# D90 for Real?



## manaheim (Aug 25, 2008)

http://www.dailytech.com/Nikon+D90+DSLR+Images+Specs+Leaked/article12768.htm

Captures video?  God.  Shoot me.


----------



## epp_b (Aug 25, 2008)

Video?  Blech.  Sounds like a tickbox feature to me, and yet another unnecessary thing to crank up the price.

But, hey, more power to them if it means I can get a D80 on the cheap


----------



## tirediron (Aug 26, 2008)

I don't understand why you want video on an SLR either...


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Aug 26, 2008)

I don't see why it's such a bad idea. I mean, I would never want video; but the market the D90 is aimed at might have people that do. I mean, it's a consumer camera; not professional.


----------



## Samriel (Aug 26, 2008)

It doesn't seem that the price of the D90 is going to be pushed up because of it's video capability, so I don't see anything wrong with it - as Trenton Romulox said, for the market it's aimed at, it's a very good marketing move. I only hope that the video feature is properly executed and not "just" a marketing trick. I can already see many mommies and daddies with not much interest in photography getting the D90.
What I really want to know is what sensor is inside it.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 26, 2008)

_It's an awesome idea!!!_  Video would *ROCK* on a dSLR with *INTERCHANGEABLE* lenses!!! If it's even 720p I'll buy one *JUST* for the video!!!

It's only luddites that can't see this. And it's OK for them... Let them buy a d40 :thumbdown: LOL!!!


----------



## tirediron (Aug 26, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> _It's an awesome idea!!!_ Video would *ROCK* on a dSLR with *INTERCHANGEABLE* lenses!!! If it's even 720p I'll buy one *JUST* for the video!!!
> 
> It's only luddites that can't see this. And it's OK for them... Let them buy a d40 :thumbdown: LOL!!!


 
Hmmm, I'm not entirely sure I think of myself as a luddite. The reason I don't see the point in having video in an SLR is the same reason I don't see the point in an 18-200mm lens, the spork, or Swiss Army knives with 84 tools. The simple fact is, anytime something is designed for more than one use, there are compromises. This is fine in a $200 P&S camera, but those who are paying for an SLR [ostensibly] want SLR results. I find it very difficult to belive that the D90 is going to be able to achieve the same performance scores in high-ISO, low noise, etc of it's existing cousins, _and_ record video.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Aug 26, 2008)

You'd be surprised how many people in the store ask me if the SLR's do video...


....and hold them out at arms length just because it's "digital".


----------



## Mike_E (Aug 26, 2008)

I the other thread I pointed out that this would be great for wedding shooters and I still think so.  Not only do you get an extra body but video to help you close the sale.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 26, 2008)

I didn't understand why people would want a camera on their phone. It's a useless feature any way you'd look at it, but never underestimate the customers. Someone somewhere may find a use for it.

Mind you give it time. The D90 isn't out yet. Plenty of time for the Nikon marketing machine to convince us all that we need video on SLRs.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 26, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> _It's an awesome idea!!!_ Video would *ROCK* on a dSLR with *INTERCHANGEABLE* lenses!!! If it's even 720p I'll buy one *JUST* for the video!!!
> 
> It's only luddites that can't see this. And it's OK for them... Let them buy a d40 :thumbdown: LOL!!!


 
I'm not a luddite, I'm a SNOB goddamnit!!!


----------



## Overread (Aug 26, 2008)

Granted the video will never be as good as a dedicated video camera  but I can't see its inclusion as damaging to the cameras ability to capture photographs.
And note that if studio photography is your thing then I can well understand video not being desirable or nessessary - but consider those who take their DSLR on holiday or wildlife shooter or press - the ability to take a video can capture sometimes more of a sight than a photo can -- and the ability to do both with one system means its far cheaper and lighter (I can't see many wildlifers carrying an SLR+lenses+tent+other stuff as well as a video camera when out trekking - just too much to carry all at once


----------



## Samriel (Aug 26, 2008)

tirediron said:


> The simple fact is, anytime something is designed for more than one use, there are compromises. This is fine in a $200 P&S camera, but those who are paying for an SLR [ostensibly] want SLR results. I find it very difficult to belive that the D90 is going to be able to achieve the same performance scores in high-ISO, low noise, etc of it's existing cousins, _and_ record video.



Isn't the whole DXX series basically a compromise? I'd try and keep an open mind until we can play around with it a bit. There can be miracles. :mrgreen:


----------



## Overread (Aug 26, 2008)

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=133360
I knew we had this discussion before

interesting to read that the video might only be 700pixels


----------



## tirediron (Aug 26, 2008)

Samriel said:


> Isn't the whole *DXX* series basically a compromise? I'd try and keep an open mind until we can play around with it a bit. There can be miracles. :mrgreen:


 
Did you mean 'DX' as in APS-C format, and if so, how is that a compromise?


----------



## rdompor (Aug 26, 2008)

^^

Actually, I think he meant DXX as in D70, D80, D90.


----------



## Samriel (Aug 26, 2008)

rdompor said:


> ^^
> 
> Actually, I think he meant DXX as in D70, D80, D90.



And you are right. :mrgreen: But I also meant the D40, D50 and D60. Every model except the top models is a compromise, and I'm far too poor at the moment not to compromise.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 26, 2008)

Garbz said:


> I didn't understand why people would want a camera on their phone. It's a useless feature any way you'd look at it, but never underestimate the customers. Someone somewhere may find a use for it.



See, this is exactly what I mean by luddite. Basically resisting change,  and out of touch with the device in question's use. 

Sorry Garbz but I know you're cool and won't take it personally. Manaheim too but he would just laugh it off. 

Old guys and luddites use a cell phone as a phone only. People that have had one since day one realize it is indeed a camera, a text messager, a video camera, a web browser, an appointment book, a calendar, an alarm clock, an MP3 player, an interactive GPS location device and map-book, a TV, a movie player, a video phone, a calculator, an audio recorder (voice memo), an answering machine, a game machine, a radio,  and if you get a few of them together even [ame=http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj6SZgbBuSQ]a popcorn popper[/ame].   And they all use them for all those things naturally without even thinking that what they're holding in their hand grew out of and is "supposed to be" only a telephone. Here in these contrasting examples you can see the definition of a luddite as I used the term in my sentence above. 

If you're not in favor of video in a dSLR you *ARE* a luddite whether you think you are or not.

If you think there's no advantage to having a video recording abilities in a dSLR just go price any HD camera that features interchangeable lenses!!! You're talking five figures before you even get started. I paid $62,000.00 for my last one. So why would any sane person not what a $20k ~ $30k camera for free with their $1k dSLR? Movie recording on a dSLR is coming whether or not the d90 is the 1st to market with it - so get used to it or admit your luddism and accept the fact that you're turning up your noses at $20k worth of free technology. 


PS: I'm pretty drunk right now (seeing two or three letters appear for every key I press) so I hope that made sense.


----------



## tasman (Aug 26, 2008)

I though I read from someone else on this forum that the image sensors on a DSLR are to sensitive to be able to be in a live view mode or to capture video. So how does the live view or vidoe capture work?


----------



## manaheim (Aug 26, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> See, this is exactly what I mean by luddite. Basically resisting change, and out of touch with the device in question's use.
> 
> Sorry Garbz but I know you're cool and won't take it personally. Manaheim too but he would just laugh it off.
> 
> ...


 
 I laugh nothing off... well, except your typing a message that long coherrently while drunk. 

Speaking specifically to your cell phone example, you would probably call me a luddite because I disdain certain aspects of my phone/pda/email thing/bottle washer...

I disdain these things, however, not because "it's a phone, damnit! you whippersnappers need to use it as a phone and stop your tomfoolery!" but rather because a lot of these devices do 15,000 things, and do all of them POORLY.

The device I have does email actually quite well, so I have no problem with that. The browser, however, regularly completely crashes the device and is horribly ill-suited to display the typical web pages of today just on size alone. The calendar thing is GREAT, and works awesome, but god save you if you want to make a simple phone call without risking a crash. Overall the whole thing is so delicate that all of the operations I might like to do with it, I don't dare do, because if I just use it for the basics it crashes about 1-2x a week, requiring this laborious and slow restart process.

I can't stress enough... it even makes for a CRAPPY PHONE, which is kind of the key and core of what the stupid thing should be anyway.

Now, I am not a videographer, but I used the video functions on my point and shoot digital cameras pretty frequently, and they kinda sucked. I mean whatever... they were fun and it was easy, but they really did kinda suck. The device just wasn't really made for that.

So my thing with the D90 is that it may be the same... sure, it works, but it kinda sucks. And since this is a device that wasn't really intended for that, what are we doing to it to make that work? Sustained wear on the mirror from lockup? What about the issues that may result from the sensor being left on? Don't we sit here and tell people over and over again that the sensors heat up and talk about all the problems that causes, etc? Or will they make compromises on either sensor quality or capability to compensate? Or will they just gimp the video to smaller res (as it sounds like they have) and/or short capture time frames (as one of my older P&S cameras did), thus making it way less useful anyway?

I mean, whatever... people want it, people will buy it, so put it in. I'm not gonna scream as long as I'm not paying extra money for something I don't really want.

It's just that, in general, I would rather have far fewer things that work well, than a cornicopia of _crap_. 

EDIT: Added the last  because I was laughing when I said it.  I mean it, but I was still laughing.


----------



## Moglex (Aug 26, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> See, this is exactly what I mean by luddite. Basically resisting change,  and out of touch with the device in question's use.
> 
> Sorry Garbz but I know you're cool and won't take it personally. Manaheim too but he would just laugh it off.
> 
> ...



You are typing absolute twaddle.

What you are effectively saying is that if you take *any* piece of technology and add the function of *any* other piece of technology, anyone who thinks that is a bad idea is a luddite.

And this is ignoring the fact that you are using the term 'luddite' incorrectly as they were a group who opposed technolgy for *economic* reasons rather that philosophical/technological/aesthetic ones.

Most people (including children) use the majority of extra functions on a mobile phone just a few times to impress themselves with what a marvel their new phone is. They quickly realise that the compromises made to enable them to fit in a package with the appropriate ergonomics for a phone are too significant. Note that I said 'most' that still leaves a sizable minority that do use a phone for two or three functions.



> If you think there's no advantage to having a video recording abilities in a dSLR just go price any HD camera that features interchangeable lenses!!! You're talking five figures before you even get started. I paid $62,000.00 for my last one. So why would any sane person not what a $20k ~ $30k camera for free with their $1k dSLR? Movie recording on a dSLR is coming whether or not the d90 is the 1st to market with it - so get used to it or admit your luddism and accept the fact that you're turning up your noses at $20k worth of free technology.



More complete twaddle.

If a $1k camera has video then by definition it is not $20k of free technology. It is $1k of technology which has had some extra technology grafted on.

Doing that grafting *will* have cost money that could otherwise have been spent on improving some aspect of the camera's prime function or reducing the price so that the purchaser could spend the money saved of something they actually want.

Of course, if the manufactirer is aiming the device at a specific market segment that really does want a DSLR with true video features, than that is quite sensible.

It just doesn't mean that people who would reject if for their own use because it incorperates unnecessary functionality are luddites.


----------



## Tolyk (Aug 26, 2008)

I wonder how well they'll make it auto-focus in video mode. It's effectively the same as Live View, meaning they'll have to drop the mirror to focus for you, unless you're manually focusing.

I can picture people trying to hold it at arms length and manual focus now...... *chuckle*

I know there's the use of a tripod, but the instant advantage of camcorders over an SLR with movie abilities is that faster focusing and the portability.


Oh, and Switch, I get a lot of people asking that same question.


----------



## andrew99 (Aug 26, 2008)

Auto-focus is an interesting point. Also will you be able to record video only in live-view mode?  And what about the aspect ratio and resolution.  Anyway, this camera will be interesting, I'm still getting used to the idea of speakers and a microphone!  That other thread with the D90 parody might have more truths than the author realized, how long until DSLRs do play MP3's?


----------



## dEARlEADER (Aug 26, 2008)

the feature isn't high on my list.... i'd prefer money spent on better dynamic range... but having said that.... i'd most likely use it here and there.... especially some off the trail landscape/waterfalls type stuff or impromptu behaviour etc...  maybe a 1080p of a humming bird or something...

i carry a small vid cam in my camera bag for this kinda stuff but it's not 720 or 1080...


----------



## MelodySoul (Aug 26, 2008)

manaheim said:


> I disdain these things, however, not because "it's a phone, damnit! you whippersnappers need to use it as a phone and stop your tomfoolery!" but rather because a lot of these devices do 15,000 things, and do all of them POORLY.


 
Bingo! 

Also how can one not see the benefit of a spork? It's call cup o' noodles. 

:mrgreen:


----------



## jvgig (Aug 26, 2008)

I am really failing to understand why anybody would be unhappy about this!

We have to remember that in a digital world, everything is exactly the same, 1's and 0's.  Thus it is all processed with the same technology, stored on the same media, etc.  So now all we have different from a video camera to a still camera is how long the sensor can remain on and how fast the processor needs to be.  In a still camera they sacrifice time for better image quality (size, dynamic range, etc), but in a video camera they go the other way.  Since the goal of both a still camera and a video camera is to take light and translate it into digital data which can be read to display an image as close to life as possible, it is only a matter of when the engineers will figure out how to combine the two into the same device.  A video camera is only a still camera that captures 24 frames (or more) per second.  

As nanotechnology improves, efficiency improves, as efficiency improves, power consumption decreases, as power consumption decreases, less heat is produced, as less head is produced, you can take more pictures faster.  The question we need to ask is when technology will allow us to take an image sensor that can capture 20+mp images over 24 times a second over a long period of time.  This is still some time to come, but in the mean time, if they can figure out how to only use part of the sensor for video which results in less heat and thus allows them to leave it on longer, then we seem to have a winner.  Sure, it wont capture the 8mp images that a $100,000 professional video camera will, but if it can sustain a measly 1mp over a few minutes at 24 fps with a basic audio input for a simple mic, then they will have an extremely successful product not only among parents and amateur photographers, but also among amateur videographers who don't have the funds to purchase that $50,000 camcorder with interchangeable lenses. 

This is the first generation of such a product and will certainly have some bugs to work out.  It may only be able to capture standard definition video for 30sec, but without a single bit of hesitation, I can say that the engineers will improve on every aspect of its video recording capabilities with every new model.  Within a few years *EVERY *dslr will have this feature from your $500 consumer model to your $8,000 professional benchmark camera.  There is absolutely no reason that it will not go in this direction.  The only thing I am not 100% sure about is how long this will take, it may be in the next generation of cameras, it may be 2 or 3 away, maybe more, but it will happen and when it does, there is no turning back.


----------



## K_Pugh (Aug 26, 2008)

I must be a luddite, too.. i HATE the idea of video on SLR's, video and liveview etc etc, to me it is just a gimmick and a selling point just to broaden the market. Speakers on an SLR.. i really don't have any words for it lol.

What next, Internet browsing? TV? MP3? GuitarHero? Games? Leave all that for the mobile phones! 

More crap means more messing about, more menus to go through, more buttons that we wont use.. all that jazz. Nice! (jazz cat voice required).

I guess the Dxx range is the entry level and as such "noobs" will be buying them (i've got a D80 so don't flame me), especially as the prices keep dropping and these features just attract them even more - you could say it was inevatible?

I'm a simple man with simple plans.

It's like door salesmen. If i wanted new dougle glazed windows i'd call someone up to get an estimate when i want them.. i ain't going to wait for someone to come to my door trying to throw them in my face!

ack, consumerism, eh?

where's that Leica brochure?


*just a side note. what does this mean for the sensor being 'on' for so long recording video.. i'm assuming they're less prone to heat etc now?.. what's the chances of more dust gathering on the sensor?, i just don't like the idea of it.*


----------



## bhop (Aug 26, 2008)

Technology sucks...


----------



## jvgig (Aug 26, 2008)

technology does not suck, the only things that suck are those who fail to use technology to their advantage


----------



## Overread (Aug 26, 2008)

I don't think the sensor being on longer should affect dust by that much = key dust problem times are changing the lens - and even then one can leave the camera on with no ill effect (if one has luck). Once the lens is connected to the camera dust should not get in (even the canon 100-400D should not let that much dust into the actual system)


----------



## Antithesis (Aug 26, 2008)

bhop said:


> Technology sucks...



Agree'd. Consumer electronics are even worse . I want my camera to take pictures through a removable lens and do a good job of it. No more, no less.


----------



## bhop (Aug 26, 2008)

I was only kidding.. i like technology.   I love my computer, I love digital music, I love my iPhone and everything it does.  (solitaire is great on it, heh, heh) but I don't think i'd ever use a video feature in an SLR.  I don't really care if it's there as long as it doesn't compromise anything on the still photo end.  I have owned some point and shoots with video and never used them.  One thing is it takes up too much card space that I could use for still photos, another is the quality is never really that great compared to a dedicated video camera.


----------



## usayit (Aug 26, 2008)

I think its pretty neat that the D90 can do video... especially if it is aimed at a typical consumer.  Me personally, I hate video... it doesn't interest me one bit BUT it would be nice to switch to video and record my son doing his various "firsts" as he grows up.  I could care less if that clip isn't as nice as a dedicated video camera.... I would use the D90 in video mode knowing full well of that compromise.

Now... if you tell me they are making a Leica M9 with video capability... I'd have a different feeling as it doesn't fit the basic design concept of a Leica rangefinder.  



Bifurcator said:


> Old guys and luddites use a cell phone as a phone only. .....
> 
> PS: I'm pretty drunk right now (seeing two or three letters appear for every key I press) so I hope that made sense.



I agree to a certain extent....  I like dedicated tools because they do a single job very well which IMO is much much better than a tool that does many things "just ok".  Cell phones are a distinct example of this observation.



Just playing devils advocate.

We see 3fps... bleh.
We see 6fps... ok better
We see 10fps... NICE!

What if we see 20 fps, 30 fps, 60 fps, .... up until we are basically shooting video.  Would we still have positive things to say or suddenly would we all be saying its all crap?


I perfer to shoot with all primes... does that make me a luddite?


----------



## epp_b (Aug 26, 2008)

> What if we see 20 fps, 30 fps, 60 fps, .... up until we are basically shooting video. Would we still have positive things to say or suddenly would we all be saying its all crap?


Technically, the human mind cannot perceive still images at 12 fps. Transitions become smooth at 20-25 fps.


----------



## roadkill (Aug 26, 2008)

I like eggs


----------



## Tolyk (Aug 26, 2008)

roadkill said:


> I like eggs


 And ham?


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 26, 2008)

manaheim said:


> I laugh nothing off... well, except your typing a message that long coherrently while drunk.
> 
> Speaking specifically to your cell phone example, you would probably call me a luddite because I disdain certain aspects of my phone/pda/email thing/bottle washer...
> 
> I disdain these things, however, not because "it's a phone, damnit! you whippersnappers need to use it as a phone and stop your tomfoolery!" but rather because a lot of these devices do 15,000 things, and do all of them POORLY.





I hear you.  But for video on a dSLR it won't be like that. The dSLR will still work exactly the same. Also most of the bad points you mention further down in your post, about video on a point and shoot will be remedied by the large video size and the manual functions (f/... ISO, and focus) inherent on a dSLR.

Also K_Pugh, etc., don't take it as an insult being the luddites that you are  as it's not really a put-down so much as it is a frame of mind (and/or opinion) about the evolution of dSLRs.  It's not evil to dislike a new feature. I totally dislike the evolution of build materials in dSLRs for example. 

And if the video _is_ crappy then I won't like it either! So nya nya.


----------



## reg (Aug 26, 2008)

Just as a side note: it's interesting to think of a whole new breed of amateur (I'm thinking Napoleon Dynamite, on that level) videography, with full manual control and possibility for bokeh all that...


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 26, 2008)

usayit said:


> I
> Just playing devils advocate.
> 
> We see 3fps... bleh.
> ...



Exactly! :thumbup:




> I perfer to shoot with all primes... does that make me a luddite?



Good point. Like zooms and primes video is coming as an additional feature and not a replacement technology so luddite is probably an inappropriate term. OOPS


----------



## K_Pugh (Aug 27, 2008)

lol nah i didn't take it as an insult.. i know i'm a luddite! not that i don't like technological advances, i'm all for that obviously.. but a so-so video feature in a DSLR doesn't sound like much of a technological advancement to me. 

the thing about the dust. I just meant that the sensor may be more susceptible to dust in video mode if the camera is getting moved around constantly perhaps stirring up the dust.. probably not, buy you never know  i'm just looking for put this video malarkey to shame!


----------



## Moglex (Aug 27, 2008)

Tolyk said:


> And ham?



Are the eggs green?


----------



## andrew99 (Aug 27, 2008)

More D90 news over at Strobist:  http://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/08/nikon-d90-kickass-video-from-you-know.html


----------



## roadkill (Aug 27, 2008)

They are this morning


----------



## tasman (Aug 27, 2008)

So, to answer my question. If you can use live view mode and shoot video in live view mode, then there must be two sensors.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

K_Pugh said:


> lol nah i didn't take it as an insult.. i know i'm a luddite! not that i don't like technological advances, i'm all for that obviously.. *but a so-so video feature in a DSLR* doesn't sound like much of a technological advancement to me.
> 
> the thing about the dust. I just meant that the sensor may be more susceptible to dust in video mode if the camera is getting moved around constantly perhaps stirring up the dust.. probably not, buy you never know  i'm just looking for put this video malarkey to shame!



Well that's just it. It's impossible for the feature to be "so-so" if it's on a dSLR.

They couldn't muck it up unless they actually _tried hard_ to do so. 

All the components for awesomeness are there. HQ Glass, Manual zoom, Manual focus, tracking (servo) focus, Aperture, large CMOS, large frame sizes (1080p, 1080i, or 720p - any of which can be used in professional cinematography), manual white balance, etc..


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

tasman said:


> So, to answer my question. If you can use live view mode and shoot video in live view mode, then there must be two sensors.



No, of course not.


----------



## Moglex (Aug 27, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Well that's just it. It's impossible for the feature to be "so-so" if it's on a dSLR.
> 
> They couldn't muck it up unless they actually _tried hard_ to do so.



Not really true, though, is it?

The problems would be exatly the same as those the manufacturers of real VR's have particularly relating to how that much data is handled and compressed.

Also it's no accident that SLR's have generally remained SLR shape and VR's have had a very different shape even though it's technically possible to make either in the shape of the other.

Then you have problems with the optimum ergonomics being somewhat different between the two classes of kit.


----------



## tasman (Aug 27, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> No, of course not.


 Then how do you get live view?


----------



## bhop (Aug 27, 2008)

http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/d-movie/

After watching this link of "d-movie" samples.  I think it's actually not a bad idea.. 
lens selection, manual focusing and matrix metering on video.. nice


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 27, 2008)

There is only one sensor, you program the sensor to do both, video and pictures....


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

tasman said:


> Then how do you get live view?


 
Are you wondering how the video "gets through" the mirror in the way of the sensor?  If so, I believe the mirror locks up out of the way and the video is taken as if you were just recording everything happening in live view for X period of time.


----------



## tasman (Aug 27, 2008)

prodigy2k7 said:


> There is only one sensor, you program the sensor to do both, video and pictures....


 Oh. Ok. Thanks.


----------



## tasman (Aug 27, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Are you wondering how the video "gets through" the mirror in the way of the sensor? If so, I believe the mirror locks up out of the way and the video is taken as if you were just recording everything happening in live view for X period of time.


 I wasnt sure if thats the way it happened.


----------



## Samriel (Aug 27, 2008)

Now that it's been announced, I think Nikon seems to have done quite a good job with the D90. Expected small upgrades, CMOS sensor, and the addition of video will make this camera sell a lot.
Of course video is not really necessary. However, as people have already pointed out, the average consumer looking for a camera with better image quality will love it. And the DXX series is still mostly about consumers.
Several photojournalists I know also told me that they would like a camera with video functionality. As Hooligan_Dan said in another thread, some might be opting for a D90 as a backup.
I like the recent Nikon camera models - makes me optimistic about the future (looking forward to a D700 in 2 years or so). If they would only finally get some AF-S primes out (hopefully at a more or less similar price to the present ones...), it would be perfect.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

tasman said:


> Then how do you get live view?



All video cameras have live view.

Basically just think of it as splitting the feed. One goes to a processor where it's scaled down for the LCD and the other goes to the engine that formats the stream and writes it to the memory card.

Simple.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

bhop said:


> http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/d-movie/
> 
> After watching this link of "d-movie" samples.  I think it's actually not a bad idea..
> lens selection, manual focusing and matrix metering on video.. nice



See... Told ya.   The dSLR facilities just make it almost impossible to incorporate a poor quality implementation. 

Yahoo!!!!


----------



## S2K1 (Aug 27, 2008)

This helped me become convinced the video isn't that bad.
http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/d-movie/

And the way I see it, Nikon has a hit on their hands. Why? We're all talking about it. I didn't care about the D80 when it came out, none of my friends were talking about it, and people weren't throwing out the word 'game changing' like in the other D90 thread. Nikon has done their job, will sell a ton of cameras, and are keeping ahead of the competition. Well done no matter if you plan to use the video or not, Nikon just put themselves on the map of every consumer thinking about their first DSLR.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 28, 2008)

Same here. If it's under $1K I'll probably get one just for the video. I wanna wait a little bit tho because there really is no reason that they can't achieve larger frame sizes than 720p and/or maybe better compression than JPEG - like wavelets or something. Still I can and have used 720p in parts of large screen cinema films - that some of you have probably paid your $15 a ticket to go see. so...  


I suppose the compression format can be modified by upgrading or hacking the firmware.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 28, 2008)

Here's some of D90 specific reviews so far:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D90/D90A.HTM
http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/2008/08/chase-jarvis-raw-advance-testing-nikon.html
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond90/
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/?cid=IGD88BGZIJ0
http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=3666&review=nikon+d90
http://www.livingroom.org.au/photolog/reviews/nikon/nikon_d90.php
http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/nikon-d90-dslr/
http://www.dphotojournal.com/nikon-d90-review-sample-image-video-manual/


----------



## Moglex (Aug 28, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Same here. If it's under $1K I'll probably get one just for the video. I wanna wait a little bit tho because there really is no reason that they can't achieve larger frame sizes than 720p and/or maybe better compression than JPEG - like wavelets or something.


You may have to wait some time.

Cameras are low power devices and compressing video in real time is a fairly compute (and thus power hungry) activity.



> I suppose the compression format can be modified by upgrading or hacking the firmware.



Yes, but again, don't hold your breath.

Nikon will have undoubtedly researched the best method available given the computing power available.

New and improved compression algorithms do not spring up every few days so although it's theoretically possible it's actually extremely unlikely to happen.

It's statistically unlikely that a better compression algorithm will appear during the sales life of the camera and the chances that they will fit faster processing without bringing out an entirely new model are practically zilch.


----------



## K_Pugh (Aug 28, 2008)

hmm well after seeing the videos of it i'm not too bothered about it to be honest.. actually looks ok so far - good for the PJ looking to add small clips, good for parents etc for quick snips, and good for a little creative use/fun.

I notice there's not really any extra buttons getting in the way or anything. I guess Nikon really have done this one properly.

I'd just like to see a few clips from the camera (except Nikon's own clip) just to see what it's _really_ like.

So.. my mind has changed. Since they've added it without it really getting in the way i don't mind it. I wouldn't use it unless i was extremely bored though.


----------



## Tolyk (Aug 28, 2008)

Hey look, I was right 

Autofocus is not available when recording movies. Matrix metering is used regardless of the metering method selected.


----------



## Tolyk (Sep 8, 2008)

So, I got to play with the D90 today at work. The Nikon rep was in with it.

It's not bad, the movie mode failed to impress though. It's not nearly as adaptable as I thought they'd do. You can't change the ISO, you can't change the exposure. About all you can do in video is zoom and manually focus. But, hey, it has sound and built-in speakers.


----------



## Photography School Asia (Sep 8, 2008)

How are your guys stamp collections holding up? Or is it transporting.


----------



## GwagDesigns (Sep 9, 2008)

Tolyk said:


> So, I got to play with the D90 today at work. The Nikon rep was in with it.
> 
> It's not bad, the movie mode failed to impress though. It's not nearly as adaptable as I thought they'd do. You can't change the ISO, you can't change the exposure. About all you can do in video is zoom and manually focus. But, hey, it has sound and built-in speakers.



Me to! i work at Kits camera, and we got them in Saturday. It is lacking in some areas though, I agree. No auto focus? mono mic? i dont think VR works while shooting video either. D100 anyone? mic jack? VR enabled video mode? with changeable ISO faster shutter speed?

heres a sample gallery of sub-par images along with a video 
http://gwagdesigns.com/gallery/5925406_vGUKG


----------



## Bifurcator (Sep 9, 2008)

Well, I don't want autofocus. It ruins more shots than it helps and it makes the video look very very amateurish!

I thought they advertised a selectable ISO though? 
I thought they advertised in-camera VR with the D90 just for video? No?
The lack of a mic-jacj is a drag!

The worst thing I noticed from the video in that link was AE Flutter was noticeable. :thumbdown:

Also to note however is that the video demonstrated at that link was NOT 720P. So I guess it's been monkeyed with and is not a good representation of the D90. In fact in  recommending an alternative purchase (The Red) it looks very bad.  


720P looks like:  http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Common_Video_Resolutions_2.svg


----------



## Tolyk (Sep 9, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Well, I don't want autofocus. It ruins more shots than it helps and it makes the video look very very amateurish!
> 
> I thought they advertised a selectable ISO though?
> I thought they advertised in-camera VR with the D90 just for video? No?
> ...



It was advertised to have selectable ISO, and when my Video specialist asked the Nikon Rep about that, he got a shrug in response  If it had the option, my boss and the video guy couldn't find it. I didn't look, I just took a short video and a few pictures with the new lens they're releasing as well.


----------



## Bifurcator (Sep 9, 2008)

Ah... you just pointed and shooted. 

Hehehe... Well as I understand it there's more than one video mode (size) and in some modes some options are available which aren't in other modes (sizes).  Here's from just DPReview and Nikon.  I'll skim for more later..  I'm stepping out for awhile.

DPReview (Movie Mode):

File format AVI (Motion-JPEG) 
Image size (pixels) 640 x 424; 24 fps 320 x 216; 24 fps 1280 x 720; 24 fps
Compression: Motion-JPEG 
Audio: Monaural on/off selection
Exposure: Determined with matrix metering utilizing output from the image sensor
*Exposure lock available*  <-- _Should always be used for pro grade clips (unless you need to dial the aperture during recording)._ :thumbup:
Exposure compensation available in *P, S, A, M modes* <-- (so P, S, A, and M modes are available in Movie mode.)
Maximum single clip length: 1280x720/ 5 minutes, others 20 minutes


Nikon.com (About Movies):

A new idea for D-SLRs, the D90 offers a movie function, allowing you to shoot movies in three different motion JPEG formats: 320 x 216 pixels, 640 x 424 pixels and 1,280 x 720 pixels. Now you can capture lifes moving moments with added drama by using many of Nikons NIKKOR lenses, including the AF DX Fisheye 10.5mm f/2.8G ED and the Micro-NIKKOR lenses. The shallow depth of field can give your movies a more creative and emotional impact. An additional benefit is the D90 image sensor, which is much larger than a typical camcorder for higher image quality and exceptional high ISO performance during low-light shooting.

*Autofocus is not available when recording movies. Matrix metering is used regardless of the metering method selected.



Shallow Depth Of Field.
One of the benefits of shooting movies with D90 is using the shallow depth of field to show off the main subject.
Nikons Picture Control System allows you to customize the look and mood of your images. Choose from six settings: Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Monochrome and the newly added Portrait and Landscape. Try using the Quick Adjust* function to easily make further adjustments according to your needs and preferences, then save the settings as Custom Picture Controls.



Picture Control.
By choosing Picture Control before shooting, you can give your movies the tones and colors you prefer.


The D90 incorporates a newly developed DX-format CMOS image sensor with technology directly inherited from the D300... (So it's the same sensor with maybe different supporting components?)


----------



## Tolyk (Sep 9, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Ah... you just pointed and shooted.


Pretty much  I had customers to go take care of, couldn't give it the lengthy look over my manager was.


----------



## GwagDesigns (Sep 9, 2008)

Tolyk said:


> Pretty much  I had customers to go take care of, couldn't give it the lengthy look over my manager was.



Busy store? We don't seem to  ever be bus weekdays where i work, so i plan on taking another look at it this afternoon, maybe test out another video, fisheye perhaps? as long as my associates didn't sell them all already...haha


----------



## Tolyk (Sep 9, 2008)

GwagDesigns said:


> Busy store? We don't seem to  ever be bus weekdays where i work, so i plan on taking another look at it this afternoon, maybe test out another video, fisheye perhaps? as long as my associates didn't sell them all already...haha


Fisheye video would be fun 

You have them for sale already? We just have the rep bringing in a demo model from time to time  And yes, it's a very busy store


----------



## Bifurcator (Sep 9, 2008)

If yall record something for internet distribution do the 720p thing and just keep it super short. 5 sec. clips are fine.


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3 (Sep 9, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> _It's an awesome idea!!!_ Video would *ROCK* on a dSLR with *INTERCHANGEABLE* lenses!!! If it's even 720p I'll buy one *JUST* for the video!!!
> 
> Put a 10.5 on it and get some crazy low angle videos.


----------



## Tolyk (Sep 9, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> If yall record something for internet distribution do the 720p thing and just keep it super short. 5 sec. clips are fine.


Will do.


----------



## Bifurcator (Sep 9, 2008)

Jus7 A Phas3 said:


> Bifurcator said:
> 
> 
> > _It's an awesome idea!!!_ Video would *ROCK* on a dSLR with *INTERCHANGEABLE* lenses!!! If it's even 720p I'll buy one *JUST* for the video!!!
> ...


----------

