I think the following should be of interest to all lovers of Nikkor glass who would like to read and view options available for using Nikon DSLR bodies (other than D5000, D90 or D300s) without the need to buy Canon bodies with adapters, yet still able to maintain full-frame HD like the Canon 5D Mark II.

There are some very interesting videos (stop-motion) shot by Andrew Kornylack using the Nikon D3 DSLR that can be seen on his website at:

Andrew Kornylak Photography - Atlanta, Georgia, USA (http://www.akornphoto.com/)

Andrew mentions about his work using the Nikon D3 on his blog "...It is pretty close to a video look, but a little different. I can shoot with strobes (like in the Nikki Blue commercial), and the color depth of even a cropped jpeg is better than the best HD video frame. I can make 11×14 prints from a frame grab, which sweetens the pot for a client looking to do a still and motion shoot without an outrageous production..."

Note also that the Nikon D3 "S" update with HD 24fps video mode and 14 fps still shot motordrive (rumoured for launch next week) should offer even better full-frame extreme quality stop-motion options than the present D3, in addition of course to normal HD video.

It looks like the new D3s has 1280×720 pixel resolution at 24fps (no 1080p!)...and there was me wishing for 25p or 50 for all of us outside USA... I can't quite understand Nikon's reason for this as it will upset quite a lot of us waiting for full HD video version of Nikon's flagship professional camera for "Pal"-land.

The launch price in UK will be around £4,200 body only, although this will of couse lower within a short time after launch date.

Say hello to the new Nikon D3S that shoots AVI motion-jpeg at 720p. See:

Nikon unveils D3S high-speed pro DSLR: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp)

Last week, I finally broke down and bought a 7D. I had been holding off until the fabled Nikon 700x was revealed. This news makes me feel justified in my decision. For some inexplicable reason, Nikon appears to be sticking with 720p.

..I also didn't see a mention of manual control.

p.s. Welcome to dvinfo Lance. I see its your first post.

Originally posted to the 7D forum, who knows why. Moved to Photo for HD Video where it belongs.

All you need to know from a video standpoint:

Full Frame Sensor
720 24p
M-JPEG
Full Manual Control (or so it seems)
ISO 200 - 12800
$5,000 usd (give or take)

This cam is targeted at the high end photo crowd and news gathering. The movie mode doesn't seem to be for most of us, especially at that price point.

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A) pretty much sums up how I feel.

Just in case you want to see a video preview of this camera, take a look here

Digital Photography at photo-i (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/)

Just in case any of you have missed this news annoucement. The new Nikon D3s now supports video capture too, albeit only 1280x720p @24fps. Here is a short video I produced yesterday (on my EX3). Unfortunately Nikon would not let us publish pictures taken with the camera as it's a pre-production sample.

Enjoy

Digital Photography at photo-i (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/)

Have they improved on the codec and on rolling shutter jello?

I find this interesting:
"Completely configurable to set up, but extremely simple to use, Nikon’s acclaimed high-density 51-point Multi-CAM3500 AF system, with 15- highly sensitive cross points, provides users with an industry leading system for tracking fast moving subjects. The D3S contrast detection AF system has also been tuned to provide autofocus support during movie capture and Live View."

In a short word No. The increase in sensor sensitivity was very impressive, and this could be used on the movie mode too. The sample video clips Nikon showed us, were shot at night and displayed a good saturation of colour. However, the night shots shot of a bear in the wild were very noisy, the grain almost became a distraction. Having said that, the alternative would have been to shoot using a nightvision camera, this would produce an overall green image. On a couple of city shots I noticed a rolling shutter effect, this could be seen on the neon light scenes.

I think Nikon are on the right path, if only they would increase the video resolution to FullHD (1920x1080) then I think it would appeal to the video cameraman too. I did push the limited video resolution question to Nikon at the Q&A session, I noticed several journalists lowering themselves in their seats - maybe I was pushing Nikon too far.

Must remember to behave myself next time.

Well, it looks like I was right...720P and ony 24fps. Some major 'tweaks' to the orginal, but nothing mindblowing against the still photo options of the original D3. Also no full manual control over the video, although some nicer control options than the D300s. Whether it will have better quality than the D300s in 720P we will have to see, but I expect so, although the D3s' AF tracking during video will help in some situations - and that incredible high ISO capabability will improve dynamic range in low light levels - plus improvements over the rolling-shutter syndrome in earlier DSLRs.

Nikon speel:

"...Share the Vision with D-Movie Creativity
Whether on the frontlines or sidelines, the amazing ISO range of the D3S can also be applied while recording HD video clips to give unprecedented low-light ability for movie clips. The refined D-Movie mode for the FX-format offers smooth 1280x720 video at a cinematic 24fps, with a new algorithm that severely reduces the phenomenon of "rolling shutter" typical to D-SLRs while panning. The motion JPEG codec allows for easy extraction of single frames from a video clip and the ability to save it as a JPEG file, while the 720p HD format eases storage, provides faster wireless transfers, and offers video files that are generally easier to use in the field. Photographers can also trim movie clips on the fly by revising the start and end points, and save the edited clip as a copy while maintaining the original. Additionally, the D3S features a built-in monaural microphone, augmented by a stereo microphone input, which is perfect for hot-shoe microphone mounting or the use of wireless microphones for interviews or spot news.'

'Photographers and film makers alike will appreciate the full aperture control from a wide f/1.4 to f/16, as the FX-format sensor renders low-noise movie clips with outstanding clarity, aided by the large selection of renowned NIKKOR lenses to produce a dramatic depth of field. High Sensitivity Movie Mode allows the utilization of the entire ISO range to capture otherwise hidden details in challenging lighting conditions, more effectively than cameras with smaller sensors. Now, users can benefit from available natural light for applications such as telling a story in a journalistic style in the field or to create a gritty film noir masterpiece without CGI post production. While recording, users also have the ability to control exposure, and will enjoy the added benefits of improved contrast-detect type AF while in Tripod Live View mode."

The first NIKON D3s Review is out:

Nikon D3s review (http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/23422/nikon-d3s-review/)


The Nikon D3s can shoot video in the extended 102,400 ISO range...which is incredible and means that you can film during the night without a tripod! Yes, there will of course be extra grain/noise at that level, but it will be a big plus for nature filmers who need to shoot without lights.

Movie clips taken using D3s, including the Bill Frakes Ozzie movie:

D3S from Nikon (http://nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25466/D3S.html)

Here's some 720P footage I shot with the Nikon D300s last month.
I suspect the new D3s will perform about the same, but it's no subsitute for a real video camera.

Nikon D300s Movie Mode Test on Vimeo

That's weird. Why does this show up as an embedded video instead of a link to Vimeo?

Actually I like the embedded video. Maybe it's the way to go, what did you do. Oh.. great pics too.

"That's weird. Why does this show up as an embedded video instead of a link to Vimeo?"

That's technology for you Doug it moves on.

Regarding the D300s v D3s quality. It is about the same from what I saw, although the D3s does have the benefit of higher ISO capture. Either way, it's not a patch on a dedicated camcorder such as the EX1/EX3, but would suffice for the odd drop in shot here and there.

Did you buy D300s for still usage or for the ability to shoot video, or maybe both?

I fail to understand why people get so excited about SLR's with video facilities. So what? Totally wrong tool for the job.

Trying to produce a professional product on one of those things would be like trying to dig your garden with a hand trowel. What you actually needed was a spade!

Yes they have large sensors and you can get all sorts of lovely DOF shots via the various lens options. But the ergonomics are all wrong and they are simply designed for taking stills. There's enough people on here moaning that they can't get creeping zooms on their EX1's let alone trying that sort of thing on an SLR!

Can't say I'm keen on the sample footage. Nice for one off shots but horribly artificial looking. What looks stunning as a still photograph doesn't make for good video IMO. Just not my cup of tea unless it was just for one single shot preferably with little movement.

Can't say I'm keen on the sample footage. Nice for one off shots but horribly artificial looking. What looks stunning as a still photograph doesn't make for good video IMO. Just not my cup of tea unless it was just for one single shot preferably with little movement.

Maybe take a look at the price for a decent wide angle lens for the EX3 and then compare the savings on a Canon 7D with a 17-40mm zoom. Those quick drop in shots work well enough with a V-DSLR, but I take your point, a DSLR is not a replacement for a decent camcorder.

Marcus,

I totally agree with your comments and I have made similar arguments many times. A DSLR sucks for video. Period.

My purpose in buying the D300s was for another reason, and now that camera is up for sale. I'll keep shooting on my D200 for the foreseeable future.

That's weird. Why does this show up as an embedded video instead of a link to Vimeo?We're making a concentrated effort to keep eyeballs on DV Info Net. Thanks for understanding,

Well, the design of the camera may suck for video, but if you're willing to work with it, you can get pretty incredible video at a fraction of the cost of a real video camera. The hybrids aren't for everything, of course. I think the age of the hybrids has arrived, like it or not. There are advantages and there are disadvantages. Like with all cameras.

The video mode on the Nikon D3s is mainly targeted at the world press. Journalists can quickly send still shots alongside video clips for daily updates to websites and news media. There is no doubt that 720p will be a big boon for many and well capable of holding enough quality for the intended usage. Being able to produce short quality news video clips from one of the world's best pro DSLR bodies is going to be an added asset.

It is true that producing full-length feature films from the Nikon D3s DSLR is going to be a bigger headache than using say, an XL-H1s, Sony Z1 or EX1 or EX3 etc., but it will offer a huge opportunity for many of us working in wilderness or remote regions where a lack of transport means that low weight plus small bulk is the No1 priority.

I, for one, am almost ready to completely move towards carrying a DSLR for some of my expeditions. I'm sure I'd be able to produce great hour long movies for DVD & Blue-Ray using only the Nikon D3s...but whether it can fully replace all my Canon camcorder equipment and lenses is a very big question I'll need to find out over the coming months.

It might still mean that I need to carry a huge amount of stills photo + camcorder equipment for some time to come, but if that is true, I've got a sneaky suspicion that the Nikon D4 will finally make me sell all my Canon camcorder equipment. I just hope that it will provide a wider range of fps options than 24fps.

The D3s is just for 2009 Nov. The new Cameras will be out in early to mid 2010... I will be getting a D4... but it will be only for certain jobs still especially when I shoot stills but need video. My EX is still my workhorse for now.

Entire Nikon 2009/ 2010 DSLR Product Roadmap Leaked | Gadget Lab | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/07/entire-nikon-2009-2010-dslr-product-roadmap-leaked/)


Nikon D4
15.7MP (more sensitive and with less noise)
Up to 16fps with “double exposure”
ISO 200-12800 (plus extended range)
61-point AF
1080p video at 30fps
CLS control (although no flash is mentioned)

Nikon D400
13.8MP (more sensitive and with less noise)
8fps
Up to 12fps with “double exposure”
ISO 200-6400 (plus extended range)
61-point AF
1080p video at 24fps

Nikon D4x
30.2MP
ISO 100 - 6400
6fps
1080p video at 30fps

Because the always busy Mr. Chris Hurd had that added - just for Vimeo - about two days ago.

See this post where he answers your question to someone else:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/1431261-post22.html

..I also didn't see a mention of manual control.

p.s. Welcome to dvinfo Lance. I see its your first post.

Thanks for the kind welcome.

The 'road map' that Jason describes is not entirely accurate of course, although there will certainly be a Nikon D4 in the future... :)

What I can't figure out is why more video camera manufacturers don't come out with a camera that shoots really good stills, instead of re-working still cameras to shoot video.

Most video cameras already have the ability built-in to shoot a single "photo" to a card, though most not very good quality. I'm thinking maybe this is where Red's Scarlet will fill the order.

With (pro) photographers now going the way of the albatross, and companies/ad agencies use more frame grabs for print from a video shoot, this is where the money would be in my best guess.

Jonanthan

Jonathan, cameras such as the Red do already capture still 'grabs' from footage if required, and other camcorders such as the Canon XL1-H1s can shoot photo stills of just over 1MP...which is not high resolution for a single photo in today's world. Single frame in SD mode using the interval timer is good for Stop-motion footage...although as I mentioned earlier, the Nikon D3 Stop-Motion footage is far sharper and higher quality, although the XL-H1 would deliver smoother blended footage without the jaggedness of similar DSLR stitched photos.

By comparison, the Nikon D3s will capture a full 12 MP full-frame extremely high quality single photo image during video shooting (by capturing a single normal 12MP image in between video footage it means stopping the flow for a fraction of a second before continuing the filming) or the D3s can also offer single frames from the actual video footage at lower rez 1280×780 JPEGs

Hands-on test video of the Nikon D3s in action:

YouTube - NIKON D3S TEST (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMeWVE47BNk)

The above was actually filmed 2-weeks BEFORE the launch by Nikon yesterday.

Below is a direct link to Vincent's extreme low light video taken at mainly 6400-12,800 ISO:

YouTube - Vincent Munier - Summer Variations - Nikon D3s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R46ca9zBP4A&feature=related)

Obviously dull light and colours, but at such high ISO it is excellent.

or the D3s can also offer single frames from the actual video footage that can be saved as 9MP jpegs.

Not sure where you get this figure from, a frame grab from a 1280x720 clip = 2.64mb

1280x720 Frame grab of the Nikon D3s as seen on my video clip of same.

One online review quoted 9MP jpegs, but looking at all others they only quote the ability to extract 1280×780 JPEG basic still images from movie, and this seems more correct when I come to think of it. Sorry about that, Vincent. I've now edited the previous post.

Some mixed wedding stills & video footage taken at high ISO settings using the D3s:

Studio Impressions Blog Blog Archive New Nikon D3S sample images and video footage (http://www.studioimpressionsphotography.com/blog/2009/10/new-nikon-d3s-sample-images-and-video-footage/)

Thanks for posting that.

The movie clip (combination of stills and video) was enough to make you feel sea-sick, if not then poking your fingers down your throat would have the same effect.

The movies I have seen elsewhere using the high ISO settings were so noisy it could have been a good substitute for real confeti.

Having said all this, the Nikon D3s higher ISO still shots I have seen are spectacular. But at £4100 I don't think I will be buying one soon.

I know what you mean about the wedding video/stills mixed clip. I thought it was badly edited, and the short footage looked to have been taken by someone more used to shooting still images than movies. Take some seasick pills, Vincent. Lol!

Regarding the actual D3s, I think that it produces the cleanest high resolution/high ISO still images of any DSLR camera, and no other camera provides the opportunity to also film at such high ISO levels without the need for extra lighting.

I'm off to France & Italy again soon to do some filming, and will be taking camcorder equipment with me for the video and SLR equipment for the stills instead of hybrid DSLRs. I might be tempted to buy a couple of D3s bodies when I return from the trip, although waiting for the D4 update due in 2010 might be the wiser option for my type of work.

The D3s is indeed a superb camera, although it still baffles me why Nikon didn't go the whole hog and incorporate 1920 x 1080 i&p modes.

The low light still shots Nikon showed us at the press launch were nothing short of superb. As for the movie feature, Nikon said it was an additional feature to a still camera rather than being a video camera - fair coment! I guess Canon still rules in that DSLR department.

I've heard that the next Nikon pro body has full 1080 and updates more inline with what the pro-videographer requires.

The latest D3s is targeted more for the press photographer, although the earlier D3 already has a massive following of wildlife & outdoor sports photographers, so the single fps rate and 720P was a surprise move for many of us. But in reality, 720p is enough for most present broadcast applications.

The new D3s was just a tweak of updates on the D3 with added video mode almost as an afterthought.

Hopefully the D4 will not only improve video footage over the 5D & 7D, but also provide far better built-in sound recording options than any previous DSLR.

Mint-conditioned D3 bodies sell for under £2,000 in UK, so I could buy another D3 body + 5D Mark II or D3 + 7D for the same price as a single D3s.

I don't like the thought of carrying a selection of two seperate system lenses with me though, which would completely defeat the object of trying to cut down on the bulk & weight of my expedition equipment. So a couple of D3s or D4 bodies plus bag of Nikkors is my best option.

Yes, I have heard allsorts of things that the next Nikon will incorporate, we will have to wait and see.

I also use the Sony EX3 and tend to use the 1280x720 mode for most of my shooting. At first I thought this format was a waste of time, but then when I started to write to SD DVDs the problem of shooting 1920x1080 came to light, i.e. downsizing to 720x576 or 720x480 for SD desn't produce nice results. If your shooting for web then the 1920x1080 is an overkill.

There are interesting times ahead, and I also like the thought of less bulky gear for in the field work. However, for studio and other less spontanious shooting the EX3 works a treat.

I had a go at the FX1 & Z1 but never tried the Sony EX3. It seems quite a popular option for many people and I've seen some superb movies produced from it.

Like you, I see the full 1080 rez as an overkill for most present day applications in my line of work, and actually still prefer to use the Canon XL2 for footage that is eventually produced as a DVD rather than down-sizing XL-H1 HDV footage.

I'm keeping a keen eye on the Blue-Ray sales and large scale production costs, but the planet seems a lot slower than predicted in taking on HD as mainstream.

Yes the EX3 is a superb camera and with an in-expensive adaptor you can use all your Nikon lenses on the camera. Here is a link to a short clip I did using a variety of "Older" Nikon lenses.

Sony EX3 Nikon mount (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/video/SonyNikon/EX3test.html)

Sorry the quality is not top notch, I shot and uploaded the clip in less than two hours.

This combination would be an ideal setup for a wildlife photographer. Having said that, you can also get an adaptor to use on your Canon XL - I had one that I used on my XL1s.

The main advantage for me is that the EX3 uses solid state memory cards (SDHC) and the workflow is much faster than with tape.

Yes, I have been using Nikkors on all my Canon XL bodies for a number of years now.

What we want to know, Tony, is... can you see all the way to China with that thing?

I could if I bayoneted this MF Nikkor MEGA Super telephoto 1200-1700mm f/5.6-8.0 P ED IF zoom lens on it!
This "mother of all zooms" weighs 16kg!

Marcus,

I totally agree with your comments and I have made similar arguments many times. A DSLR sucks for video. Period.

My purpose in buying the D300s was for another reason, and now that camera is up for sale. I'll keep shooting on my D200 for the foreseeable future.

I am a stills photographer by trade now doing some video work. I just sold my HVX200P and am going to purchase a DSLR that shoots video as well. I like where we are headed and because I feel comfortable with the feel of a 35, video images will be easy and exiting to shoot. Lance Armstrong once replied 'It's not about the bike'. He could ride any bike and win the race. You dedicated video guys are so immersed in the technical end of it, you pay little attention to what your shooting.

Jerry mentions - "...You dedicated video guys are so immersed in the technical end of it, you pay little attention to what your shooting..."

Well, knowing many who frequent this forum, my self included, who are 'dedicated video guys' with a deep and longterm knowledge of using SLRs and DSLRs at a professional level, I would have to say that your comments don't quite ring true... :)

Hi Tony, I don't mean to be negative in any way, most of the post's that I read deals with just that. What I am trying to say is that I enjoy what I do, and I am inspired to see such beautiful images coming from canon and nikon products at that level. I don't shoot feature films, and if I did I would probably look at the equipment to use in a different light.However, I still feel strongly where DSLR'S are going. The only thing I am not happy with is, is how these companies that produce this equipment might be treating us. There is not one camera that is perfect, that has everything we want, hopefully that will come one day. Years ago typesetters laughed at computers and how type was dealt with, where are they now. Photographs are more easily accessible to my clients today. I hear a lot, 'I have a digital camera , I'll shoot it'. So be it, they may have the best camera in the world, doesn't mean they'll get the shot.Because there are so many products coming out these day's, and changing so fast I have not yet decided which way to go, but I will make up my mind soon because it will always be this way. I am trying to hear from others and there experiences with equipment they've tried. If your ever visiting the Niagara region look me up and I will invite you our house to share a good glass of wine.

The bottom line has to be, that both cameras will serve their purpose. I personally like the idea of being able to mix footage from both camera types into a final project. As long as the story or message is conveyed in a visually stimulating way then it doesn't matter what you use.

From running my own web site I quickly found out that there are many people who just like to tinker with equipment, they don't produce earth shattering photographs or movies, but they enjoy what they do. I am not critical of the "tinkerers", far from it, they often supply tips and techniques which we can all benefit from.

In recent months I have seen some amazing clips produced with DSLR cameras, some of these mini movies would not have seen the light of day had it not been for the small cameras. Progress marches on, and I am sure things can only get better. None of us who are serious about our movies should burry our head in the sand and dissmiss the DSLR, it is here to stay.

You dedicated video guys are so immersed in the technical end of it, you pay little attention to what your shooting.

It's not that us video guys want to be technical but proper moving image acquisition with equipment that has the form factor/mechanics of a DSLR is so frustrating difficult, if not impossible. The ergonomics of any of them is a real nightmare. "Proper" here has nothing to do with the image sensor, the recording codec, type of media or output. It's more about how one acquires moving images and sound in the manner that the final pre or post production output, be it action, drama, comedy, documentary, commercial, educational or even religious, is viewed as acceptable by ordinary viewers as these are fundamental to good motion pictures. Proper focusing, steadying of the image, consistency of exposure (as panning or changing reflectance in the scene causes unlocked exposure to shift), clear and audible dialogues with other secondary noises recorded only as intended.

Without a proper mounting rig, rails, follow focus mechanism, mattebox, filters and a separate audio recording system (a preamp box such as a DSLR-specific Beachtek is the alternative) and maybe more, most of the video DSLRs today are next to useless as a professional video tool. Fully pimped, any of them can be useful in producing images with low noise and shallow depth of field to the degrees most real video cameras usually fall short. But shooting has to be under controlled environments where almost every filming element such as lighting, sound and the subject's movement or composition is pre-arranged and can be controlled.

I can only think of one area where the use of a stand-alone DSLR to shoot video is suitable, breaking news or paparazzi-type video clips. This is where focusing accuracy, steady image, fidelity of dialogues don't count as much as getting the footage.

New NIKON website now up and running for the latest NIKON D3s:

Nikon D3S (http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/microsite/d3s_d3x/special/en/index.html)

Honestly, canon is beating nikon's butts in the video dslr market. The combination of awful rolling shutter, awful codec, and no manual controls is really destroying the market. Honestly the canon hv30/hfs100 (I would know i own an hfs100) is a higher quality video camera than any of the nikon dslr with video. I think that ppl should just go for the hfs100 or hv30. Seriously it has basically full manual control, mic, audio control etc. Not mention it basically rivals the quality of the xh a1 (and basically is on par iq wise). The most annoying thing is from nikon, beside the lack of manual control, is their codec I would be slightly content if their codec was usable. I am in the market to buy a d90, and I really want a video feature similar to the 7d, but nikon isn't going anywhere so far with video. The d90 will be my first dslr and like the option alot better than the t1i or 50d from canon. Those are really the only cameras in my price range. Plus it is a reassurance from canon because canon makes video cameras, nikon doesn't! (OMG)

I don't mean to still this thread but I am in the market for a nikon d90, a canon t1i, or canon 50d. Do you have any recommendations? My only nikon lens is an old 1.4 50mm mf lens in mint condition.