Nikon D3s for Video Television Production?

George D.

Well-known member
As professional cinematographers we are interested in the Nikon D3s for video production for television.

I need a few important questions answered before the decision can be made as to whether it will meet our demands:

1 - What is the highest quality I can expect from video shot with this camera? (RAW, JPEG ?)(max pixel size?)

2 - What is the recommended software for editing video from the Nikon D3s?

3 - What are the Windows XP requirements needed (RAM, HD capacity, etc) for downloading, storage, and editing video from the D3s?

4 - How many minutes of video can be expected, in the highest quality, from a 16GB CP card?

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.
 
Actually since I posted this, I've changed my mind due to more research, and have found the Canon ES-1D Mark IV more suitable because of it's ability to capture the video in 1080p rather than the 702p of the Nikon.

Even though, all my questions still pertain, except now it regards the Canon instead.

Thanks.
 
Actually since I posted this, I've changed my mind due to more research, and have found the Canon ES-1D Mark IV more suitable because of it's ability to capture the video in 1080p rather than the 702p of the Nikon.

Even though, all my questions still pertain, except now it regards the Canon instead.

Thanks.

If you're just planning on doing video the 5D MkII seems to be a better choice than the 1D-MkIV. If you also need a super-pro still camera then the 1D-MkIV is superior in that respect, but the 5K MkII seems to be the king of the Canons when it comes to video image quality.
 
^^yeah because the 5d mk ii is full frame (APS) versus 1.3x crop for the 1d mk iv (APS-H).

so.... low light performance of the 5d is better.
 
I think the one that monitors best is probably the best

of course the 1ds is not the best pixels per $ but that doesnt matter to everyone

S
 
It's not just the crop factor - both full frame or 1.3x crop have their advantages, but the 1dmk4 sensor is packed much more densely with pixels in a smaller area so it has to downsample/alias more than the 5D mkii does.
 
It's not just the crop factor - both full frame or 1.3x crop have their advantages, but the 1dmk4 sensor is packed much more densely with pixels in a smaller area so it has to downsample/alias more than the 5D mkii does.

I do NOT care what these cameras can do as "still" cameras. Their video capabilities is ALL I care about.

I also, do not believe sensor size matters, but more importantly, what number of pixels in 1080p HD that you end up with.

Therefore, which model do you guys think will ULTIMATELY produce the BEST, HIGHEST QUALITY, video images for television documentary production?

I apologize for my ignorance on some of this.

Thanks.
 
I do NOT care what these cameras can do as "still" cameras. Their video capabilities is ALL I care about.

I also, do not believe sensor size matters, but more importantly, what number of pixels in 1080p HD that you end up with.

Therefore, which model do you guys think will ULTIMATELY produce the BEST, HIGHEST QUALITY, video images for television documentary production?

I apologize for my ignorance on some of this.

Thanks.

I would go with the 1D, especially if you're doing documentary. Since the sensor is smaller than the 5D, the DOF is slightly deeper and its easier to control focus.

What type of documentary production are you doing? If you're doing a lot of low light than the 1D has an amazing low-light performance and low noise even at 6400 ISO.

Now if you're doing almost night vision I would go with the Nikon D3s because the low light capabilities are AMAZING on the camera. But if you're doing mostly normal lighting than I'd say the 1D is your best bet.
 
I would go with the 1D, especially if you're doing documentary. Since the sensor is smaller than the 5D, the DOF is slightly deeper and its easier to control focus.

What type of documentary production are you doing? If you're doing a lot of low light than the 1D has an amazing low-light performance and low noise even at 6400 ISO.

Now if you're doing almost night vision I would go with the Nikon D3s because the low light capabilities are AMAZING on the camera. But if you're doing mostly normal lighting than I'd say the 1D is your best bet.


Thanks, but light is not THAT big a problem for the kind of work we do. It may come into play now and then, but not as a general rule.

The "size" of the sensor is not as important as how many pixels are on it. It MUST have 1080p HD or it's worthless to me. In other words, if a smaller sensor can produce 1080p WITHOUT compression, then it would be a better choice for me.

IDEALLY, what I need, is a camera that can shoot video in 1080p HD in the RAW format. If not RAW, then the highest quality JPEG possible. THAT is the camera I'm looking for. The upcoming Scarlet, will of course, give that to me, but I can wait no longer for it's release. Promises don't make money.
 
IDEALLY, what I need, is a camera that can shoot video in 1080p HD in the RAW format. If not RAW, then the highest quality JPEG possible. THAT is the camera I'm looking for. The upcoming Scarlet, will of course, give that to me, but I can wait no longer for it's release. Promises don't make money.

RAW doesn't exist in the DSLR world (video wise). So your only option there is RED.

From the sounds of it, you probably shouldn't be looking at DSLRs at all. But if you're intent on that route, I think your choices are basically between the 5D, 7D, or GH1. And they all compress their footage.
 
RAW doesn't exist in the DSLR world (video wise). So your only option there is RED.

From the sounds of it, you probably shouldn't be looking at DSLRs at all. But if you're intent on that route, I think your choices are basically between the 5D, 7D, or GH1. And they all compress their footage.


I'm only looking for an alternative UNTIL the Scarlet is released. I just can't afford to wait forever for many reasons.

It looks to me like the BEST choice may just very well be the Canon 5D Mark II.
 
I do have to say I'm a little surprised that as a professional cinematographer, as you state you are, the sensor size is of no concern, since this will affect your decisions with regards to what lenses/focal lengths you plan to use and of course, the overall look of the project given that the sensor size directly affects depth of field.
 
I do have to say I'm a little surprised that as a professional cinematographer, as you state you are, the sensor size is of no concern, since this will affect your decisions with regards to what lenses/focal lengths you plan to use and of course, the overall look of the project given that the sensor size directly affects depth of field.

If you look at the specs and sensor size options of the RED-One and the Scarlet, you'll understand what I'm talking about and referring to. I should have phrased it differently.

**It's all irrelevant now anyway. I just found out from National Geographic Television that they will NOT accept video from any DSLR. So, THAT throws the idea right out the window and into the trash.

And, life goes on.
 
If you look at the specs and sensor size options of the RED-One and the Scarlet, you'll understand what I'm talking about and referring to. I should have phrased it differently.

**It's all irrelevant now anyway. I just found out from National Geographic Television that they will NOT accept video from any DSLR. So, THAT throws the idea right out the window and into the trash.

And, life goes on.

I am not sure what looking at the Red specs has anything to do with why you don't need to know or care what sensor size your dealing with, but like you said, your gig is gone and it's over now except for the crying.

and I thought this thread was going to get interesting ...:D
 
Back
Top