Could it finaly be true??

If you only know Nikon from having just arrived onboard the dslr video boat, I can understand what you mean. Otherwise, that's a pretty ignorant statement. Yeah?

I've known Nikon for much longer than that.
Other than the recent D3/700 they consistently fail to impress and really don't seem to consider what users want. 24MP for $8000, is one of the latest examples, not to mention the D3s with crippled video.
 
Crippled video?

I've known Nikon for much longer than that.
Other than the recent D3/700 they consistently fail to impress and really don't seem to consider what users want. 24MP for $8000, is one of the latest examples, not to mention the D3s with crippled video.
 
I've known Nikon for much longer than that.
Other than the recent D3/700 they consistently fail to impress and really don't seem to consider what users want. 24MP for $8000, is one of the latest examples, not to mention the D3s with crippled video.

from the 1960s until the the DSLR Nikon made some of the best cameras on the market, the choice of working pros worldwide. They are designed to be comfortable in hand and easy to use while still giving as many usable options as possible. You seem to be ticked that your Digital Still Camera isn't a fully functioning video camera and somehow not embracing this tiny little sub segment of the market is consistently ignoring what the users want?
 
from the 1960s until the the DSLR Nikon made some of the best cameras on the market, the choice of working pros worldwide. They are designed to be comfortable in hand and easy to use while still giving as many usable options as possible. You seem to be ticked that your Digital Still Camera isn't a fully functioning video camera and somehow not embracing this tiny little sub segment of the market is consistently ignoring what the users want?

Canon is certainly addressing this "tiny subsegment"... you honestly think they are doing it over a handful of users?

I am ticked that:
1. Canon has a 24mp still camera for < $3000, Nikon's is $8000
2. Sony has a 24mp still camera for < $2000, Nikon's is $8000
3. Canon has a 24mp still camera with awesome video for < $3000, Nikon has nothing like this.
4. Canon has a 18mp still camera with awesome video for < $2000, Nikon has nothing like this.
5. Canon has cameras with fully manual video operation, Nikon does not.
6. Panasonic has cameras with fully manual video operation , Nikon does not.

And thats just off the top of my head. I have many reasons to be disappointed in Nikon. Sorry I'm not a fanboy that clings to how great they were in the 60's.
 
Last edited:
Canon is certainly addressing this "tiny subsegment"... you honestly think they are doing it over a handful of users?

I am ticked that:
1. Canon has a 24mp still camera for < $3000, Nikon's is $8000
2. Sony has a 24mp still camera for < $2000, Nikon's is $8000
3. Canon has a 24mp still camera with awesome video for < $3000, Nikon has nothing like this.
4. Canon has a 18mp still camera with awesome video for < $2000, Nikon has nothing like this.
5. Canon has cameras with fully manual video operation, Nikon does not.
6. Panasonic has cameras with fully manual video operation , Nikon does not.

And thats just off the top of my head. I have many reasons to be disappointed in Nikon. Sorry I'm not a fanboy that clings to how great they were in the 60's.

it gets harder and harder to disagree !
 
So why don't you buy a Canon? Get the tool for the job. I agree that Canon has been pumping out lots of incentive to make the switch, at least coming from a photography and video perspective, but to say Nikon is somehow sub par is ridiculous. I do also think that in 2010 Nikon is going to have to start playing the MP and video game a little better or they are going to lose a lot of new customers to Canon. That being said, I also think, Canon at least, is going to wait until Scarlet is released or close to before releasing they XL bodied large sensor video beast.

Time will tell.

And you never know. We may still get manual controls for Nikon...
 
Ummm, the D3s has complete manual control. You can even alter/control aperture and iso while recording. The D3s video looks better than all of the other DSLR's out there. It's just very expensive. :)

(It's also an insanely amazing stills camera that trumps all of Canon and Panasonic's).
 
Ummm, the D3s has complete manual control. You can even alter/control aperture and iso while recording. The D3s video looks better than all of the other DSLR's out there. It's just very expensive. :)

So far I haven't seen any footage that shows what you are talking about ... any links for the great footage you speak of ? or raw files etc.

I am in, if it is that good:cheesy:
 
that will be a big step. I hope the next models allow that too.

Ummm, the D3s has complete manual control. You can even alter/control aperture and iso while recording. The D3s video looks better than all of the other DSLR's out there. It's just very expensive. :)

(It's also an insanely amazing stills camera that trumps all of Canon and Panasonic's).
 
Brad after watching 100's of DSLR videos all of them have good and bad points. Even the 7D. But when the Nikon is shot right it just has a great "film look"
As far as the D3s goes it just came out. Give it some time

So far I haven't seen any footage that shows what you are talking about ... any links for the great footage you speak of ? or raw files etc.

I am in, if it is that good:cheesy:
 
Canon is certainly addressing this "tiny subsegment"... you honestly think they are doing it over a handful of users?

I am ticked that:
1. Canon has a 24mp still camera for < $3000, Nikon's is $8000
2. Sony has a 24mp still camera for < $2000, Nikon's is $8000
3. Canon has a 24mp still camera with awesome video for < $3000, Nikon has nothing like this.
4. Canon has a 18mp still camera with awesome video for < $2000, Nikon has nothing like this.
5. Canon has cameras with fully manual video operation, Nikon does not.
6. Panasonic has cameras with fully manual video operation , Nikon does not.

And thats just off the top of my head. I have many reasons to be disappointed in Nikon. Sorry I'm not a fanboy that clings to how great they were in the 60's.

I dont want to be too much of a nikon fanboy but for shooting stills the D3, and I assume D3s and D3x, are fanstastic cameras

I have been using my D3 virtually every day since it was released a couple of years ago probably 100k frames

The ergonomics and build quality, the AF that is spot on every time, the intuitive controls, usale 1600, two card slots etc make it an awesome camera that delivers in front of clients every day

As a stills tool it is in a different league from anything but the top line canons that are $5k too

As for the video - Im yet to be convinced

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=38151 shows some footy

OK the video is 720 but what is a canon actually resolving ? 600 for the 7d and 800 for the 5d ?

Nikon just dont overspecify like canon do

Im really looking forwrd to a decent side by side test

Again if you look a nikons digital history it is slow to develop, the D1 was a year behind canon and nikon D1x etc hung around the 4-6mp mark while canon were doing 12+ mp, but when nikon caught up they really caught up

S
 
So why don't you buy a Canon? Get the tool for the job.

Perhaps you have infinite dollars, but I don't. It's not a simple economic decision to switch brands.

I have a lot of money invested in glass, unfortunately it's of the Nikon variety. That said, if Nikon doesn't up their game with the D400/D4/D800 (whichever comes first) then I will, indeed, eat some of that investment and switch to Canon. I truly prefer the Nikon ergonomics but at some point the benefit of raw features outweigh the benefit of ergonomics. The next iteration is where I'll be making my decision.
 
Last edited:
Ummm, the D3s has complete manual control.

I didn't know that - I will have to look into this. I thought it was exactly the same as the D300s feature set (but on a full frame sensor).
If that is the case then I would have to think that they will continue to offer this feature in all future models since the software has already been written.

This is encouraging.
 
Ummm, the D3s has complete manual control. You can even alter/control aperture and iso while recording. The D3s video looks better than all of the other DSLR's out there. It's just very expensive. :)

(It's also an insanely amazing stills camera that trumps all of Canon and Panasonic's).

wow that's really cool. I'm really surprised the d3s has flown under the radar then- honestly I think I might have gotten it a little confused with the d300s (similar names and released pretty close together) but also its high price and only 720p (and no 60p) might have made it less appealing. still, with complete manual control and vastly improved rolling shutter it should be getting more mention. also not to mention its best feature- its low light ability. it supposedly has an ISO of up to ISO 102,400 (which makes it similar to the 1dMarkIV which caused all the hubbub with its low light performance). its 12 megapixels on a full frame sensor is actually an advantage for video, and should make it at least around twice as light sensitive as a 5d. the 1dmarkiv is actually slightly cropped (at 1.3x) which makes the d3s more appealing.

here are two clips from the same guy, the first shows how the rolling shutter has improved (although it might have already with the d300s):

and the second its low light performance:


personally I actually lprefer the nikons' color tones and dynamic range- I think the footage tends to look more organic compared to the canons' video which can look a little plasticky. if you're right about the manual control I'd say the d3s is pretty sweet.
 
Back
Top