Im with Zim on this one. I am a film student and use my d5000 for my work. It is annoying having to find the right area to expose to then auto exposure locking before I shoot. If this cam gets rid of that plus lets me get 1080 plus just a little better video Im in. I mean I have made stuff that rocks some of the t2i stuff Ive seen (not too be cocky). When it comes down to it, compression and bit rates are not as important if you take the time to really make good art and not just another generic thing.
DSLR gains from the Nikon D7000: cross your fingers
- Thread starter HHL
- Start date
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
There is no reason to "struggle".
ALL of my Nikon lenses have the fotodiox adapters and they work well on both my 7d and 5d. Even on this massive 50-300mm:
Michael Carter
Veteran
I can second McGee's experience - get the Fotodiox ($70ish) vs. the $20 deals. It's a much tighter fit.
The only "struggle" I've had: it took some time getting used to Canon's "reverse twist" bayonet - may take a few days to adjust.
And, getting the adapter off your Nikon glass is picky - there is a tiny lever to push. If you can afford it, get one for every lens, like you would a focus gear.
That said, I can't imagine someone giving up on it - it's very simple, and it's mechanical, not, like software or a new philosophy. Though the cheap adapters have some "play" that you might see as a "jump" when adjusting focus.
The only "struggle" I've had: it took some time getting used to Canon's "reverse twist" bayonet - may take a few days to adjust.
And, getting the adapter off your Nikon glass is picky - there is a tiny lever to push. If you can afford it, get one for every lens, like you would a focus gear.
That said, I can't imagine someone giving up on it - it's very simple, and it's mechanical, not, like software or a new philosophy. Though the cheap adapters have some "play" that you might see as a "jump" when adjusting focus.
As described earlier. Here's some pics/diagrams. Go Nikon D7000!
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2107304&postcount=33
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2107304&postcount=33
Michael Carter
Veteran
"Brand loyalty" in this world can also translate to "lens investment".
As for codecs, b-frames, all a that - will buying a D700 give me an upgrade in picture quality, useability, flexibility over what I use now? That's what it comes down to.
Sadly, I'll still have to keep a canon around for 60p slowmo - waiting for some real-world looks at D7000 footage though.
UPDATE: Early results say YES! See it here: (ISO 2000-5000!!) http://www.vimeo.com/15894774
ps...It's official...I will be selling my T2i. It has been a GREAT camera...worth every penny...paid its self off easily...ALL OF MY GLASS JUST GOT UPDATED BY THE D7000!!!
ps...It's official...I will be selling my T2i. It has been a GREAT camera...worth every penny...paid its self off easily...ALL OF MY GLASS JUST GOT UPDATED BY THE D7000!!!
Snapper123
Well-known member
I just wish that there'd hurry up and be a test where both camera's sharpness were turned down, both cameras had close-as-possible color settings applied, both cameras using the same lens (heck, why not?), and of coarse, both cameras having same white balance and ISO. So far, I've seen "simple tests" where the new Nikon blows the Canon's out of the water for sharpness quality (you could actually semi-read street signs and all that with the Nikon.), but the thing is, the Nikon could have been set to 4 sharpness, Canon set to 0, who really knows? The test I saw had no sort of details accompanying it.
Personally, I find it hard to believe that one camera truly would end up being better than the other, I just think that this camera is a miracle for people who have invested in Nikon over the years. Other than that, I'd personally want to see some rigorous tests before I even think about switching. Thing is, that doesn't mean I'm satisfied with the Canon cameras at all, I think the sharpness to them are horrible, and the noise isn't much better. If Nikon could improve both those areas by 25%, I think it'd seriously make me consider switching. Otherwise, prolly not.
Personally, I find it hard to believe that one camera truly would end up being better than the other, I just think that this camera is a miracle for people who have invested in Nikon over the years. Other than that, I'd personally want to see some rigorous tests before I even think about switching. Thing is, that doesn't mean I'm satisfied with the Canon cameras at all, I think the sharpness to them are horrible, and the noise isn't much better. If Nikon could improve both those areas by 25%, I think it'd seriously make me consider switching. Otherwise, prolly not.
macgregor
Veteran
Well, this is what i´ve seen so far:
- i think 5D resolves more detail than the d7000
- d7000 tone curve is more filmic (more natural colours)
- nikon has more dynamic range (in highlights and shadows)
- canon has less aliassing
- I see less compression in the nikon but I need to test more.
www.macgregor.autoecstasy.com/d7000/01.wmv
There is a lot of information hidden in the highlights from the d7000 mov files. I noticed it by looking at the waveform. When pulling this down i got some ugly noise which is normally not there so I wonder if quicktime is clipping information above 100IRE (239) while the camera is probably using the full 256 bits.
- i think 5D resolves more detail than the d7000
- d7000 tone curve is more filmic (more natural colours)
- nikon has more dynamic range (in highlights and shadows)
- canon has less aliassing
- I see less compression in the nikon but I need to test more.
www.macgregor.autoecstasy.com/d7000/01.wmv
There is a lot of information hidden in the highlights from the d7000 mov files. I noticed it by looking at the waveform. When pulling this down i got some ugly noise which is normally not there so I wonder if quicktime is clipping information above 100IRE (239) while the camera is probably using the full 256 bits.
dfreerider
Well-known member
Great to finally hear about some real hands on experiences with the D7000. Keep it coming 
macgregor
Veteran
This camera is insane.
Dynamic range and colour reproduction are amazing.
Compression is there but it´s not annoying. No weird noise patterns and noise behaves more like film grain.
Now, it seems there is the same problem with how QT transcodes the files (similar to when the 5D was launched). QT appears to be clipping the levels below 16 and above 239 because with heavy curves I can recover a lot of highlight and shadow detail that was invisible at first:
look for example at the hood and around the tyres.
Dynamic range and colour reproduction are amazing.
Compression is there but it´s not annoying. No weird noise patterns and noise behaves more like film grain.
Now, it seems there is the same problem with how QT transcodes the files (similar to when the 5D was launched). QT appears to be clipping the levels below 16 and above 239 because with heavy curves I can recover a lot of highlight and shadow detail that was invisible at first:
look for example at the hood and around the tyres.
Attachments
macgregor
Veteran
I´m having a lot of fun so I´ll try to elaborate the problem better:
clip "raw" This is how it looks when opening the original file.
clip graded (curves, levels, a bit of film grain and done). Look how much info there was hidden there!!!! And it´s perfectly usuable!
clip "raw" This is how it looks when opening the original file.
clip graded (curves, levels, a bit of film grain and done). Look how much info there was hidden there!!!! And it´s perfectly usuable!
squig
Veteran
The aliasing on the cars in that first clip was pretty bad, how did you have the sharpness set on that one?
The high ISO looks good, how does 2000 ISO look compared to the 5D? From what I saw from the D3s high ISO on the Nikons looks more grain like rather than noise like as it does on the Canons. I'm trying to hold out for a full frame Nikon, there should be a D700 replacement early next year.
The high ISO looks good, how does 2000 ISO look compared to the 5D? From what I saw from the D3s high ISO on the Nikons looks more grain like rather than noise like as it does on the Canons. I'm trying to hold out for a full frame Nikon, there should be a D700 replacement early next year.
Thanks so much for posting that! I updated the first post to include the fact that it looks like more dynamic range (even if only slightly more) than we are used to seeing with DSLRs. Thanks again!
PS...would you mind shooting and posting an example of ISO 3200? This being one full stop better than the 7d and T2i. (No flame here...I own the T2i, and I'm just wanting a better idea of what I can expect) Thanks for posting what you have already!
squig
Veteran
What were your aperture and ISO settings on this shot?