Playing with D90 - a quick video, mostly shallow DOF outdoors
- Thread starter alexandroff
- Start date
jaadgy akanni
Active member
Wow, that looks pristine. Can you please tell which primes? Thank you.
alexandroff
Well-known member
i have 35mm 1.4 , 50mm 1.2, 85mm 1.4
i think i used 35mm here mostly.
i think i used 35mm here mostly.
I always get amazed of how people look good with the D90 imaging quality
all D90 owners seem to unconsciously to know that, most D90 vids posted are about people, whereas the 5Dmkii shots are mostly landscapes and scenery full of details (that also always looks fantastic)
but the opposite, filming people with the 5DmkII and landscapes with the D90 gets terrible
all D90 owners seem to unconsciously to know that, most D90 vids posted are about people, whereas the 5Dmkii shots are mostly landscapes and scenery full of details (that also always looks fantastic)
but the opposite, filming people with the 5DmkII and landscapes with the D90 gets terrible
John Caballero
Veteran
Sorry, but the steadiness of the 5D image is much better than the D90. Even in handheld you see the difference. "Jello" is inherently much more noticeable in the D90 than in the 5D. The sharpness? Forget it, the 5D kills the D90. Color reproduction, 5D. Codec, the same. I've got the D90 so I know what it is capable of doing. Maybe the D400 will match the 5D? I hope so.
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Would you be willing to make that video available for download on vimeo, so I can see the 720?
NoahK
Hottie Mod
Amen- bring on the D400. I'm on the fence about skew, lack of 1080 and general iffy quality with the D90 and no 24p, high price and tricky manual control on the Mark II.
I'm ripe for a D400 that costs under $2K, has close to a full frame sensor with 1080/24p and full manual control in movie mode out of the box. Not to mention I've got more Nikon lenses laying around. Gimme that and you got my vote Nikon.
-Noah
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Yeah, I just got a D90 yesterday. To me, the Mark II was too high priced to gamble on. The D90 was low enough that I would risk it and see what I can do with it. So far I am very impressed with what is essentially and afterthought, and I really hope they get serious about this as a feature this year. If they put in a more advanced, stable, better version of the same in the 400, I would be very tempted.
Last edited:
Park Edwards
Veteran
John, why don't you just change your name to "5d MkII fanboy troll" I know it's a little long, but it suits you.
John Caballero
Veteran
John, why don't you just change your name to "5d MkII fanboy troll" I know it's a little long, but it suits you.
Because I don't own one or are planning to buy one. The fact are the facts and it doesn't take an expert to use your own very two eyes to see that the 5D is much better than the D90. Having owned the D90 from the first week it hit the streets I can talk about it and all its pros and cons. Pro: great stills camera. Cons: lowsy video camera. It is like it is. You don't need to be an expert to tell the difference. I am 100% for this new technology and Nikon improving on it, in the meantime you have to say it like it is: the 5D beats the pants off the D90. And there you go. If you don't like it, though luck.
Why do you insist to compare both cameras? I see different purposes right away
just give me one shot of 5DmkII where people look good that I can give you hundreds of the D90 making people shine, and vice-versa for landscapes
but lets use your eyes, here is an 5DmkII example of what I'm talking, she looks good to you?
the 5DmkII needs a very soft light (and a cute girl) to people look good in that camera
Look at their own 5D ad, they didn't dare to shoot a close-up with this camera, but everything else is indeed breathtaking
And the first vid of D90, do you remember what it was? A close-up
And why people look better on D90? To be honest, I don't know. but I suspect that one of the reasons is the dynamic range of the cheaper D90 at lowest ASA beats the full frame 5D by more than a full stop, or the 5DmkII, or the old 1Ds III. its a fact, take a look here. For some, resolution isn't everything
Last edited:
I agree that the two are different cameras (And thus have different functions), and while fun to compare, I don't think they should be compared too much.
D90 is a great deal for the price, and can be used to create some great moving pictures.
I would not call the D90 the best video camera for all situations, but for my needs and price range I think its the best.
As it has already been stated, Nikon is expected to improve the video function even more. But I'm happy with what I have for now. But it is nice to think I'll be able to upgrade if I want.
For example: I think the 5D is better suited for in the field video journalism and I think the D90 might be better for a low budget indie film with hopes to be distributed on film.
D90 is a great deal for the price, and can be used to create some great moving pictures.
I would not call the D90 the best video camera for all situations, but for my needs and price range I think its the best.
As it has already been stated, Nikon is expected to improve the video function even more. But I'm happy with what I have for now. But it is nice to think I'll be able to upgrade if I want.
For example: I think the 5D is better suited for in the field video journalism and I think the D90 might be better for a low budget indie film with hopes to be distributed on film.
Last edited:
I think its better for National Geographic, that snow leopard vid with 5D is beautiful
John Caballero
Veteran
If you can't see the difference in the quality of the image between these two videos I rest my case. People, scenery, whatever, the 5D has a sharper and better colored image. It has to. Logic tells you it has a better sensor, better compression, a lot more stable image. I am not comparing the two cameras, I am again stating that the Canon video is much better. Hopefully the D400 will match and best it.
thanks john...im glad you took the time to actually do some scientific research!
John Caballero
Veteran
You don't really need to be a rocket scientist to tell the difference. Really, it is not that difficult.
which means if you prefer a softer look with muted colors the d90 is better, right? ;-)
/matt
John Caballero
Veteran
Well, if you want to do all your projects like that I guess is fine. You can soften the image and mute the colors all you want with the 5D footage in post and it will still look natural. If you try to sharpen the image and make the colors brighter with the D90 footage you might not be so lucky. The bottom line is that if you feel you can produce high quality professional stuff that will make you money with the D90 more power to you. I myself will keep shooting stills with mine and videos with my HVX 200 and will be eagerly awaiting to see if the D400 will be real and hopefully much better.
not really, as the thousands of film look filters around have proved by failing. and yes, i'd like to do most my projects that way, just as i never really used video except for documentary work. many video cameras produce results that are sharper than 16mm but the latter always looks much better in my opinion.
/matt