what's better about the D3s over the D90??

K

keeganuhl

Member
So, besides the low light sensitivity, is there really anything new or better about the D3s video capabilities?



Here is a web series I shoot on the D90:http://www.guessagain.net
I am waiting for a reason to upgrade the cameras we are shooting it on. For now, the most tempting thing is the Canon 7D! But its still twice what a D90 costs, and I'm not convinced its that much better.



When will Nikon answer the Canon call and give us 1080p recording at 24fps and 60fps??



I guess we'll have to wait and see. And in the meantime, maybe pick up a 7D body to put behind my Nikon glass...



Cheers!
Keegan
 
My only complaint with the D90 is lack of manual controls. Really I would not buy the D3s for it's video functions, there are better video options at that price range.

D90 is great, although I don't know why Nikon won't give us manual controls. Seems silly.

I imagine the main reason why Nikon is behind on the video is because they don't design and manufacture their sensors in house, which creates more lag time between idea and development. Where on the other hand Canon produces their own sensors and seems to have the edge in the developmental area. Nikon will eventually catch up. But the wise word is to buy what you need now, and not wait on products that don't exist.

The D90 is just as capable as any other HD Cam in the right hands depending on your needs, it just takes a bit longer to understand it, as you probably already know.
 
Hey Keegan just watched episode 6 - awesome stuff mate :)

I agree, for video there are much better options out there than the new D3s.
 
Probably without a doubt the D3s has better video than the D90 but if you were going to spend $5,000 for video you shouldn't be buy a DSLR. You should get a video camera
 
Hands On, Videocentric Review of the D3S?

Hands On, Videocentric Review of the D3S?

I'm interested in the D3s, but I'm reserving judgment until I see more than just a couple of sample videos & a press release.

Have there been any in-depth reviews of the D3s by a videographer? I want to know about Manual Controls, audio input, and autofocus, as well as the low-light performance.
 
artforme said:
I imagine the main reason why Nikon is behind on the video is because they don't design and manufacture their sensors in house, which creates more lag time between idea and development.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the D3 sensor is an 'in house' sensor. My understanding is that except for the very first top shelf Nikon digital, all of the top shelf Nikons have in house developed sensors. It's not that Nikon can't develop sensors for other of their range - they make semiconductors and other highly technical materials after all - it's that it's cheaper to outsource.

I agree with your sentiments in every regard. The D90 can produce terrific video.
 
damonb said:
My understanding is that the D3 sensor is an 'in house' sensor. My understanding is that except for the very first top shelf Nikon digital, all of the top shelf Nikons have in house developed sensors. It's not that Nikon can't develop sensors for other of their range - they make semiconductors and other highly technical materials after all - it's that it's cheaper to outsource.

I agree with your sentiments in every regard. The D90 can produce terrific video.
Click to expand...

While they do design their sensors, I don't think they own the manufacturing designs, and there are rumors that they get their sensors from Sony, whom as a vested interest in DSLRs and Camcorders. So if Sony does in fact own the manufacturing plants, they actually have final say on what type of sensors Nikon can and can not develop. And while Nikon could of course go somewhere else, if they already have a vested interest in Sony's manufacturing ability, they may not want to rush off to another manufacturer or develop their own sensor manufacturing abilities. So maybe it's Sony whom is holding Nikon back in the world of video...

This is only speculation, but I read a bit of tech news...

According to dpreview.com the D3s' sensor manufacturer origin is unknown.
 
I too heard that Nikon sensors were made by Sony. Ever since the D90 it's had me thinking that an F35/CineAlta/Nikon marriage is right around the corner.

Livin' the Dream.
 
Saw this posted on another forum, thought others might be interested. It's about the Nikon D3/D700 FX sensor.

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/scene/24/index.htm

The article states that that sensor is indeed being developed inhouse by Nikon. I believe Nikon also developed their own sensor for the older Nikon D2h.

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/scene/07/index.htm

Anyway, the sensor is just one part of the camera. Not the entire part. There's also the EXPEED processor and various other chips which I believe are Nikon designed and developed. And those chips and processors are on various Nikon DSLRs and P&S cameras to varying degrees.

Would the fact they don't manufacture their own sensors for their DX line of cameras limit video functionality? I doubt it. I reckon there is more to it than that. Also, Nikon isn't the only one buying sensors from Sony :)
 
not much... the video resolution is improved, that's a fact. But so the d300s. By the samples, it seems to give true 720p resolution where the d90 is marginally better than Standard Definition

Thom Hogan said also this:


  • The D3s video is improved over Nikon's previous iterations. In particular, the rolling shutter effect is minimized by about half. Unfortunately, all CMOS-based sensors are going to have some rolling shutter artifacts, but at least the D3s has minimized the worst of the problem.
  • The video user has control of aperture and shutter speed, and the ability to select an Auto ISO barrier. Moreover, the exposure flickering we sometimes see on previous Nikon DSLR video implementations seems to have improved (these flickers were caused by using the ISO to change exposure).
The D3s only makes sense for you if you need a very high sensibility. This is really something
 
Thanks, Beckspace, for the Thom Hogan review. I work in industrial photography, and the high sensitivity is very attractive to me...shooting video of black locomotives in a sprawling railyard at night is not easy at all.
 
I think you'd want to be a photojournalist or a very serious still photographer as well as film maker to lump for the D3S. If you're starting out, for the price I don't see that what the D3S offers in video would substitute for a D90 or D300S with a solid fluid head tripod, basic light kit and good sound. Or the pay for an actor or two.

Incidentally, it's all going CMOS - less power needed and lower noise output = easier to sell and better result (mostly).

Edit: Does anyone know if the current slew of dslr cinema rigs adjust as standard for the D3S, or the D90 with battery grip with the baseplate they provide? I'm thinking here about Redrock, Cavision, Proaim, etc. .
 
Last edited:
Has anybody heard if the D3s will have full manual in Video mode?
 
The number one reason why the D3s is touted as a superior image acquisition tool than the D90 is because the D3s has an image sensor that is the equivalent size of a 35mm Film SLR camera earning the D3s the "FX" badge of honor - while the D90's DX image sensor, also called an "APS-C", is somewhat smaller. Nikon "DX" sensors measure 23.7 x 15.7 mm, while the full frame "FX" sensor measures 36 X 24 mm.

Both cameras have a similar amount of pixel power 12.3mp, however, the full frame "FX" sensor - with its larger size - captures more available light while allowing for the individual light capturing electronic pixels to be larger. even though the "DX" sensor found in the D90 has the same amount of pixels, those pixels have less of an area to populate making for a much more crowded space.

The crop factor on the Nikon APS-C sensor is 1.5X meaning a 50mm lens used on the D90 translates to about a 75-80mm 35 mm equivalent.

Hope that was not to wordy, and that the info helps
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top