Nikon D3100 - 1080/24 + continuous auto-focus

stephenvv said:
2001 is 2.21:1 - so most of the encode is black as it's not stored in anamorphic, it's a 16:9 file with bars. The black compresses to near 0 bits per frame.
Click to expand...


sorry, you're totally right: I was using mediainfo, now I actually played it for a bit
why do they still do this? it's silly
anyway, sorry for my mistake and for the off-topic

my point was: 18Mbps could be enough, if the encoder is good
 
I love Nikon to death. I have owned Nikons since 1975.
I have a D200 that I use for timelapse and panorama shooting.
I was never happy with the still photo quality of the D200.
So I finally bought a Canon T2i.
I was using it as 2nd camera on HVX shoots.
On certain shoots & subjects the Canon footage is better than HVX.
No it is not RED quality but for web delivery it is damn good.
I have actually done some shoots and left the HVX at home or
sometimes just used the HVX as the audio recorder....LOL

And I am very happy with the still image quality of the Canon T2i.

Selling some Nikon lenses on e-bay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...78270&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT#ht_500wt_1154

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...33123&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT#ht_500wt_1154

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...37852&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT#ht_500wt_1154
 
NormanBates said:
sorry, you're totally right: I was using mediainfo, now I actually played it for a bit
why do they still do this? it's silly
anyway, sorry for my mistake and for the off-topic

my point was: 18Mbps could be enough, if the encoder is good
Click to expand...

No problem - I agree in theory that with a great encoder 18Mbps might be enough. However, it would have to be much better generation chip for heat/power/size issues and unlikely (though not impossible) in a low end plastic body cam. I tend to think it will be GH1-ish, perhaps a bit better. Despite the mud in GH1 it's not bad and if this is a step up it still may be okay.
 
HVXguy said:
I love Nikon to death. I have owned Nikons since 1975.
I have a D200 that I use for timelapse and panorama shooting.
I was never happy with the still photo quality of the D200.
So I finally bought a Canon T2i.
I was using it as 2nd camera on HVX shoots.
On certain shoots & subjects the Canon footage is better than HVX.
No it is not RED quality but for web delivery it is damn good.
I have actually done some shoots and left the HVX at home or
sometimes just used the HVX as the audio recorder....LOL
And I am very happy with the still image quality of the Canon T2i.
Click to expand...

Why do you "love Nikon to death" if you weren't even satisfied with the image quality of the photos from your D200 even before this whole HDSLR thing? Photo image quality is one they have no excuse for not getting right. I probably would have switched back then if I were you.
 
ecking said:
Why do you "love Nikon to death" if you weren't even satisfied with the image quality of the photos from your D200 even before this whole HDSLR thing? Photo image quality is one they have no excuse for not getting right. I probably would have switched back then if I were you.
Click to expand...

Because I was shooting film until I got the D200. I use to do a lot more photography when I shot film. My interest in still work dropped off when I started producing video.
I have more of an interest in Timelapse and 360 Panoramic work and the D200 is great for that kind of work. I bought the Canon T2i for video work but discovered the still image quality better than the D200. I am sure the really expensive Nikon's can hold their own when it comes to image quality but since I don't make my bread & better shooting stills I never bothered to investigate the higher end cameras.
 
In the Zacuto shootout, the Nikon had amazing high iso quality. Hopefully it's made its way onto this cam.
 
It appears rather clear that this is a consumer DSLR, lacking the "revolution" thing the 5Dm2, 7D, and even T2i brought to the industry. I can't imagine this being used as a "B" camera, or C,D, or E camera for any pro applications. I also can't comprehend not spending the extra one hundred or so for a T2i.

It's too bad -- because Nikon needs something revolutionary -- and "mirrorless" is not revolutionary.

The reason they need something revolutionary is because I'm at least the third voice in this thread that was a decade-plus pro Nikon guy heavily invested in Nikon glass -- who was converted to Canon, complete with the unwanted new lens expenses -- by the 7D. Heck, earlier today I was going through archive images of work done with a D2Xs -- and all I kept saying to myself was "I wish I had my 7D for this."

So -- here's another former "Nikonian" coming in with a "What the hell is Nikon's problem?" comment.
 
AGMedia said:
So -- here's another former "Nikonian" coming in with a "What the hell is Nikon's problem?" comment.
Click to expand...

I remember being real excited about the N90 and after looking at the sample videos went - I think I will pass on that....

Then Canon with the 5D and I was like wow the video can look really good
but the price was too much for me. And this is all while Scarlet fever was ramping up.

Then I almost ordered the 7D but I think I was scared off by all the crap video I was seeing. Then the T2i price point was low enough that I felt even if the video was not usable in a professional sense I could use it as a timelapse B-cam.

In many, many situations the Canon video is much better than the HVX.
On a tripod it is great. I still think handheld video from HDSLR's looks kinda crappy.

So, yes I think Nikon has missed the boat. Unless they really leapfrog ahead someday
with a Scarlet killer.......
 
This camera (D3100) has really captured my attention though, despite all the naysayers on this thread. Chip/image size, live view, HDMI out, 1080/24p, AF while filming might make this an interesting choice for steadicams, video output is MOV, photo can be RAW, ISO will lend itself to what should be decent nighttime shooting performance...seems like a lot of the money quite frankly.

I'm eagerly awaiting an experienced DP to put it through a few paces...see if it can handle the rigors of a shoot and if there are any unexpected issues, etc...

Prof.D
 
NO MIC JACK? LOL, nikon you fail again. Man this is really embarrassing.

Maybe next time around fellas.

Glad i ditched my D90 and jumped ship a while ago.
 
Uhhg..the camera HAS audio. Check out the specs on the NIKON.com site prior to commenting. This reminds me of the month or so prior to the Canon 5D Mii release..so many naysayers and misinformation floating around the forum..now, some of the same peeps practically swear by the camera. I'm thinking the D3100 might become an interesting preference for DSLR steadicam shooters due to 11 pt movie AF tracking feature...of course AF is something we never use normally, but steadicam is quiet a different requirement.
 
Too little too late.
Nikon needed a home run and delivered a base hit. So the price is good. Yeah but why not go with Canon t2i? pay a bit more and get 7d.. Nikon's effort is not enough. I am also one of the suckers who bought d3000 for hobby. So I might be just a tad pissed off.... :)
 
I really doubt Nikon is seeing video as a huge market draw...if you compare the amount of people that are out to just shoot photos to people that are trying to rig these cameras up to do serious video work, then Nikon is going to put their money where they'll get returns.
 
Keeganxt said:
I really doubt Nikon is seeing video as a huge market draw...if you compare the amount of people that are out to just shoot photos to people that are trying to rig these cameras up to do serious video work, then Nikon is going to put their money where they'll get returns.
Click to expand...


I honestly suspect Nikon has no idea what's going on. What they shouldn't have missed were the profits Canon recently posted -- I don't remember the numbers -- but it was something outrageous relative to Canon.

Nikon executives sitting in their offices oblivious to the V-DSLR revolution is the only possible explanation for Nikon completely ignoring the new marketplace.

Despite the lone positive voice in this thread -- I'll repeat, based on over a decade of professional experience -- this new Nikon won't come close to a T2i. My recommendation to any consumer is to enjoy 1080/24p on a one hundred dollar more T2i for the next year or two it takes Nikon to discover what's going on.
 
People should but their fanboyism on one side as they are dishing a camera which is not already out. Everyone is saying that it is not as good as the 550d. It is as if the Canon was a Red MX or Arri Alexa. Sorry to tell everyone here that the Canon does suffer from many problems, moire and aliasing being too good examples. Low resolution, barely more than 720p is another one. Can you do some very good video with the 550d, for sure, but you still have issues.

So before dishing the Nikon D3100 (I have both Nikon, for my photographers work, and Canon equipment for video) lets wait to see how it fares up. I did not seem to see any moire and aliasing in the Family video in 1080p. The handheld video also seemed to not suffer much from jello. For one thing, we know that it has at least one function better than the Canon in continuous auto-focus.

The last thing is that it is the entry level camera from Nikon and that a D90/D300 replacement will be unveiled next month. So lets give Nikon the chance to show us what they will offer as Dslr video. I myself have been forced painfully (investment wise) to go Canon for video, but one thing I know is that competition is the driving factor for innovation and cost reduction for all of us customers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top