"My VHS tape is nearly as good as betamax!"

[Andrew Reid]

I think these tests are fake anyway. If you look at them all, they seem to be shot with the same two cameras.

 

There's no way the G1 X Mark II has no aliasing

 

[Michael Scrip]

This is something that has puzzled me once in a while, so I'll just ask why? Why is that shocking?

 

Unless you know him personally, why would you care what some online/YouTube celebs/geeks like Dave Dugdale are shooting with? 

Does it really matter what they are using, and why would/should it affect you in any way?

Do you let the online celebs choose your gear for you?

 

Not bashing, not judging, just curious.

I'm aware of the lemming effect and the concept of projecting, but I'm just curious how the actual thought process goes.

 

It's a huge undertaking to switch platforms.  Maybe "shocked" was the wrong word. How about "intrigued"

 

The reason Dave is switching is because he feels Canon isn't taking video as seriously as Panasonic in their smaller, more consumer cameras.  

 

He talked to Panasonic at NAB and they seemed very excited about about moving forward and adding features in video in the GH4.

 

Canon was not so receptive when asked the same questions with regards to their smaller cameras.

 

You're right... I don't know Dave personally... and I certainly know it's "not about the gear"

 

But the drumbeat for Panasonic is getting louder. Dave isn't the only person singing the GH4's praises. I follow dozens of video people online... and they all have good things to say about Panasonic.

[rndmtsk]

It's hard to tell what it would look like without youtube's compression, but there are some issues:

 

1. Moire at 54s.

2. Rolling shutter at 8m18s.

3. It's basically your fault if you don't succeed even if the economic system is rigged to direct more wealth to the wealthiest at 2m39s.

 

This killed me

[jonpais]

It's a huge undertaking to switch platforms.  Maybe "shocked" was the wrong word. How about "intrigued"

 

The reason Dave is switching is because he feels Canon isn't taking video as seriously as Panasonic in their smaller, more consumer cameras.  

 

He talked to Panasonic at NAB and they seemed very excited about about moving forward and adding features in video in the GH4.

 

Canon was not so receptive when asked the same questions with regards to their smaller cameras.

 

You're right... I don't know Dave personally... and I certainly know it's "not about the gear"

 

But the drumbeat for Panasonic is getting louder. Dave isn't the only person singing the GH4's praises. I follow dozens of video people online... and they all have good things to say about Panasonic.

You needn't have explained yourself. I thought Dave's was one of the most thorough reviews/comparisons I've seen yet, and he has long been a Canon user. I think that speaks for itself.

[jonpais]

It's hard to tell what it would look like without youtube's compression, but there are some issues:

 

1. Moire at 54s.

2. Rolling shutter at 8m18s.

3. It's basically your fault if you don't succeed even if the economic system is rigged to direct more wealth to the wealthiest at 2m39s.

Magenta skin tones.

[slakjaw]

Am I the only one who watched it on mute? Try watching it on mute. its better that way.

[jonpais]

I see this as a VERY good sign. We have never seen Nikon lay that much importance to video. From this, we can see Nikon really are starting to look at themselves as a video-camera company, a company for professional broadcasters and cinema, not just stills photographers.

Even if that particular product is not good, I think it's a sign that Nikon will be giving more attention to their cameras as video cameras and even a strong sign that they might develop their own video division. They're clearly after the professional video market and see it as a big market worth investing in.

Nikon cameras have very good dynamic range compared to the DSLR competitiors, and has gorgeous colour science, I even say colors are better than Canon to my eye. The Nikon image when done right (D5300) has a unique look that's very hard to find in other cameras. Plus they are reliable like Canon and have a wide range of excellent stabilised Nikkor glass.

I see it's very probable they would put that s35 sensor from the D5300 in a different housing, add XLR inputs, NDs, peaking and zebras and waveforms and histogram, decent codec and log profile, etc, and charge somewhere around 3000$ for it. It would be a VERY successful camera in the low-budget wedding videography and documentary world even more so than the C100.

I see this as a step from Nikon closer to making something video related.

I'm sorry, Ebrahim, but I don't follow. How is it very probable that Nikon will be putting all these features into one of their cameras in the very near future? Are you employed by Nikon? Do you have information the rest of us don't? Otherwise, this is pure fantasy.

[Nikkor]

I could see the d400/d8000 being that camera, it would be 24mp and do 12-24fps stills and oversampled 4K video.

[Wulf]

I think these tests are fake anyway. If you look at them all, they seem to be shot with the same two cameras.

 

 

exactly my thoughts

 

forget about this tests in the internet, guys

[Andrew Reid]

I could see the d400/d8000 being that camera, it would be 24mp and do 12-24fps stills and oversampled 4K video.

 

Yeah Nikon are really going to give us oversampled 4K video on a DSLR aren't they??! What from? 8K!?

[Nikkor]

Yeah Nikon are really going to give us oversampled 4K video on a DSLR aren't they??! What from? 8K!?

At some point soon there will be still cameras doing 4K, and these cameras will have at least 24mp. The d5300 has to read the whole 24mp sensor even if it discards data later, so it wouldn't be something strange. The RX10 is supposed to fully ready and use the whole 20MP. I bet the 7D mkii does the same. But maybe we have to wait one more generation, who knows, who cares.

[leo]

Nikon is uselles for video and it will stay uselles, i hope they die as a company at some point, photography tools have reached a point where nobody wants to upgrade, a 20-24 mp sensor is enough and from here there is litttle to no imporvement in DSLR's, d700 users have a hard time justifing an upgrade to a d800 with 36mp sensor, d3s users have almost no reason to get the d4 or d4s, almost the same low light performance.

So what's left ? videographers, well, we don't care for nikon's misleading greedy marketing.

There is one thing that kills nikon from the start, lens design, the curent mount needs a separate motor for changing aperture in live view, only a big body like d800/d810 or d4 can achieve this, all other DSLR's below these 2 can't change aperture in live view.

This means Nikon will never be able to make a small body that drives the curent lenses properly in live view, all other manufacturers have motor in lens for changing aperture.

Never ever trust what Nikon says, they always mislead people and they do it trough rumor websites too, the aperture problem was all known and couldn't be overcome because of the mechanical imposibility and yet the rumor websites were raving about some new firmwware that will fix this problem, well, years have passed :).

Man i can't wait to get an A7s.

[Michael1]

Nikon is uselles for video and it will stay uselles, i hope they die as a company at some point, photography tools have reached a point where nobody wants to upgrade, a 20-24 mp sensor is enough and from here there is litttle to no imporvement in DSLR's

I think people were saying this about 5MP sensors not that long ago.

 

As long as there are debayers, there will be a demand for high MP sensors, even for video.

 

Michael

[Damphousse]

I think people were saying this about 5MP sensors not that long ago.

 

 

I think if you just look at the marketing materials and consumer trends of the 5MP days and compare them with what is going on today you will realize only now are a great many consumers content with 18-24mp.

[Quirky]

Maybe "shocked" was the wrong word. How about "intrigued"

 

Okay, that does indeed make a significant difference, doesn't it.

 

 

The reason Dave is switching is because he feels Canon isn't taking video as seriously as Panasonic in their smaller, more consumer cameras.  

 

He talked to Panasonic at NAB and they seemed very excited about about moving forward and adding features in video in the GH4.

 

Canon was not so receptive when asked the same questions with regards to their smaller cameras.

 

You're right... I don't know Dave personally... and I certainly know it's "not about the gear"

 

But the drumbeat for Panasonic is getting louder. Dave isn't the only person singing the GH4's praises. I follow dozens of video people online... and they all have good things to say about Panasonic.

 

Yes, that is quite interesting, and it's an undeniable fact that both Panasonic and Sony, and even Olympus (and Fuji) have managed to lure in even some well known pro shooters from the Canikon camp, and only a very few of them are either Sony ambassadors or Lumix Luminaries, aka sponsored celeb users. Quite a few of them are genuine, unsponsored switchers. The tide is slowly changing.

 

As for the reason why Dave switched to Panasonic, yes, I know why he switched, and I know migrating to another system is a big undertaking, but that was not the point. That was not what I asked.

My point was in the notion that many people seem to form their opinions and choose their gear based on the antics of celebs, rather than try out things and think for themselves. The brands themselves have nothing to do with it, it could be any of the major brands.

 

On the other hand, needless to say that YouTube celebs like Dave Dugdale  publicly switching to Panasonic is free and valuable advertising for Panasonic.  Even if they are sponsoring his switch. Thanks to that mysterious lemming effect.

 

 

You needn't have explained yourself. I thought Dave's was one of the most thorough reviews/comparisons I've seen yet, and he has long been a Canon user. I think that speaks for itself.

 

If you are referring to answering my (somewhat rhetoric) question above, I think you missed the point (too). Dave has his valid reasons to switch away from Canon, but that has nothing to do with the lemming behaviour I was talking about. Dave is just one of the recent switchers. Many of which are coming from the Nikon camp.

[Michael1]

I think if you just look at the marketing materials and consumer trends of the 5MP days and compare them with what is going on today you will realize only now are a great many consumers content with 18-24mp.

Most consumers are content with stills and video they are getting out of their smart phones, and look at what they shoot at best on a computer screen.  I thought the discussion on this forum was at a level higher than that of "a great many consumers" (you would think so, anyway, just based on the price of the equipment discussed).

 

Michael

[jonpais]

Okay, that does indeed make a significant difference, doesn't it.

 

 

Yes, that is quite interesting, and it's an undeniable fact that both Panasonic and Sony, and even Olympus (and Fuji) have managed to lure in even some well known pro shooters from the Canikon camp, and only a very few of them are either Sony ambassadors or Lumix Luminaries, aka sponsored celeb users. Quite a few of them are genuine, unsponsored switchers. The tide is slowly changing.

 

As for the reason why Dave switched to Panasonic, yes, I know why he switched, and I know migrating to another system is a big undertaking, but that was not the point. That was not what I asked.

My point was in the notion that many people seem to form their opinions and choose their gear based on the antics of celebs, rather than try out things and think for themselves. The brands themselves have nothing to do with it, it could be any of the major brands.

 

On the other hand, needless to say that YouTube celebs like Dave Dugdale  publicly switching to Panasonic is free and valuable advertising for Panasonic.  Even if they are sponsoring his switch. Thanks to that mysterious lemming effect.

 

 

 

If you are referring to answering my (somewhat rhetoric) question above, I think you missed the point (too). Dave has his valid reasons to switch away from Canon, but that has nothing to do with the lemming behaviour I was talking about. Dave is just one of the recent switchers. Many of which are coming from the Nikon camp.

First of all, I want to say that I really enjoy reading all of your posts, they are very refreshing! So I was shocked :) that Dave's very next video (about dropping GH4 4K video into 1080p timeline) addressed certain skeptics who think he is receiving money from Panasonic. Incidentally, they are not 'sponsoring his switch'. And if it's free advertising for Panasonic, so much the better: because I've been living in Vietnam for 2 years now, and all I see people using, both locals and tourists alike, is Canon.

 

/edit/ but I still resent the fact that you say I missed the point - on the one hand, you claim that you weren't referring to Dave Dugdale - and on the other hand, you insinuate he is being paid by Panasonic. Which is it??

[maxotics]

Andrew would know better than me, but I doubt companies sponsor web people to switch to their cameras--too many legal/liability issues.  They might give someone first access to a camera, or pick up the phone when they call, but that's about it.  Why Panasonic, or anyone else, wouldn't sponsor Dave

 

o. He'd have to sign a contract saying he would never disparage Panasonic in the future

o. He'd have to deliver some sort of metric to keep getting payments

o. He would have to show them copy first (so he doesn't give way secrets/confuse the marketing focus, etc).

 

What makes Dave and Andrew so successful is you know they'd rather live on the street than follow any corporate party-line.  

 

Lately, DPreview is getting into hot water because they came out with an article saying why the d810 was so great, even though they were just tiny improvements.  The article suggested that these tiny improvements constituted a reason to upgrade.  Even Nikon lovers found that a bit irritating (the improvements might make me pick an 810 over a 5D3, but for me, at least, it woudln't get me to sell my 800).  On the video side, they said it had a new profile, which Andrew pointed out was wrong.  In any case, the idea that anyone would sell their 800 for an 810 to get a new picture profile is hilarious, to me.

[Damphousse]

Most consumers are content with stills and video they are getting out of their smart phones, and look at what they shoot at best on a computer screen.  I thought the discussion on this forum was at a level higher than that of "a great many consumers" (you would think so, anyway, just based on the price of the equipment discussed).

 

Michael

 

The discussion I was having was about reality.  You can insult people with their iphones but the fact of the matter is you don't become the number one camera company in the world by selling $3,000 36 megapixel cameras to pros in 2014.  The megapixel race was in full swing in the 5 megapixels days and Canon ruled the roost with its 16 megapixel full frame Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II and bumping up the megapixel count every year in its consumer lines.  But times have changed.  You simply can't move bodies nowadays by simply increasing the megapixel count.  Yes there are landscape photographers out there that can't get enough of the megapixels but as this site has shown other things are occupying the thoughts of consumers and pros.  I certainly would take a more restrained megapixel count in exchange for better video.  I think a lot of people on this forum would.