D7000 Official!

The Nikon D7000 or Canon 60D will be my first DSLR, so forgive the NOOB question.

It seems that you must set aperture before entering Live View (you can apparently set shutter speed and ISO while in Live View). That seems a little backwards to me - I want to set a fixed shutter speed based on the framerate ~1/48 and then use aperture and ISO (and perhaps ND) to set exposure and depth of field.

The Canon 60D manual seems to pretty clearly state that the Live View is a reasonable approximation of what will get recorded (DOF, Picture style, etc). Does the same apply to Nikon both before and during movie recording? Seems like manual focus would be really hard if the DOF was not represented. So can someone explain the Nikon Live View behavior?
 
On the D90 you know (see) your DOF because the aperture is set before live view begins. Live view opens up to your aperture setting. Frame rate and gain then adjust to give proper exposure.

I would assume the D7000 is the same, except you can control frame rate and gain manually.
 
Apologies if these questions have already been answered, but:

Do we know yet if the D7000 has live video & audio outputs during recording (for video & audio monitoring)?

If there's live video output, is it 1080i or 1080p, and can it be visually "uncluttered" (no on-screen text/graphics) & thus suitable for external recording?
 
You do see DOF in live view with the Nikon just as on the 60D.

It´s a small letdown that A has to be set before engaging liveview, but it´s not that big of a deal compared to how it has been using existing Nikon dslr´s.

In the end, pulling focus manualy will be just as "easy" on both when shooting film. If you care about stills at all, then the Nikon viewfinder is a step up compared to the one that Canon 60D use.

Of course, The D7000 not having an articulated liveview might be important for you.

Also, and i´m not sure how usefull it will realy be, but i guess in some situations it might be - the D7000 aparently has a an af while filming that actualy seems to work.

Quoting one of the D7000 Jarvis test team members.

"
The live view face recognition is actually really incredible, and we’ve had good luck in low light. It does need to have enough contrast to grab focus, as with all AF, but we were definitely impressed."
 
mcenroe said:
On the D90 you know (see) your DOF because the aperture is set before live view begins. Live view opens up to your aperture setting. Frame rate and gain then adjust to give proper exposure.

I would assume the D7000 is the same, except you can control frame rate and gain manually.
Click to expand...

That seems odd - stick a manual lens on a D90 and you can adjust aperture while shooting even. T2i, you can adjust a manual lens aperture with the ring, or a canon lens with the thumbwheel.

My expectation would be with a fully manual Nikon, you can adjust the same way. I wonder if you release the lens from f22 (unlock the ring) if aperture can be adjusted.

That's a huge part of lighting for me - adjusting the aperture with live view on.
 
squig said:
After a year with the 5D I can say that 44Mbps H.264 is just passable for pro use so this is a big fail for Nikon. It's a real shame because it sounds like it might have the edge on the 5D in low light. This thing needs a hack.
Click to expand...

bitrates are not comparable, different encoders will get different results, even if both encode to the same codec; there are cameras out there that record pretty impressive images on H.264 with half the bitrate of the canon DSLRs
 
NormanBates said:
bitrates are not comparable, different encoders will get different results, even if both encode to the same codec; there are cameras out there that record pretty impressive images on H.264 with half the bitrate of the canon DSLRs
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether the codec is a match for the 5D it certainly couldn't perform any better at half the bit-rate. Nikon have had 2 years to get it right and they should now be aware of the size of the video DSLR shooter market so it's still a fail.
 
NormanBates said:
bitrates are not comparable, different encoders will get different results, even if both encode to the same codec; there are cameras out there that record pretty impressive images on H.264 with half the bitrate of the canon DSLRs
Click to expand...

Unless the codec uses b frames, we will see mud. The only way is to increase bitrate. No other choice
 
squig said:
Regardless of whether the codec is a match for the 5D it certainly couldn't perform any better at half the bit-rate
Click to expand...
it could for sure. codec specs typically only specify the dec part, the co part is up to the developer, and the results vary *a lot*. as long as your stream can be decoded correctly it's h.264, it can be i frame only even, or do motion estimation on whole pixels only, and so on. 20 mbit is definitely enough if you use for example x264 at the best settings, but that's not real time even on a fast computer. it's unlikely that the d7000 can beat the 5d, but not impossible, and to get close or on par is even likely given the performance increase of embedded devices the last two years. but then again, it's nikon so i'm ready to be disappointed.
 
dcloud said:
Unless the codec uses b frames, we will see mud. The only way is to increase bitrate. No other choice
Click to expand...
using b-frames or increasing bit rate are the best ways, but i'm pretty sure the 5d cuts other corners as well that can be improved on as well.
 
mattsand said:
but then again, it's nikon so i'm ready to be disappointed.
Click to expand...

Hehe, yeah me too. But it looks like it might have an edge in low light and the Nikon grain looks more film-like. This thing is ripe for a bit-rate hack. I still want a full frame replacement for the 5D. I think your "everything I want in a DSLR is out there just not in the same body" quote still stands. We might have to wait another 6 months for the real 2nd gen 5D MKIII and D800? All we've seen so far this year is repackaged 1st gen DSLR video technology. But fingers crossed there might be another announcement at Photokina.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you guys can help me on this.

Canon 5D II max. file 4GB, or potentially 30mins. approx Mov. MPEG 4

Nikon D7000 max. file 2.9GB, or potentially 20mins. approx Mov. MPEG 4

The sampling rate of the Canon is 44.1 KHz, and the Nikon is significantly lower,
I gather (half?).

Division of file size into minutes (which may say nothing I guess)
shows not much difference between the two cameras in terms
of memory use for video.

If someone could explain why the Nikon files are so relatively large
and yet the sample rate is so comparably low, I would be grateful.
 
The 5D has a record time of 12min = 4Gb. The audio is recorded at roughly 3-4Mbps and the video is about 40Mbps.
The D7000 should record audio at at least 16bit 44.1KHz
 
t.p. said:
i dont get you guys , only complains , this is a great camera it seems , they fixed the rolling shutter issues..... and i dont think video is all about bitrate and codec , canon and panasonic both have higher bitrate , and probably allot sharper SO WHAT ??....
Click to expand...

Alright, how do you know they fixed the rolling shutter issues?
 
I think I saw somewhere where it's doing it by software in-camera (kind of like the way Panasonic corrects its lens "issues").
 
squig said:
Nikon have had 2 years to get it right and they should now be aware of the size of the video DSLR shooter market so it's still a fail.
Click to expand...

What exactly is the size of the video DSLR market? And what's it projected to be in a year, two years, five years? That's the number that will drive development of the technology for this use.

It's easy, after spending a few years on forums for filmmakers, to assume Nikon and Canon can now hand out giant executive bonuses due to our fascination with these camera bodies. I don't know a single consumer that has the slightest awareness that we're doing video that's somewhere in the cinema-quality ballpark (I know, there's a wide range of opinions about the size of that stadium) on sub-$1k to $2500 cameras that most people see as higher-end still setups. My assumption is that if development ends today and future cameras offer zero improvements in video capture, it won't even be a blip on the manufacturers radar, especially across their entire photo line.

That's just a guess, and if Squig has the sales data to answer that question, I'd love to hear it. (Specifically: what percentage of Nikon and Canon's DSLR sales are to people buying primarily for video use? And how is that driving their R&D?)

The one fact I am aware of is that the DP for TV's "24" has stated that Canon is working closely with them; they've somehow bypassed some of the compression issues; and some "cool developments" are coming. By all appearances Canon cares, and whether that's a market share issue now, or they're taking advantage of the free R&D coming from professional enthusiasm to develop products for a promising "future" market, my fingers are as crossed as they were last week for Nikon's announcement.

(And as a Nikon shooter, my initial feeling is a bit disappointed, but this body may excite me when I start seeing some real-world results).

This thread's already getting a little tense over codecs and bitrates, with people arguing over their speculations of either test-chart level quality or final aesthetic "feel' of the footage. I'd respectfully suggest we all chill for a couple weeks, as the web should quickly fill up with test footage, test charts, real-world reports and so on.

At which point we'll still be arguing - there's still a lot of fussin' over whether 5D video is awesome or crap. But we should at least be informed enough of how the D7000 might fit our particular needs, desires, and scenarios.

Personally, I'm using a 550D with Nikon glass and working around the limitations; I paid $2500 for a DVX a few years ago and I'm beyond grateful for what I have to work with today. I do want more & better, as we all do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top