I don't get it...

The D3s has awesome low light ability but it's only 12 MP. Nikon's newer cameras may have higher megapixel counts for slightly reduced low light performance.
 
That confirms it. Nikon did not intend video for us folks. Its a tourist feature. And they are very concerned about sacrifices to still imaging, which is why they do not want to appear to video-friendly.
Canon doesn't have that kind of idealistic image to maintain. They pissed off some people with the 7D and alot of people were saying canon made a mistake with launching that camera. Canon seems to be reckles and "going rogue", Nikon plays it safe for their elitist photography appeal.
 
I think the most telling line was when he said "nikon is looking into ways of integrating video as well as still image editing into its bundled software" The real race is to RAW video not limited to 1080p. I want the full sensor for video.. no line skipping

imagine capture NX with video support

http://www.capturenx.com/en/index.html
 
Nitemare said:
That confirms it. Nikon did not intend video for us folks. Its a tourist feature. And they are very concerned about sacrifices to still imaging, which is why they do not want to appear to video-friendly.
Canon doesn't have that kind of idealistic image to maintain. They pissed off some people with the 7D and alot of people were saying canon made a mistake with launching that camera. Canon seems to be reckles and "going rogue", Nikon plays it safe for their elitist photography appeal.
Click to expand...

Canon didn't intend for the 5D2 to be a runaway hit with digital cinema either but they have changed course now.... Nikon will do the same but in their own fashion (slower and with less marketing hype) But when the dust settles the thing that will matter the most will be the lenses you have invested in.

Could the 16-35 f/4 VR be a great video lens ?
 
I must say, that I don't like either company that much. And Nikon clearly plays in the "quality before hype" field. I like the decision against pixel resolution bt in favor to high sensitivity. Nikons way feels right in some cases, but requires pacience.

I've invested in quite some lenses, so I really need them to get this going somwhere video. But my guess is, that we won't see raw video any time soon. Mabe in the next D3 type model.
 
what a loser..
" Nikon regards video as a function that is of more use to users of lower-end cameras,"

people who buy the high end cameras are professionals dealing with media clients - media clients now want stills and motion

No motion - no buy - IMO

ann when the pros dont buy the ams dont buy because they want to have a 'pro' brand

he needs to get out more

S
 
Last edited:
They don't put a tourist feature on a $5,000 camera.

Looks like they are planning to improve the video from what I read and it won't take much to blow Canon away. All they need is 1080HD, which they have put on a Coolpix already. Manual controls and a longer record time.




Nitemare said:
That confirms it. Nikon did not intend video for us folks. Its a tourist feature. And they are very concerned about sacrifices to still imaging, which is why they do not want to appear to video-friendly.
Canon doesn't have that kind of idealistic image to maintain. They pissed off some people with the 7D and alot of people were saying canon made a mistake with launching that camera. Canon seems to be reckles and "going rogue", Nikon plays it safe for their elitist photography appeal.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Zim said:
All they need is 1080HD
Click to expand...
The label sticker Canon uses to mislead buyers of the 7D? Or the actual usable HD resolution like from a professional video camera? You are right, all they need to do is deliver real 1080p not the tourist camcorder quality of the 7D (just resolution wise). But there are already demands for RAW and we don't even get a basic quality of cheap camcorders.
Of course the 7D would be a valid choice for me (I've worked with it, it's alright), if I had invested in canon glass that is...
I'm just not sure I want to trust these two companies so far into specific demands, if we don't even get basic human rights like manual controls from Nikon or the truth about the actual resolution from Canon. And I remember the cries for manual control future buyers of the 5DMkII uttered to Canon, with no response until they deemed it was time for it half a year later.

Now reading about Nikons view on this matter does not fill me with hope.
 
... nikon put 120 fps on a cropped sensor on the new cool pix... that shows they are starting to get it.

Give me the D3s sensor with RAW 4K video and 120 fps and I'm set.... bottom line as of today. Nikon has the killer glass and best (dynamic range, low noise sensor) foundation everything else is a matter of time....

The silent bomb in Sasagki brief interview was Nikon is working on way of integrating video as well as still image editing into its software. Imagine capture NX with RAW video support.

http://www.capturenx.com/en/index.html
 
Hmm, one reason to yet have hope is Nikon's state of the art appeal. They may have ignored the market until they've got something with professional quality like RAW. While Canon is providing some small fish fodder, Nikon might be preparing for the big fish. One can only hope...
 
3space said:
Give me the D3s sensor with RAW 4K video and 120 fps and I'm set.... bottom line as of today. Nikon has the killer glass and best (dynamic range, low noise sensor) foundation everything else is a matter of time....
Click to expand...

You're practically describing RED there. Unfortunately RED has a bit of a price premium over the D3s.
 
Mr Sasagaki is simply being clear about his company’s priorities. The big revenue streams are at the lower end of the DSLR market which is why Canon have been so quick to add the 7D’s video features to a small lightweight 800 USD camera. These are the rival cameras that Nikon will seek to match. So don’t expect 4K RAW anytime soon from Nikon.
 
Last edited:
I don't think they're saying video is only for amateurs, I think they're saying the crappy video these dumbass VDSLR hybrids create is only for amateurs.

In other words "If you want a video camera, buy a video camera. We make STILL cameras."

If Canon had 1/15th of a brain, they would say "Hey, good idea," stop with this 'VDSLR' nonsense and put an APS or 35mm sensor into an XH-A1 type body, and create some pretty ads that say "Don't buy a VDSLR full of compromises, buy a REAL video camera."

And let Nikon get back to making still cameras, damnit.
 
Lee Saxon said:
And let Nikon get back to making still cameras, damnit.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand why you would say that in a forum dedicated to video DSLRs.

There's no turning back now, VDSLRs are here to stay. It's like with mobile phones, at first everybody mocks them, later everybody has two of them!

I want two VDSLRs, haha.

Btw, I've heard canon made a mistake with the 7D. Turns out, most of the 5Dmkii sales were video related and...well with the 7D that kind of dropped. Now they want to improve the 5Dmkii again, to make it more attractive thand the 7D...hah!

Canon is stupid like that, Nikon however is even more...unaware of the trend apparently.
 
Is there a trend? Nikon makes still cameras and they have been adding video to all of them. Maybe Nikon is more worried about their main market and that is photography not filmmaking. If people are happy making films with a $800 or $1699 DSLR, ok but I don't think Nikon is going to change their marketing plan for what 1% of the market wants.

I don't think Nikon are making their cameras to be "video cameras" and I don't think they should be used just for video cameras. I really wonder how long some of the cameras are going to last getting heated up all of the time. Are the insides just getting fried?

There is going to be some great reasons to have video on DSLRs but don't expect Nikon to focus on video. Most photographers don't care that much about video on their cameras.
 
Zim said:
Is there a trend? Nikon makes still cameras and they have been adding video to all of them. Maybe Nikon is more worried about their main market and that is photography not filmmaking. If people are happy making films with a $800 or $1699 DSLR, ok but I don't think Nikon is going to change their marketing plan for what 1% of the market wants.

I don't think Nikon are making their cameras to be "video cameras" and I don't think they should be used just for video cameras. I really wonder how long some of the cameras are going to last getting heated up all of the time. Are the insides just getting fried?

There is going to be some great reasons to have video on DSLRs but don't expect Nikon to focus on video. Most photographers don't care that much about video on their cameras.
Click to expand...


I have a 7d. My cousin wants to get a new dslr -- apparently dslr are the rage now a days. In any case, while at a family event, she asked me what she should get. My cousin is NOT "into" photography. She has a couple of toddlers and another one on the way. She's a stay at home mom.

I told her all entry level dslr have about the same capabilities (IMHO, @ least as far as she's concerned; she's not a camera "expert"). I told her both Nikon and Canon are pretty much equal. Actually, she had a bias towards Nikon because one of our relatives in California is a nikon "guy".

After creating a video of a familiy event and sharing it on youtube, a couple of weeks later she said that she was no longer looking into Nikon cameras. They didn't have "good HD video". She asked if there was a specific canon camera that was good. I told her t2i.

If Nikon wants to continue improving market share, they need to address video. I moved from a 20d to a 7d because of video. If there was no "good" video, I would have just kept the 20d.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top