Nikon VDSLR, which one to choose?

A

ansonwong

New member
As far as I know.
Nikon has 4 models that has HD 1080 video capability.
Can anyone comments on the pro and cons on each options and perhaps make a suggestions on which one to pick?

I am thinking of getting one to shoot music videos and short film. My brother in law has a D700, so I have access to a few full frame lens...so that might be one of the considering factor.

D5100
D3100
D7000
D3s

Thanks,
Anson
 
The D7000 is the only one with full manual controls and full HD video, which you need if you want to get any good quality. However, there are workarounds you can use to get pretty good control on the D3100 or the D5100, if you're on an extreme budget like I was.
 
If you have no investment in Nikon at all then avoid Nikon at all costs. Get a Panasonic GH2 or even a Canon instead of a Nikon.
Poor old Nikon still has plenty of catching up to do.
 
iHartVideo said:
If you have no investment in Nikon at all then avoid Nikon at all costs. Get a Panasonic GH2 or even a Canon instead of a Nikon.
Poor old Nikon still has plenty of catching up to do.
Click to expand...

I woudn't necessarily agree with that in its entirity. I def. think the Nikons, while not user friendly in their ability to set your exposures, benefit from colors that are much richer and "filmic" than what comes out of the Canon's. Canon footage (camcorder and DSLR) has always appeared to my eye to be a bit unappealing when it comes to the color you get out of the cam.

If you want Nikon, D7000. I still use my D90 as well, even though its rediculous to use, due to the fact that when it does get the shot right, it looks pretty nice (other than the fact I wish it wasnt limited to 720p)
 
iHartVideo said:
If you have no investment in Nikon at all then avoid Nikon at all costs. Get a Panasonic GH2 or even a Canon instead of a Nikon.
Poor old Nikon still has plenty of catching up to do.
Click to expand...

At all costs? That's a bit extreme. There are plenty of reasons to buy Nikon over Canon. And there are also reasons to buy Canon over Nikon. And there's lots of that kind of information here on the forum which is a bit more nuanced than the above. But if you buy Nikon, the D7000 is worth the investment over the two less expensive models.
 
If you must go Nikon, then I'd only consider the D7000.

The only reason I would choose Nikon for video is if I already had a significant investment in the system or if I wanted to shoot stills just as often as video. Purely for video though, there are better options.
 
Thanks guys. When some of you say better options, what do you mean? From my basic research, VDSLR is the most economical option to get cinematic look videos. Especially when my brother in law already have full frame lens that I can borrow, he has a d700. I think a D7000 might be the best bang for the buck for me.
 
mvdm929 said:
The D7000 is the only one with full manual controls and full HD video
Click to expand...

The D5100 also has Full HD and does it at 24p, 25p and 30p, whereas the D7000 only does 24p. Shooting 25p is important to me here in Australia but it isn't necessarily important to others. The downside of the D5100 is that you can't take proper manual control over the movie exposure, you have to use hacks to get it to shoot at the settings you want.
 
I would say if you are mostly wanting a video camera avoid DSLRS at all cost. Start adding up the cost to get them to work like a video camera. Where is the XLR jack on any DSLR? I buy Nikon because I like to take pictures with Nikon and have a bunch of lenses and flashes. The D7000 looks pretty good, so do some of the Canons. I will wait and see what the D400 or D800 does with video, but more than likely my DVX100b will be replaced with a traditional video camera.
 
ansonwong said:
Thanks guys. When some of you say better options, what do you mean? From my basic research, VDSLR is the most economical option to get cinematic look videos. Especially when my brother in law already have full frame lens that I can borrow, he has a d700. I think a D7000 might be the best bang for the buck for me.
Click to expand...

The Panasonic GH2 is a far better choice. With an adapter you can use all your brothers Nikon lenses on the GH2. That's what I do as I have a significant investment in Nikon glass as I used to be an avid Nikon fan.
 
AndrewGentle said:
The D5100 also has Full HD and does it at 24p, 25p and 30p, whereas the D7000 only does 24p. Shooting 25p is important to me here in Australia but it isn't necessarily important to others. The downside of the D5100 is that you can't take proper manual control over the movie exposure, you have to use hacks to get it to shoot at the settings you want.
Click to expand...

This isn't true. You don't have to hack anything to properly expose movies on the D5100. It's ironic that Panasonic Lumix owners use the word "hack" to describe Nikon cameras. The GH1 (that I owned previously) was worthless without the GH13 "hack". And progress is underway to "hack" the GH2. My D5100 shoots better video (and substantially better still images) straight out of the box than my GH13 did hacked. And I can use 30P (29.97)!
 
iHartVideo said:
The Panasonic GH2 is a far better choice. With an adapter you can use all your brothers Nikon lenses on the GH2. That's what I do as I have a significant investment in Nikon glass as I used to be an avid Nikon fan.
Click to expand...

The Nikon adapters for the GH1/GH2 don't fully support AF(s) or metering. If you have older Nikon manual glass or the newer AF lenses with aperture rings, you are golden. If you have modern AF Nikon glass without aperture rings, a Nikon camera body (like the D7000 or the D5100) might be a better choice (especially if you take a lot of still images).

The GH13/GH2 have excellent video features such as the electronic viewfinder and direct access to manual controls. But I found the white balance, latitude, high ISO performance, and lack of frame rate selection beyond 24P (in 1080 full HD) of the GH13 and GH2 to be lacking. Additionally, the M43 2X lens crop factor is annoying as well.

There is no perfect DSLR for video shooting. The popular Canon 5DMKII was on the market for over a year before it gained manual control and 24P. The Nikon D7000 and D5100 are brand new. Let's see where Nikon goes next...
 
Bikergeek said:
If you have modern AF Nikon glass without aperture rings, a Nikon camera body (like the D7000 or the D5100) might be a better choice (especially if you take a lot of still images).
Click to expand...

You haven't actually used a GH2 have you?
There are plenty of adapter rings with aperture adjustment... I use one for my Nikon 10.5 fisheye and Sigma 10-20.


The GH13/GH2 have excellent video features such as the electronic viewfinder and direct access to manual controls. But I found the white balance, latitude, high ISO performance, and lack of frame rate selection beyond 24P (in 1080 full HD) of the GH13 and GH2 to be lacking.
Click to expand...

What you said *may* be accurate for a GH1 it is absolutely incorrect in respect to a GH2.

Spend a few minutes on Vimeo looking and check out the latitude & high ISO performance... it really is incredible.
 
iHartVideo said:
What you said *may* be accurate for a GH1 it is absolutely incorrect in respect to a GH2.

Spend a few minutes on Vimeo looking and check out the latitude & high ISO performance... it really is incredible.
Click to expand...

I auditioned a GH2 specifically for picture-taking. It was better than the GH1 but not in the same league as a Nikon or Canon. If you have found a Nikon G/DX lens adapter that allows iris control and accurate metering on the GH1/GH2, I would love to know the brand and model.
 
For picture-taking???
This is a video forum. If it's not safe to assume that video is goal #1 here, then what are the hundreds of photography forums like dpreview for?

If you're going to give advice in a video forum based upon results you found regarding photography then you should make that very clear.

For video the GH2 is heads & shoulders above the Nikons.
 
iHartVideo said:
For picture-taking???
This is a video forum. If it's not safe to assume that video is goal #1 here, then what are the hundreds of photography forums like dpreview for?

If you're going to give advice in a video forum based upon results you found regarding photography then you should make that very clear.

For video the GH2 is heads & shoulders above the Nikons.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. A DSLR is a picture and video-taking instrument. It should serve both functions well. If you are using the GH camera exclusively for video, then buy a Panasonic camcorder.

Regarding dvxuser forum etiquette, why are you trolling in the Nikon Forum telling Nikon owners that their cameras suck and to buy a Panasonic GH2. Go back to the Panasonic Forum and discuss your "superior" camera with other Panasonic owners. Please allow us "inferior" Nikon owners to share useful information rather than respond to the the bashing of the Canon and Panasonic crowd. But before you go, please tell me what Nikon to M43 adapter you are using. I still own an Olympus E-P1 and would love to use my DX lenses with the Olympus (if the adapter allows for iris adjustment and AI metering).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top