D300s video-in HD quality

except it's vga quality in hd and qvga in sd. :-) looks good though. it definitely looks less artifacty than the d90, but that could have been done in post. who knows maybe they used my stairstep removal. :-)
 
I can see the stairstepping when the female opens the curtains. It's all over her hair.
 
yup its the same as the D90 and as always there is no clean full HD version we can pixel peep. I wonder why .... hmmm
 
Let's face it, no manual controls, no 1080p only 720p, and no real improvements to the MJPEG codec. Sorry Nikon, nice try but no cigar. Not when there are the choices of the GH-1 and 5DmII, plus a possible 60D looms on the horizon.

Having said that, that was a nice video. I'm sure some will be happy with the D300s. It's too bad that Nikon didn't step up to the plate. They could've hit a home run with fixes to just those three issues.
 
It looked really good. I'm starting to wonder why you guys are complaining so much about Nikon!!!

If they are doing this good now I can't wait till they get something you guys like!!! I hope it is in the D400.

But really.... that looks pretty good.
 
This is the third iteration of "Nikon" video since (and including) the D90. This isn't a good sign. It's more like an obvious "we don't care about video" Sign.
 
again after watching that video I have to wonder why you guys think Nikon has failed? Maybe it isn't what you guys will be using in your next movie but it isn't so bad to say Nikon doesn't care about video. Video might not be there main focus but after watching that video they seem to be thinking about it.


I emailed the filmmaker to see what see did to make it. lenses, in post etc.
 
This video clearly shows that Nikon has improved albeit not that much. They will get there sooner or later. They are on their timetable not on anybody's here. Exactly what Red is doing with Scarlet, although a bit different because they are releasing cameras. If you don't like the cameras or what Nikon is doing, well, I am sure the way they figure it out is: tough.
 
I'm missing something here...

I'm missing something here...

I've been pondering a replacement for a my old Nikon D70. With my SB800 flash, it still take very good images. If I was shooting only still images, my camera of choice would be a Nikon DSLR - probably a D300 or D700. But...

I like to take videos too. Nothing like the work I've seen on this forum, but modest efforts that I enjoy. I have a Canon HV30 for that. Good footage, but some very significant drawbacks, including very limited manual controls and I don't like hassling with tapes.

A driving motivation for me is that I'm tired of dragging two cameras around with all of their SEPARATE paraphernalia. That's getting to me. I want a single camera that can take very good still pics AND has the capacity to replace my HV30 AND has full manual control of both processes. In other words, the camera must have a foot firmly planted solidly in both worlds - video and photography.

When I saw the GH1, I realized that maybe it was possible. Perhaps it would be better to wait for a GH2, but at least with the GH1, it looks like Panasonic "gets it". I've seen great GH1 still pics and excellent video. And the features are nice. Most importantly, it looks like it handles both worlds pretty nicely.

Regarding Nikon OR Canon, it doesn't appear to me that either company "gets it". (I'm excluding auto-everything P&S cameras here.) To me, it looks like even their best efforts for a "combocam" is still nothing more than a DSLR with some add-on video features. IMO, grafting on video features doesn't make them video cameras - they are still fundamentally DSLRs and not video cameras.

So what am I missing? How is it possible to turn any DSLR - with a mirror and optical viewfinder - into a fully functioning video camera? Something that you can shoot like like a dedicated video camera.

Regards,

Dan.

p.s., I'm brand agnostic. Over the last 50 years, I've owned Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, and Olympus cameras. These days, all of them make excellent cameras. I just want something that produces good results.

p.p.s. Yes, I realize that the GH1 has no built in ND filters, no selectable gamma curves, no genlock, no time lock, and all the other features that make for a "real" pro camera. I don't expect that in a $1,500 camera.
 
Zim said:
It looked really good. I'm starting to wonder why you guys are complaining so much about Nikon!!!
Click to expand...

We already knew it would look good, that's why we got d90's in the first place. Then we saw the problems and when they don't fix them we would be really stupid not to complain, don't you agree? We're not reviewers, we're users. I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say.
 
Dan Clark said:
I've been pondering a replacement for a my old Nikon D70. With my SB800 flash, it still take very good images. If I was shooting only still images, my camera of choice would be a Nikon DSLR - probably a D300 or D700. But...
Click to expand...

If you have the money for a D700 and you want to take good pictures and shoot the highest quality video then get a 5D MKII, but if you want something a bit more video camera like then get a GH1.

If you're not in a hurry then you might want to wait for the Canon 60D rumored to be announced in a few weeks or the D700s in october. There are no confirmed specs on either of these cameras and we don't even know if they will have full manual controls.
 
all I can say is that video Ami Vitale took looks damn good. Maybe some of you are going frame by frame trying to find some flaws. If she does not have to go through the loops to get it video like that I would like to have one. I don't want to waste the time trying to fix the video. I don't want to buy plug ins to fix the video. Again if she got that video right out of a DSLR camera that I think is under "2,000 grand I don't think you have a lot to complain about. Maybe you want more controls and I'm guessing they will go on a D700 or something. But when I see video like Vitale made with the D300s and then I hear people say "Nikon just doesn't care" I have to wonder why people are saying that....

You can say you don't like it, that is great. But this is a discussion board and I'm telling you what I think.


mattsand said:
We already knew it would look good, that's why we got d90's in the first place. Then we saw the problems and when they don't fix them we would be really stupid not to complain, don't you agree? We're not reviewers, we're users. I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...
 
Again nobody says it doesn't look good. What's your point exactly? Even good cameras can be better, i'm not sure what's controversial about that, especially if they're no better than a cheaper camera released one year ago.
 
All cameras can be better. You don't know that it is not better. You are looking at numbers on paper. I'm looking at the video. Maybe Nikon made some internal corrections. They did that with D200. There was a big uproar over that camera. I don't think Nikon every made much of a statement. They just fixed it. Look at the other video I posted.


mattsand said:
Again nobody says it doesn't look good. What's your point exactly? Even good cameras can be better, i'm not sure what's controversial about that, especially if they're no better than a cheaper camera released one year ago.
Click to expand...
 
Btw, you don't want to use plugins so thus you want a camera for which you need it? I'm not sure i follow your logic. Besides my plugin is free so i see no reason not to use it. It does improve quality a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top