D800 VS d750 in video

R

rocketman122

Active member
thinking about getting a used D800 for video AND stills, or for D750?

is there such a huge difference in IQ?

high iso noise..I dont plan to pass 3200 and mostly will be around 2000
minuses for the D800 in video? no aperture control in live view?
 
Nikon D810 is far better for video than D800. If you don't need the 36MP for photos then get the D750.
Best hybrid so far. The tilt screen also helps a lot for video shooting. For the current price of D750 you just can't go wrong.
I am using D750 for about 1.5 year and I am very satisfied. Get some quality glass.
 
sakattaq said:
Nikon D810 is far better for video than D800. If you don't need the 36MP for photos then get the D750.
Best hybrid so far. The tilt screen also helps a lot for video shooting. For the current price of D750 you just can't go wrong.
I am using D750 for about 1.5 year and I am very satisfied. Get some quality glass.
Click to expand...


ah ok. I didnt mention the D810. I guess you missed my concerns. yes 36/24 same for me.

D750 to D800. no aperture control in live view? is there such a huge difference in IQ? high iso noise..I dont plan to pass 3200 and mostly will be around 2000
 
D810 was mentioned because it shares the same quality of video recording (dynamic range, resolution, color, skin tones, good compressed codec) with the D750.The only thing that D810 has better is the DX crop mode.


If you plan to use lenses without aperture ring then it makes a difference to control the iris during recording. Also D750 has a smooth step of aperture with af-s lenses. This is very helpful in a run & gun shooting.


If you can't wait for the new Nikon D500 the go for the D750. You won't regret it.
 
why d500? I didnt mention the d500. I was asking d800 vs d750. my concern for stills is high iso and I think I may go with a grey D750. the D500 looks nice but I dont think it can hang with FF no matter how much hype there is around the camera. I hope im wrong. my intuition say possibly a half stop better.
 
Between D800 & D750, the newer camera (D750) has more advance features for video and stills (except only for the 36MP resolution). Better high ISO performance and far more better auto-focus system.
A true hybrid camera. I wish if only had the internal 4K video recording of the upcoming D500 (more future proof).

I only mentioned the D500 so that you know all the possible solutions for your budget. Don't expect to have better iSO performance than D750. It is just a more durable pro body with a crop sensor. (you don't really need FF for video)
 
As someone who has owned and used both: D750. Not even a contest. D800 has a significant amount of color moire in video. D750 has 60p and a flat profile, better color, better file compression, less rolling shutter, better rear screen for easier video focusing, and less cropped (D800 is a 1.2 crop for video). I prefer the photos from the D750 as well, AF is much faster and DR is slightly improved. Detail loss was barely noticeable. Go for the D750.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ruh5wlDd0Dw
 
D750 is hands down waaaaaaaaay better than the D800 for video. (better than D810 too)
D800 is only better than a D750 for stills if you *MUST* have the super high resolution, but otherwise I believe the D750 to be better in every way.

D750 is basically the best DSLR there is for video right now (well... arguably the 1D C is better, and the D5/D500 are not shipping yet. Plus there are mirrorless options too, but I was tricky and said "best DSLR" ;-) ).

And for general purpose photography (i.e. not super high resolution or super high FPS) it is the best FX DSLR there is.
 
In general, I'd agree that the D750 is currently the most refined 1080p hybrid DSLR Nikon offers. Like all Nikons, however, the D750 has a few crucial limitations that impair its usability as a video camera:

* 4GB maximum file length limits each video to less than 30 minutes.
* Lack of focus peaking makes it essential to use an external monitor.
* Primitive iPhone/Android app limits usefulness of Wifi remote control.
* Resolution and video detail limited to 1080p at 24Mbps.

For my purposes, a Nikon full-frame DSLR fills a video niche that would otherwise require a Sony A7s: high-ISO low-light shooting. Neither the Panasonic GH4 nor the JVC LS300 produce acceptable noise levels above ISO 1600 (and even that requires Neat Video in post). Both of those cameras are otherwise excellent choices, with none of the above limitations of Nikon DSLRs. But for ISO 1600+ Nikon is a better choice, with a full-frame sensor and image stabilized lenses far superior to Panasonic OIS zooms. On the MFT side, the SpeedBooster option is indeed useful, but IME shooting video at effective apertures wider than f2.8 often produces a painfully narrow depth of field. I much prefer to shoot in low-light at f2.8 at a higher ISO.

With that context in mind, there's a video alternative I still prefer to the D750: a Nikon D800 with a Mosaic Engineering anti-aliasing filter, hacked to use a 64 Mbps bitrate. This combination of third-party enhancements eliminates video moire and captures the highest quality low-light shadow details of any DSLR short of the Sony A7s. (While the A7s is superb in low-light, its proprietary lens selection makes it impractical for my purposes.) Here are links to the third-party D800 developer sites:

Mosaic Engineering: http://www.mosaicengineering.com/products/vaf/d800.html
Nikon Hacker: https://nikonhacker.com/index.php?sid=1257e1f5cafd972a325cb7d868b55048

Of course, the D800 solution requires additional camera preparation and enthusiasm for custom firmware hacking. As one of the more prominent hackers of the GH2, that's not an issue for me, and I've tested Nikon Hacker's firmware upgrades to my complete satisfaction. IMO, 50Mbps is the minimum bitrate needed for fast-motion and low-light video shooting at 1080p. Unfortunately, the D750 doesn't meet that spec, and Nikon Hacker has been unable to increase the bitrates of Nikon models beyond the D800. For that reason alone, I must regretfully pass on Nikon's current generation of hybrid DSLR's, in spite their improvements in overall usability.

The following video samples show the difference 64Mbps can make in fast-motion videography on the D800. To clearly see the increase in video detail, I'd recommend examing the frames at 200% resolution in a video editor. The original footage can be downloaded from my Vimeo site.


 
Last edited:
Hey Lpowell, really interesting to hear your views on the Nikons. I still dig out my old Flowmotion Gh2 when I need an extra cam, never looks out of place !

I bought a GH4 just after they came out, and a D750 for low light stills primarily, but I got to say motion wise, its a lot easier to nail the colours with the Nikon than with the GH4. The Nikon colours just seem to sit better in relation to each other. So this brings me back to your post above, what would your opinion be on the D750 with an external recorder over the D800 with your above mods ?

M
 
Last edited:
Murph100 said:
I bought a GH4 just after they came out, and a D750 for low light stills primarily, but I got to say motion wise, its a lot easier to nail the colours with the Nikon than with the GH4. The Nikon colours just seem to sit better in relation to each other. So this brings me back to your post above, what would your opinion be on the D750 with an external recorder over the D800 with your above mods ?
Click to expand...
An external HDMI recorder can definitely provide a noticeable improvement in motion picture quality with both the Panasonic GH4 and Nikon DSLRs. Both D750 and D800 output 8-bit 422 color depth on their HDMI ports, while the GH4 outputs 10-bit 422 color. However, the GH4 has noisier shadow detail than the Nikons, and it needs those extra 2-bits of color depth to handle the noise. The Nikons have cleaner shadows and can get by with 8-bit 422 color, but require at least double the bitrate of their internal encoders to handle fast motion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top