Nikon D3100 D-SLR

Ugh. So much for the 3100 as a video option.

The half glass full take would be that the d7000 has a completely new sensor, supposedly designed and produced by Nikon (not Sony produced and Nikon tweaked), so the rolling shutter fail on this camera doesn't mean anything for the much more capable d7000 (a camera that I would want to purchase for its still capabilities alone).

The other take would be that Nikon doesn't realize what the biggest flaw in there video feature is. It wasn't lack of autofocus.
 
I want to add either the 3100 or 7000 to my photo/video collection. Having nikor AI-S lenses , does that help with the focusing issues in the video footage since auto-focus would be disabled?

Thanks,
Chris
 
My 2 cents.

I have had a T2i and I have a GH1(3).

Nikon is superior in image quality.

Nikon lenses are better period.

dSLR video is overrated. I sell a lot of stock clips and 720p from a Nikon simply looks better than crap moire/aliased jello 1080 from Canon or Panasonic.

Stay away from Canon and Panasonic. Invest in Nikon.

A $1000 camcorder shoots better video than a $3000 5Dmk2.

Auto focus on all these video dSLRs is a joke, go manual all the way.

I think Nikon is smart not jumping on the vDSLR bandwagon because the tech is just not ready.

Go Nikon.
 
@ Canadafirst, that sounds like fanboy talk! =)

Yeah, we can get good results from almost any camera. Here is a link to a short film idea I shot with a D90. At 3:36 there is a running clip with a 28mm lens and it does look fine to me. The opening scene has ever so slight RS, but it creates a surreal feel that does not get in the way of the story.
http://www.youtube.com/user/James0b57#p/a/u/0/PZ0CXmIeNwk

That said, working around the rolling shutter was a bear and anything that gets in the way of creative freedom should and will be complained about. That's part of progress.

And the $1000 camcorder argument ignores why certain people buy dslr's.

The DVXuser forum is for film makers and video professionals or enthusiasts, so saying invest in Nikon makes no sense, at this point. I have used the T2i, and while I prefer the color renderings of the D90, I find the T2i a much better video camera, and I have repeatedly recommended it over any Nikon to students and friends, many whom now own a T2i or a 5D.

Nikon is primarily reaching a photographer customer base, and does not need the loyalty of filmmakers and videographers. They will have to earn that.
 
Opinions are like elbows...

Fanboy talk. Not a chance. I own a GH1 and with the hack it produces the highest quality video of any current dSLR. But... looking back I would rather have invested in a Nikon for stills, and a camcorder for video.

dSLR video is consistently twitchy no matter what brand.

Nikon has the best image in stills and soon will have the best video implementation..
 
Canadafirst said:
Opinions are like elbows...

Fanboy talk. Not a chance. I own a GH1 and with the hack it produces the highest quality video of any current dSLR. But... looking back I would rather have invested in a Nikon for stills, and a camcorder for video.

dSLR video is consistently twitchy no matter what brand.

Nikon has the best image in stills and soon will have the best video implementation..
Click to expand...

Why, that a horse of a different color!
 
Canadafirst said:
Opinions are like elbows...
Click to expand...


Nikon has the best image in stills and soon will have the best video implementation..
Click to expand...

Unlikely.
It looks like Nikon aspires to be as good as the competitions prior generation. The 5Dm3 or 8D will be phenomenal.

I have Nikon glass & a lightly used D300s for sale... let me know if you're interested (and I'm in Calgary - no mail costs).
 
If Nikon is so bad... I'll trade you Body for Body. My GH13 for you D300s.

D3100 is going to be a good all around performer with better photo quality than Canon or Panasonic and very solid video.

For $700 you can't beat that.

Time to go edit some amazing GH13 shots...
 
Last edited:
Canadafirst said:
If Nikon is so bad... I'll trade you Body for Body. My GH13 for you D300s.
Click to expand...



I see you edited your response from "Sure, 100 bucks for the D300". To the above body for body deal. I'm glad you did, because the previous comment was not only rude, but it was inconsistent with you argument.

Side note - He probably won't trade, because as epic a challenge as that is, he could sell the body to a photographer and then buy a GH2, if that's what he was into.

Canadafirst said:
Time to go edit some amazing GH13 shots...
Click to expand...

Go get 'em!
 
James take a hike.

GH2 is a flop. Won't be half the camera of the GH13.
Nikon rules in the still world. I hate to state the obvious but the D300s is worth half of what a T2i or GH13 is worth.

My GH13 with stock lens is listed on Ebay. Offers started around $900 and is now $1200. I'm going for $1600.
 
Last edited:
Just beat it, beat it, beat it, beat it
No one wants to be defeated
Showin' how funky and strong is your fight
It doesn't matter who's wrong or right
Just beat it, beat it
Just beat it, beat it
Just beat it, beat it
Just beat it, beat it
 
James0b57 said:
Side note - He probably won't trade, because as epic a challenge as that is, he could sell the body to a photographer and then buy a GH2, if that's what he was into.
Click to expand...

Exactly.. LOL.
How about I sell my D300s and buy a GH2, and a Zoom H4n? Just because I dislike my D300 doesn't mean that I'll hurt myself economically.
 
Last edited:
In all earnestness I hope you can get a fair price... but I doubt it. Too many new models out lately. I would be surprised if you get more than $700 for it.

Again, GH2 will have better stills but inferior video to the GH13.

That leaves 5Dmk2 and GH13 as the best options for serious videographers...and T2i as the poor man's default position. Not a lot of choice with all of those options out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top