D90 or DVX?

[MutePrint]

So here is my dilemma: due to financial constraints, I need to sell either my D90 or DVX100A by the end of this month. I'm a film student and have been using the DVX for the past few years, but I'm also fairly infatuated with the D90 so far. My concerns are:

1. It's fairly clear that--short of the rumored buffer upgrade--the D90's HD image is relatively useless. Given that...
2. The DVX is clearly more rounded and delivers an (objectively) higher quality SD image. It is also more versatile for handheld use and quick action/panning. But...
3. 35mm DoF has really spoiled me. As has the D90's dynamic range and color reproduction. No matter how frustrating its limitations have been, I just can't seem to shake the allure of its overall image.

While the DVX may seem the safer choice, I am concerned that it is quickly becoming obsolete, and that its resale will likely follow suit. I paid around $3200 retail for my DVX, but they're currently selling for around half that (often less). The D90's retail value, on the other hand, should remain high for the immediate future. I am up for the D90's challenges, but also don't want to shoot myself in the foot on a technical level. I probably won't be investing in another camera (short of any new developments from Canon or Nikon in the next few months), so this will have to cover all my filmmaking needs for the next 6-12 months. I am much more interested in the next wave of technology (Scarlet, etc.) than the here-and-now of the HVX, HPX, etc.
I don't really do any paid work, or at least not enough to influence the decision. The D90 is very appealing as a DSLR as well as a video camera, and will be utilized on both ends. I currently only have the stock VR kit lens, which has been fairly underwhelming, but the footage achieved by many here with manual lenses suggests that there is plenty of potential for a satisfying image.
Finally, whichever camera I end up with will be used almost exclusively for short films; I'm comfortable with the film workflow and syncing sound, so that shouldn't really be a factor.

So, what would everyone here suggest? I'm leaning toward the D90, but the DVX has a lot of sentimental value, so it's a little hard to let go of. Are there any big factors I'm overlooking?

 

[Matthew Bennett]

d90 dude...

If you're just thinking how to get the best SD resolution image, the d90 is your absolute greatest friend.
Using the stair removal, a nice downsampling/ coloring program like AE, and creating SD res material from that, the d90 footage looks gorgeous.
At HD its passable if you massage the image and concentrate on nice shots/sound design.. but it is a dream camera for SD/Web delivery..

But the DVX is great for sound, I always use mine to record the sound for my d90 drama/short work. Too bad you can't have both.

The d90 image will always be more impressive and flexible for you, it will allow you to grow and experience many more cinematographic options..

 

[dresam]

I'm in a bit of a similar dilemma, so thanks for the topic. For the cost of a 35MM adapter for my DVX, I could theoretically buy the D90 Body and use my existing lens collection. Then, in a year or so, decide where to go then.... I already have a field recorder, so sound isn't too much of an issue...

I hope I'm not hijacking this thread by asking this: Between the two cameras, the D90 and the DVX100, which is going to pull a chroma key better? I know it's kind of a ridiculous question, two very compressed formats, but I was wondering if anyone had any input...

 

[BMFM FILMS]

I hope I'm not hijacking this thread by asking this: Between the two cameras, the D90 and the DVX100, which is going to pull a chroma key better? I know it's kind of a ridiculous question, two very compressed formats, but I was wondering if anyone had any input...

I'll take the risky guess of saying the D90 will do a better job at keying. This is not a fact, just from the little I've seen and the little testing i've done it's come out better then DV/DVX footage.

I'll wait patiently to be proven wrong, but D90 does a good job.

D90 is very cost efficient, but wouldn't be usable in live events, if it's staged, it will rock. Or, if your budget somehow triples, get the Mark II from canon.

 

[SomewhereinLA]

First of all, the DVX is not quickly becoming obsolete, it is obsolete! And I fear that within a year, we are going to see a lot of 35mm adaptor and HVX for sale ( Just sold my Brevis ). I got my D90 yesterday and this little camera is incredible... I just can't believe it's flexibility, how beautifull the image is at a very high ISO.... I have played a little with the video features and once I figured out how to "lock" the iris, I was really pleased with the result.
However if I was a film student I would keep the DVX. I think too many film students get lure by the "film look" thing, they want their movie to look like film and spend too much time ( and money) doing so rather tan focusing on telling a story well. Concentrate on story telling, think of your camera (DVX) as a note pad, a cheap way to experiment with a lot of thing and see what works. The DVX is great for that, you can shoot hours, the workflow is fast and easy, the video files are small etc... The D90 is great, but it is a still camera with limited video capabilities, it 's a way for Nikon to see if there would be a potential demand for future products. I am sure Nikon and Canon will come out with something that's really optimized for video work, but it won't happen for at least another few month to a year...

Of course if you want to be a DP, the D90 might be worth keeping. Doesn't the school you go to has cameras for student to use???

 

[Ralph Oshiro]

I would suggest: If you want to become a skilled cinematographer, choose the D90. If you mainly want to concentrate on writing, story, and actors, get the DVX.