Another Dubious Nikon New Model "Leak"...

[Flash In The Pan]

Does anyone know when a D400 will be released as I'm looking into upgrading from my D60 and it will be the D300 or D400 (if I have the money )

There's a Nikon press conference scheduled for the 29th of this month, so we'll know one way or t'other then what's coming out this year.

 

[Amp34]

Obviously not cherrypicked - the first is just someone else's opinion and the second, well sorry to disappoint you, but I'm pretty sure this

IMG

isn't a £500 camcorder, but it is one of the video cameras your second piece of "evidence" refers to. Here's the other....

IMG

and I could be wrong here, but that doesn't look like a 500 quid video camera either.

True, neither of those two look like £500 pieces of equipment, unfortunately they were the only two sources I found that even remotely compared DSLRs to consumer video cameras, all the rest were talking about the comparison with £50k+ pro cameras...

As noted above, no they don't....

No, obviously not...

They're gigantic in comparison with the best camcorders out there, I mean, Sony's professional movie camera CineAlta F35, is the only from Sony that features a full frame sensor for not less than $ 80 000 and you can get a full frame from Canon 5D Mark II for just $ 2699 dollars and HD video from it at a kind of respectable bitrate of 37Mbps.

the video is fundamentally lower-quality than true, dedicated digital cinema cameras.

The image above is a still from some 1080p 5DmkII video taken by Jim Jannard, creator of the RED camera which the 5D is mistakenly compared to (partially RED’s fault). Here’s a resized version of the full image:

I’m not sure how many people were really making a big deal about the new set of DSLRs being professional video cameras, but the few movies we’ve seen come out sure aren’t doing anything to dispel that notion

And many more...

Oh and I haven't edited your post (that wouldn't be possible), I have selectively quoted from it - there's a difference....

No you highlighted one bit that I didn't highlight...

Umm, that was the camera/lens combo and prospective use that you gave..

No it wasn't, I wrote two seperate pieces, if you couldn't work that out then you really need to go back to school...

Said the man who jumped on a thread about a possible sub-£500 Nikon and started going on about ten grand Canon combos being better than pro, sorry, semi-pro video equipment. If that was what you wanted to discuss, why not start another thread? I refer you to your own statement...

I was only replying to a post that had already been posted, and have already explained why I posted that, you still yabbering on about that?

I'm not to bothered actually, so no I won't start a new post, however if I jumped on someone's post then you landed like a 10ton weight on me, and derailed your thread nicely...

Now, back to the original point of the thread Please feel free to contribute if you have anything to say about that

Well most of the posts are actually about the benefits of video in DSLR's, which started way before I got into the thread... so I assume you are going to ask most of the others to get back on topic too?

 

[SuperAP]

I'm more interested in the murmurings of a new 70-200 VR... Think of all those FX users rushing to sell the current model with the vignetting issues

 

[Martyn...]

I guess I can see your point, however it's the same with IS on lenses. If the feature is "free" then would you rather have it and never use it or decide not to have it and decide one day that actually it could be a good idea?

IS or VR improves the still picture taking ability, Video adds nothing to the cameras ability to take still photos, so the comparison is not the same.

I do not mind if they keep it on the consumer bodies, but there is no need for it on pro bodies.

It starts to become a bit like my Swiss Army Knife reference, a jack of all trades but master of none.

I have no argument with your opinion that you like it, but I am entitled to my opinion that it is of no use to me.

 

[Amp34]

IS or VR improves the still picture taking ability, Video adds nothing to the cameras ability to take still photos, so the comparison is not the same.

I do not mind if they keep it on the consumer bodies, but there is no need for it on pro bodies.

It starts to become a bit like my Swiss Army Knife reference, a jack of all trades but master of none.

I have no argument with your opinion that you like it, but I am entitled to my opinion that it is of no use to me.

But people against IS and VR say the same thing, it isn't needed (have a look at the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 IS thread) and just takes away from the optics (not that I agree with that either ).

I agree with you to an extent, I am perfectly fine with companies tacking extra bits on, AS LONG AS they don't affect the ability of the device to do it's main job (such as a phone, stick a camera, mp3 player etc in as long as the the actual making and receiving calls and texts is not affected). However yeah there is a point where there are too many things tacked on.

You are perfectly entitled to your own opinion, I assume that was aimed at the last bit of my post? If so that was just to give a bit of background to my thoughts on video in DSLRs.

 

[david1701]

I heard about this.... isn't it two house bricks and some tape


<insert apologies for being an ass here>

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Well most of the posts are actually about the benefits of video in DSLR's, which started way before I got into the thread... so I assume you are going to ask most of the others to get back on topic too?

No,this drivel started at posted #20, when you said

What do you mean by dedicated Video Camera? The £500 ones that normal people buy or the £3000+ ones that "pros" buy?

A DSLR with video function is far better than the £500 ones that's for certain!

and then preceded to waffle on about high-end Canon cameras and lenses....

From the forum rules...

General Conduct


Please don't take forum threads "Off Topic". However, the 'original poster' ("OP") of the thread is given more leniency to do so.

I think you've taken this thread pretty far off topic, don't you?