FINALLY - 1080p

mattsand said:
yeah but i wish manufacturers could for once use advances in compression technology to increase quality rather than decrease bitrate. the only reason mjpeg doesn't quite work on dslr's is that the bitrate is too low. at 70 mbit or so it's excellent and voids the need for more advanced codecs. codecs like redcode, prores and cineform would be the logical next step, not a stupid delivery codec designed for low bitrates.
Click to expand...

They do... just not at this price point unfortunately.

Plus is doesn't make sense to put a 50mbps or 100mbps codec into a consumer camera because almost every customer would ring up and compain that the video function is broken after trying it with a class 4 card. And when you have 1/2 million people complaining about something on every technology/photo/video site online, regardless of the fact they are all wrong, it is still terrible PR.
 
If they're using AVCHD and 24Mb/s the quality will be fine, for this price class of camera.

With a 10MP sized sensor, there would be less aliasing and moire, theoretically, depending on implementation.

Hopefully the read/reset is up to snuff with the Canon's for no jello - that's the main thing for Nikon.
 
you mean the red one? the other ones i can think of either have smaller sensors and/or record to high def video tape (or avchd even in pro cameras). a 35mm sensor behind an interchangeable lens recording to a nice codec is a rare thing.
deltoidjohn said:
Plus is doesn't make sense to put a 50mbps or 100mbps codec into a consumer camera
Click to expand...
oh belive me i understand the dynamics, i'm just thinking wishfully. a prosumer video camera based on slr technology, with manual control and high bitrate will come for sure. sometimes things happen by mistake and a few years are skipped though, like when the dvx was released. it could happen again. too bad panny's slr sensors suck so far.
 
steventimothy said:
If they're using AVCHD and 24Mb/s the quality will be fine, for this price class of camera.
Click to expand...
i disagree, h.264 based codecs destroy the noise/grain structure of the image even at higher bitrates. i'd much rather have mosquito noise and color bleed than muddy blacks, plastic gradients, and stripey noise. mjpeg at 24 Mb would be better imho, if card performance is the limiting factor. as somebody said this means the most in low light but guess what, i like low light. ;-)
 
mattsand said:
i disagree, h.264 based codecs destroy the noise/grain structure of the image even at higher bitrates. i'd much rather have mosquito noise and color bleed than muddy blacks, plastic gradients, and stripey noise. mjpeg at 24 Mb would be better imho, if card performance is the limiting factor. as somebody said this means the most in low light but guess what, i like low light. ;-)
Click to expand...

100% agreed. I've always thought Mjpeg looked leagues better than H.264 at equivalent compression. So much smoother and more organic than H.264's obvious digital compression.
 
Jester2138 said:
So much smoother and more organic than H.264's obvious digital compression.
Click to expand...

I agree. MJPEG may be old, but has a comparable effect to video footage as old manual lenses do.

Update on Nikon, seems like D90 replacement will have 1080p and continous fast AF in video mode as well.
 
I'm not sure this one is a replacement for the D90. It seems to be below it or a whole new line of cameras. It's nothing photographers would be interessted in. The already complain about DSLRs haveing to many video features, for which they don't want to pay a single penny. They'd rather have more photo features instead. So i guess nikon is going to adress the video crowd with their special video models.
 
mattsand said:
i disagree, h.264 based codecs destroy the noise/grain structure of the image even at higher bitrates. i'd much rather have mosquito noise and color bleed than muddy blacks, plastic gradients, and stripey noise. mjpeg at 24 Mb would be better imho, if card performance is the limiting factor. as somebody said this means the most in low light but guess what, i like low light. ;-)
Click to expand...

Not sure why Barry didn't jump in here to defend me, but I'll try: AVCHD is a specific implementation of h.264. Depending on the implementation, that can be done with MUCH better results than you're thinking.

On this thread here:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=214127&page=21
Barry tested the HMC-40 vs. GH-13 and Canon-7D. Most people preferred the HMC-40 quality vs. the other two (from an extracted still). Hint: It's (c).

Judge for yourself. It's 25 Mb/s AVCHD, but properly done, not lamely done as the original GH-1.

So if Nikon implements the AVCHD codec as well as Sony did with the HMC-40, there will be no call for complaint on a camera that costs $500.00.

Also, as prev poster mentioned, Nikon probably doesn't want the hassle of requiring a higher speed card for a $500 camera, so I would not be surprised to see that 25 Mb/s prediction come true.
 
24, yes, megabit is actually around twice the d90 rate. codec datarates are very rarely measured in bytes. as for what h.264 in its various implementations can achieve there's probably very little you can teach me, but thanks for trying. i know it's very difficult to tell who actually knows what they're talking about here. i also tend to assume that people are idiots, statistically it works. ;-)
 
Well, the next 6-12 months is where we see how Nikon really feels about the video market - I can't say if Canon's advances are a drop in the bucket regarding DSLR sales - as an active DVXUser member I'm sure I can't see the forest for the trees (especially when the trees have a lot of Jello wobble).

I'm shooting Nikon glass on a 550d for video - haven't bought a single Canon lens yet (makes no sense without useable AF on either). But man, I'd love to see the D90 replacement take the lead for a while.

Speaking of, I recently did a very tough shoot - Canon for broadcast video, D90 for stills. The latitude and data that Nikon is getting with Raw stills? It still completely shocks me. I hardly ever bracket anymore - it's all there, even shooting landscapes with bright skies, I can do several Raw-to-PSD layers and get a killer shot. The "recovery" slider is amazing.

Client was blown away with the video feel and the stills. But man, I want my Nikon to do it all.
 
Id move to nikon if they do come out with the right camera... d90 1080p 24p, proper rolling shutter, articulating screen

Id be able to reuse nikon lenses...

specially when the AF100 comes out :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top