D800 press release

When I said "I wonder what they did." I meant "I wonder what process they're using." And, then someone posted something saying "how".

You might need to calm down a slight bit.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly what I mean by "the evolution of technology". How wonderful is that a bunch of brilliant engineering and software experts get together and find the solution to problems for the next generation of tech. I knew that if the process didn't exist it would be developed. Thank you Sony for keeping up. And I am saying this as calm as I can be.
 
I think what he meant was, "What was up with that sarcasm?", because the subtext, and the way you reply at length has a very strong insinuation that you assume the person you're replying to is of a lower status rather than equals. Kind of like a father lecturing a child...

It might just be a language barrier though, if English isn't your first language.

 
I think what he meant was, "What was up with that sarcasm?", because the subtext, and the way you reply at length has a very strong insinuation that you assume the person you're replying to is of a lower status rather than equals. Kind of like a father lecturing a child...

It might just be a language barrier though, if English isn't your first language.
Click to expand...

None of these comments are to be taken too seriously. Although what I really meant is that it is about time they start seriously fixing the rolling shutter problems and they apparently are. BTW I can think both in spanish AND english! 15 years in Puerto Rico, a U.S. outpost (LOL) and 35 years in NYC do that to you! Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Lammy said:
I disagree. It's not a bad indicator of what the D800 can do... nothing looks over or under exposed and the camera holds up nicely. I don't see any of that mushy bluey chroma noise in the shadows we'd get on the canons.

Although I don't agree with the edit choices like enabling blurry frame blending slow-mo, or shooting at 30 fps.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean techinically :) it's just a terrible video, I can't even watch it. The first few seconds are so bad I can't bear to watch it to assess the camera's performance either way.
 
I didn't mean techinically :) it's just a terrible video, I can't even watch it.
Click to expand...

Well, I agree with you content wise but what we are discussing here is the technical side. And at a professional level one has to analyze it technically regardless of content. Just turn the volume down for one and look at the quality, or lack thereof, of the visual images. Then you can say, that's a horrible CAMERA. If that's your opinion.
 
Emanuel said:
... personal taste is what it is

(that is) nothing :-)
Click to expand...
No the video is horrible. It looks very amateurish and likely a poor representation of the cameras capabilities. I have no issue with this camera and will never judge it based on uploaded footage. Sorry if ny taste clashes with yours, heck maybe you shoot and edit in a similar style, but this video fails as a "promo" for any camera.
 
John Caballero said:
Well, I agree with you content wise but what we are discussing here is the technical side. And at a professional level one has to analyze it technically regardless of content. Just turn the volume down for one and look at the quality, or lack thereof, of the visual images. Then you can say, that's a horrible CAMERA. If that's your opinion.
Click to expand...

I can't judge the footage with all that gook on it. Also can't judge it on vimeo as anything shot half way decently with any camera can look good. We all know the difference between viewing on the web vs a uncompressed (non-web) environment right?
 
cinebuddy said:
No the video is horrible. It looks very amateurish and likely a poor representation of the cameras capabilities. I have no issue with this camera and will never judge it based on uploaded footage. Sorry if ny taste clashes with yours, heck maybe you shoot and edit in a similar style, but this video fails as a "promo" for any camera.
Click to expand...
No, the problem is that you are too quick to shoot over... Or perhaps to start to make assumptions about what you think others are used to shoot and edit (or not) : D

Personal stuff means nothing. Japanese culture has teached to the world something really worthy of notice:

Don't judge even what YOU think you know, yet according to your personal opinion, say thanks if you feel to say anything. Or say just nothing.
 
For me I don't see anything truly impressive about this video. I see lots of missed focus shot, the very in vogue, full frame missed shot video. I saw colored moire on the bridge, but I think it is better than the Canon because with all those bricks I guess we would have seen a ton more moire. The resolution was not much more than the Canon much lower than the gh2. Now the low light I cannot comment because I don't know the lighting condition, so nothing conclusive and to some saying C300, the later has much better resolution. I did saw aliasing also, but again better than the Canon but nothing compared to the gh2.

In terms of dynamic range you could not do worst than the shot with the candle and the keys it was blowing completely as the flame moved with some very dark crushed background (could have put a little ambient light so the flame and hand is a bit lower). Some complain about the videoy quality in certain shot and for me it was due to a slow shutter speed perhaps to counter the lighting condition of the streets. The shot in the hospital was really horrible. The ones in the room and the mother and the baby, did anyone see how much there was blown out where the light was hitting (think overhead stop on an operation table). Perhaps they could have lit the room more so as where these spot hit the exposure is not that much contrasty to keep some detail. Perhaps they could not because she was having a baby and it was a hospital but it the end it is some horrible (lighting condition) image to show the camera.

I really don't understand NIkon, they do their promo video of the suppose low light king D4 in full daylight (The one with the climber, mountain biker, etc.) and the one with the high resolution camera in complete darkness. If you look well there is almost no lighting in this video. In his room it is completely dark, in the streets it is steet light and the hospital it is the hospital light. The other video with the blind child is so compressed on vimeo that you can't judge the footage again. Untill we can clearly see other footage it is as if Nikon has taken Canon 3 year old dslr video quality as the aim/standard/benchmark and just did the basic minimum to just top it. Even if they know that Mr Canon update is just at the corner with the launch of the Canon 1dx and that video wise they could find them-self as a non contender in the hybrid dslr again for the next 3/4 years. The only thing impressive is the lack of jello for what I have seen in the different Nikon video.

Don't be fooled by my rant. In the next months I am getting a D800, a true beast in photography (dream camera in terms of resolution and DR) and if the video we have seen confirm my fears for the video quality. My hacked gh2 will still be my video camera buy far.
 
I agree with your post. I am wishful that Canon will have better video image quality because they know how, but will they allow it? I personally use the 5DMKII in mainly a still role. It is great and I don't need much more outside of cleaner mid-ISOs. I am interested in upgrading if the images and features are there. But this space can be tricky with final video quality. If Canon can give it up and have HDMI output for recording I think they will be the video DSLR king of the hill. But I am not holding my breath! A PIX 220 paired with a DSLR with the detail I think we all expect would be a killer combination.
 
If they hadn't shot the D800 in the dark, we would all be wondering about the Low light capabilities of the camera. The night shoot was a clear statement: D800 can shoot low light.

Though the D800 is by no means a low light king, at least we know what it is capable of.
 
Danielvilliers said:
In terms of dynamic range you could not do worst than the shot with the candle and the keys it was blowing completely as the flame moved with some very dark crushed background (could have put a little ambient light so the flame and hand is a bit lower). The shot in the hospital was really horrible.
Click to expand...

Agree - I thought those shots were about as bad as any interlaced camera from the early 2000's.

What I'm hoping is that those type of unimpressive shots are more a factor of: A) a rushed shooting schedule; B) with a pre-pro camera; C) That the DP was unfamiliar with as it's brand new.

Unfortunately for Nikon, their reputation for good video is poor. Between that and all my Canon glass, I can't quite bring myself to order one.... yet.

If Canon doesn't announce something comparable by NAB, buh bye EOS glass!
 
Danielvilliers said:
(...)

I really don't understand NIkon, they do their promo video of the suppose low light king D4 in full daylight (The one with the climber, mountain biker, etc.)

(...)
Click to expand...
Well, that is a point, not personal taste... ;-)

James0b57 said:
If they hadn't shot the D800 in the dark, we would all be wondering about the Low light capabilities of the camera. The night shoot was a clear statement: D800 can shoot low light.

Though the D800 is by no means a low light king, at least we know what it is capable of.
Click to expand...
And here is another example of a point... LOL
 
I appreciate the fact that they use bare minimum lighting and pushed the D800 hard. It was not a glossy hide imperfections production, and it helped me more accurately assess the camera.
 
Yes, I agree it was interesting to access from scratch to what small size pixels are able to also offer.

But crazy high ISOs have been Nikon's target to compete with and even beyond the Canon's abilities.

Now clean HDMI output too.
They don't have video division to worry about, so...
 
Saw this on Nikon Rumors... clever...

enesunkie
Posted February 10, 2012 at 10:33 pm | Permalink
So let me get Nikon marketing straight:
The “S” version is the high speed/low light body,
the “E” version lacks the AA filter and
the “X ” version is the high MP body
Do you think that Nikon hopes that sex sells!
 
Emanuel said:
No, the problem is that you are too quick to shoot over... Or perhaps to start to make assumptions about what you think others are used to shoot and edit (or not) : D

Personal stuff means nothing. Japanese culture has teached to the world something really worthy of notice:

Don't judge even what YOU think you know, yet according to your personal opinion, say thanks if you feel to say anything. Or say just nothing.
Click to expand...
Jeez that was bad, take your last sentence to heart next time. The video was bad no matter what it was filmed on. Bad edits, bad effects, and a bad showing for the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top