The end of 35mm adapers and hv20s....

John Caballero said:
Sorry to be so blunt but I have to. After watching Slice's blog I've come to the final conclusion that unless you put this camera on a tripod, do some decent lighting, decent framing, etc. you will never ever get any positive results. If you do shaky hands takes, badly lit and shaky fast walking movement sequences, shaky car sequences you will never get positive results, not even with a much better camera. And sorry to be blunt, thats a fact. If you take the proper time and prepare one sequence with all the proper procedures I am 100% that it will look 100% percent better that any of that overexposed, badly focused, woobly and useless footage we keep seeing.
The guy shooting thru the dirty window did a much better job with the camera in the five minutes he had to test it mounted on a tripod. I recomend that you take your time and do it right then post the results. I said to myself that in this circumstances I was not going to post again but I had to add my two cents. I appreciate the effort and again, sorry to be so blunt.
Click to expand...

Lighting well (descent lighting) is always a priority (as well as composition) with any camera. None of the tests, tested 'lighting' or 'composition' because it's not inherently determined by the camera. It was, however, tested for exposure issues, which it seems setting ISO is difficult.

If you want ALL locked shots with no moving camera, or moving subjects, you'll be fine I'm sure... oh except the small bitrate and compression.

But other then lack of total manual exposure, rolling shutter, bitrate/compression, etc, you should be fine!


I think testing the camera by giving it the optimal circumstances is not how one should test something. Last time I checked... tests were supposed to challenge the limits of something. Not to be blunt.

Ever see a latitude test? Alignment test? Resolution test? They aren't artistically lit or composed. They simply give us technical results which we can make assessments off of.

***That pizza video told me NOTHING except one setup of a slow moving action can work. Didn't tell me the limits I could take the camera, therefore is misrepresenting.***
 
Last edited:
John Caballero said:
Sorry to be so blunt but I have to. After watching Slice's blog I've come to the final conclusion that unless you put this camera on a tripod, do some decent lighting, decent framing, etc. you will never ever get any positive results. If you do shaky hands takes, badly lit and shaky fast walking movement sequences, shaky car sequences you will never get positive results, not even with a much better camera. And sorry to be blunt, thats a fact. If you take the proper time and prepare one sequence with all the proper procedures I am 100% that it will look 100% better than any of that overexposed, badly focused, woobly and useless footage we keep seeing.
The guy shooting thru the dirty window did a much better job with the camera in the five minutes he had to test it mounted on a tripod. I recomend that you take your time and do it right then post the results. I said to myself that in this circumstances I was not going to post again but I had to add my two cents. I appreciate the effort and again, sorry to be so blunt.
Click to expand...

In that case, I recommend everyone go out on release day then, next time, and buy your own camera and do your own tests instead of pining for footage samples ASAP.

Period.

I'm concerned about figuring the settings out in D-Movie mode. I revealed how it ain't as manual as you or others wanted it to be. Next time I'll make sure to just let it go unknown while I hoarde it to my damned self.
 
John Caballero said:
Sorry to be so blunt but I have to. After watching Slice's blog I've come to the final conclusion that unless you put this camera on a tripod, do some decent lighting, decent framing, etc. you will never ever get any positive results. If you do shaky hands takes, badly lit and shaky fast walking movement sequences, shaky car sequences you will never get positive results, not even with a much better camera. And sorry to be blunt, thats a fact. If you take the proper time and prepare one sequence with all the proper procedures I am 100% that it will look 100% better than any of that overexposed, badly focused, woobly and useless footage we keep seeing.
The guy shooting thru the dirty window did a much better job with the camera in the five minutes he had to test it mounted on a tripod. I recomend that you take your time and do it right then post the results. I said to myself that in this circumstances I was not going to post again but I had to add my two cents. I appreciate the effort and again, sorry to be so blunt.
Click to expand...

buy your own camera and you can stick it on a tripod or up your ass for all i care.
 
Naturally you can get better results if you take greater care to make it look that way. That shouldn't be a mystery to anyone. However, we can't scream for footage and tests, and expect to be shown the very best the camera can do - those types of shots will come later, after more people have gotten their camera and begun shooting more seriously.

I would just like to thank the guys who have put up time and money to give us the tests we wanted.

And now for something completely different... Does anyone know if the wobble can be fixed in post? I would be surprised if there wasn't some fancy software out there to correct that sort of distortion.
 
hey guys, if you have the d90, would you mind putting the camera on its side and panning left to right? see if the rolling shutter still exists?
 
I went to my Best Buy to get it and they did not have it. The problem is that it is all about perception. Kholi, I know that you are testing the settings and stuff but if people keep seeing that image shaking so badly they will make the conclusion that the camera is completely no good. The first thing to be done is to stabilized the image the best way possible so it won't shake and bake so badly that your heart sinks and you feel like crying because the thing looks that it is totally useless while we find the elusive 1/48 shutter speed. Kholi and others, I truly appreciate your efforts, but please, put the camera on a tripod, do some slow panning, dolly shots, crane shots, whatever, just don't hand hold it. Thank you again.
 
I've put up a low light sample on the channel, it looks pretty good IMO. Now imagine it on a tripod or run through some stabilizing software.
 
John Caballero said:
The problem is that it is all about perception. Kholi, I know that you are testing the settings and stuff but if people keep seeing that image shaking so badly they will make the conclusion that the camera is completely no good. The first thing to be done is to stabilized the image the best way possible so it won't shake and bake so badly that your heart sinks and you feel like crying because the thing looks that it is totally useless while we find the elusive 1/48 shutter speed. Kholi and others,
Click to expand...

If he hadn't tested the camera to it's limits and just given us a sweetened and mild demonstration, you would have had your "heart sink and feel like crying" after you bought it.

DON'T YOU PEOPLE KNOW THE PURPOSE OF TESTING? YOU THINK PEOPLE TEST CARS WITHOUT CRASHING THEM?

Kholi doesn't work for nikon. His job isn't to only show the camera in optimal and restricted settings to make the D-90 look better then it generally performs. I'm sure the camera can have some good results, but we are testing the limits, not the safe area.

When I say we, I mean Kholi
 
John Caballero said:
Sorry to be so blunt but I have to. After watching Slice's blog I've come to the final conclusion that unless you put this camera on a tripod, do some decent lighting, decent framing, etc. you will never ever get any positive results.
Click to expand...

What is being tested is the technical aspects of the camera, not any artistic skill of the testers.

John Caballero said:
If you do shaky hands takes, badly lit and shaky fast walking movement sequences, shaky car sequences you will never get positive results, not even with a much better camera.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the right kind of stuff to put the camera through it's paces, to see how it handles changing lighting environments, movement etc etc.

I think what you would appear to be proposing is something like the rather nice Nikon promo movie with the rotating camera, looked very nice indeed, but told us nothing about the cameras functionality.
 
Madmanden said:
I've put up a low light sample on the channel, it looks pretty good IMO. Now imagine it on a tripod or run through some stabilizing software.
Click to expand...


The footage looks really good. If it was stabilized, it would of looked even better. What was your shutter speed at?
 
Car3o said:
hey guys, if you have the d90, would you mind putting the camera on its side and panning left to right? see if the rolling shutter still exists?
Click to expand...

Haha! Funny thought, and yes there would still be effects. Tilting up and down normally tends to compress and/or stretch the image.
 
Originally posted by ZAK FORNSMAN, again ZAK FORNSMAN, one more time ZAK FORNSMAN:

buy your own camera and you can stick it on a tripod or up your ass for all i care.
Click to expand...

Wow! That shows real class, real class. I would never expect such a think from you, but we can always be proven wrong. That is precisely the reason I was not going to post again. The same thing happened to that guy earlier. The minute you disagree or decide to make a strong point egos are bruised and real colors come shining thru. Keep on working dudes, I will of course get mine ASAP and test it. At least I am happy that I will make my investment back with couple of great looking photo jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top