How much of a disadvantage is it staying with Nikon?

specialman

specialman

Messages
8,193
Name
Pat MacInnes
Edit My Images
Yes
I love Nikon, and I have spent a massive amount of money in recent years getting my gear to the point it's at now. However, aside from wanting better low-light performance, I also want HD video and although I don't know the total ins-and-outs of what is out there to buy, it seems Canon has a massive advantage in what they bundle into its DSLRs on the video front.

The thing for me is the video function has to sit alongside a fully-functioning, hard-wearing DSLR that will get me good image quality. I don't want something to sit in a bag and come out now and then; whatever body I use must be able to do stills and video as and when i want it to and do it well. But the kicker is it has to be reasonably priced....

So, the choices I have:

D3s - looks amazing and I have no doubts that it would be the perfect solution to my needs. But I don't have £3,000+ at the moment.

D300s - 720p video and a sensor that is good but is probably due for replacement, depending on how much impact the floods have had on production of any new models. This is about the price-point and feature list I want (good build, good handling, tough) but the video function looks to be a half-cocked idea going on what I've read and not really as useful as Nikon would like to think it is.

D7000 - image quality, high ISO noise control and the video function all seem pretty bloody good and at the price, it is the best option. But there's part of me that says as a camera, it won't be right for me because it's a small body and isn't weathersealed, which is a big consideration doing what I do. But a used one is £650(ish) so it's not a massive investment and probably won't loose too much value inbetween buying one and when the D400 comes out (which will hopefully be the nuts).

Not bothered about the D90 or the Dxxxx models that carry video, as they're far too small for me.

I keep hearing that Canon has really nailed its HD video functions thanks to several frame rates (24/25/30/60) that really help the creative process. But I don't want one of those god-awful 5D mk2s and the 1.6x crop of the 7D is frustrating to say the least. Do any of the older 1D bodies carry video? I doubt it but it's worth asking.....
 
The canon 7D is the daddy for hd video as sky use them it speaks for itself.
 
Last edited:
The canon that fits your description is 1D IV - so you may as well get D3s and keep your lenses. D400 can't be that far out either... It is your job and your money so you have to weigh your needs against, cost, and dislike of smaller body.
 
lucky_13 said:
The canon 7D is the daddy for hd video as sky use them it speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

What does sky shoot with the 7d?

I've only ever seen them filming with live hd broadcast cams.
 
Last edited:
a fully-functioning, hard-wearing DSLR that will get me good image quality
Click to expand...
But I don't want one of those god-awful 5D mk2s
Click to expand...

Just out of interest, what's god-awful about the 5D mk II? It would seem to meet your criteria for a fully-functioning DSLR with good image quality..

A.
 
Wilky said:
Well the focus issues for a start is well known to be god-awful......
Click to expand...

What "focus issues"?

Nothing wrong with 5d focus. For sure, not quite as good as 7d or 1d but to call the focus "god awful" is 100% incorrect.
 
Last edited:
scottthehat said:
the center focus point might be ok but the outer points are not upto much.
Click to expand...

Really?

I never had a problem with them.
 
Sharp intake of breath, buy D3s. It's the only sensible option. A D7000 sounds like it would be worth a punt, but if it follows your Sb-800s into the drink it'll die, a D3s won't......
 
lucky_13 said:
The canon 7D is the daddy for hd video as sky use them it speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

It is not the "daddy" and if I was buying a DSLR for video then I wouldn't be buying the 7D, no manual audio controls for a start and it produces video identical to the much cheaper 550D. I would go for the 60D for APS-C sensors or 5D mkII if you want full frame.
 
How often do you want to do video and how much "quality" and how many features do you want? If it's only occasional, the Nikon range plus some software will probably be fine (if someone wants to let me know the frame sizes/rates of the different Nikon cameras, I can advise - consumer video devices is my day job).
 
arad85 said:
How often do you want to do video and how much "quality" and how many features do you want? If it's only occasional, the Nikon range plus some software will probably be fine (if someone wants to let me know the frame sizes/rates of the different Nikon cameras, I can advise - consumer video devices is my day job).
Click to expand...

This week I've just been asked by the bss if I want to change my job role, sticking with imaging but instead of 100 per cent stills, splitting it 60/40 between stills and video. The thing is, that 60/40 split won't be as clear cut as 3 days out on shoots, two days doing video, hence why I've made a point of talking about cameras that will truly multi-task (i.e do still as well as it does video and vice-versa).

I've also just been asked to learn video editing (Final Cut Pro) so I'll be sent on one of those Apple-accredited courses, which is something I can't wait to get my teeth into.

Flash In The Pan said:
Sharp intake of breath, buy D3s. It's the only sensible option. A D7000 sounds like it would be worth a punt, but if it follows your Sb-800s into the drink it'll die, a D3s won't......
Click to expand...

Yep, D7000 sounds a good interim buy. And I may have learned my lesson with stuff going in the drink!! :)


daugirdas said:
The canon that fits your description is 1D IV - so you may as well get D3s and keep your lenses. D400 can't be that far out either... It is your job and your money so you have to weigh your needs against, cost, and dislike of smaller body.
Click to expand...

Yeah, think Nikon is where my loyalties lie. Canon does some lovely glass but the menu-based interface (as opposed to Nikon's button-led interface on its pro bodies) is much more my thing. Plus I couldn't live without a 'proper' rear command dial!! :lol:


Anorakus said:
Just out of interest, what's god-awful about the 5D mk II? It would seem to meet your criteria for a fully-functioning DSLR with good image quality..
Click to expand...

God-awful was probably the incorrect term. I use a mate's 5D2 on a regular basis and I love the feel and size of it and what that lovely sensor can provide, then I hit the brick wall that is its AF system, which is even a backward step from my D2x in the way it covers the frame. If Canon had fitted multi-point AF that covered the whole frame it would have been perfect but alas, that ain't the case....
 
Last edited:
OK. Still not clear on what you'll end up videoing though. For TV? Does 1080p REALLY matter? Could you get away with speeding up video from 24p->25p (a 4% speedup) in post (my understanding is the D300s is 24p capable and I'm sure Final Cut Pro will be able to change the speed of video and audio - Premiere Pro certainly can).
 
Maybe go D7000 for the moment, then upgrade to a D800 whenever it comes out, maybe even keep the D7k as a companion? The D7000 has been fairly well proven and is a fantastic little camera as it is, and it copes with rough conditions suprisingly well :)
 
I wouldn't discount the D7k because of weather-sealing when it will withstand downpours fine, and even if it didn't, you could buy a cover. I have a D3s and happily looking for a D7000 as the backup/second camera. Yes, the D7k is smaller and looks less 'pro', but who cares if it can do the job? And anyway, what's wrong with changing the size of what you hold in your hands? Never worried me with boobs, so what's the problem with a camera...? :naughty:
 
Pat one important question is what are you planning to shoot video wise?
 
arad85 said:
OK. Still not clear on what you'll end up videoing though. For TV? Does 1080p REALLY matter? Could you get away with speeding up video from 24p->25p (a 4% speedup) in post (my understanding is the D300s is 24p capable and I'm sure Final Cut Pro will be able to change the speed of video and audio - Premiere Pro certainly can).
Click to expand...

Sorry, forgot to say. I'll be doing web films, plus footage for DVD productions we'll be covermounting on the mags, stuff to go on our iPad/iPhone/Android apps, and stuff that will ultimately be sold on DVD.

We already have Sony 1080 cameras but these are just for video - no still are being produced from htese - whereas I will be shooting stills for magazine features alongside filming the feature to give added depth to the magazines through web and app precsense.

The speed thing is something I'm yet to really delve into. Obviously, having something like 60p would be good for slo-mo stuff (i.e going all arty) but it's not essential.


EMA747 said:
Pat one important question is what are you planning to shoot video wise?
Click to expand...

We currently shoot angling DVDs for sale and covermounting with our mags. The plan we have is multimedia (i.e. apps and web content featuring still and video) is a massive area that can expand our business greatly beyond traditional print-based media.

Ksanti said:
Maybe go D7000 for the moment, then upgrade to a D800 whenever it comes out, maybe even keep the D7k as a companion? The D7000 has been fairly well proven and is a fantastic little camera as it is, and it copes with rough conditions suprisingly well :)
Click to expand...


That sounds a plan. I really wish Nikon would let out a few tasters about what's in store on the D400 and D800 front, if only to reassure us we're going to catch Canon up :)


Phototalk - I agree on the boob issue but I never get to hold a pair anywhere near as much as I get to hold a camera!!! :lol: Seriously, the D7000 does look tasty.... maybe I need to have another play with one.
 
Last edited:
I'm a Nikon fan to behonest but i got to admit out of Nikon and Canon, Canon do better video but personally i won't use Nikon or Canon to do video.

I film video and edit video as part of my role and i personally favourite on the Panasonic GH2 or GH1 if you get one for cheap. They produce better video than Canon and Nikon. You may say the lens sucks on the GH but you can use adapter and use any M42 lens or get a adapter and use your NIKON lens too. Only downside will be NO AUTO FOCUS but in real video filming you won't use auto focus because is horrible. I film pretty much use all manual focus and manual setting on your camera.

Hope this help. If you really want to use either Nikon and Canon, i will say stay with Nikon and get a D7000 because is pretty good enough already for the stuff you want to shoot. I use my D7000 many times as a second and third camera when shooting and the result is still surperb.
 
New/ Used 550D and Novoflex adaptor. Then use Nikon lenses with manual focus- can get an adaptor model that allows you to change aperture as well seeing as Nikon are too stingy to provide it any more.

Wait to see what Nikon come out with then replace the existing camera. The D7000 is flawed in the video department ( granted it's better than some Nikons but that's hardly anything to shout about), it's not as well put together as your present camera by any stretch and I'm not sure i would be what you're looking for. It does have better ISO than yours but you've lasted this long- another few months to see what Nikon do isn't too long? Besides if Nikon don't sort their strategy out quickly regards operational decisions and direction, your decision will be a lot easier:D. You only have to look at Olympus to see where poor management gets you...
 
D7000 with battery grip :) still not as big as a D3s but bigger than standard.

Personally a DSLR for stills and dedicated camcorder for video. Full HD camcorders are small and better quality than a DSLR why use a DSLR it's like using a toaster to fry an egg
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
Sorry, forgot to say. I'll be doing web films, plus footage for DVD productions we'll be covermounting on the mags, stuff to go on our iPad/iPhone/Android apps, and stuff that will ultimately be sold on DVD.
Click to expand...
If it's only DVD (and no BluRay) 720p will be fine as long as you can convert to 576i in post (one to ask on your course). You need to understand how you will frame rate convert, but 24p goes well into 25p which goes very nicely into 50i which is DVD for UK.

Audio may be a different matter - high quality may need an external system - but is possible on both Nikon and Canon systems. I guess what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter...
 
specialman said:
We currently shoot angling DVDs for sale and covermounting with our mags. The plan we have is multimedia (i.e. apps and web content featuring still and video) is a massive area that can expand our business greatly beyond traditional print-based media.
Click to expand...
Hmm hard to say if this influences the choice of equipment. I am trying to set up something similar at the moment in aviation and transport type DVD for enthusiasts. While I love my new 1DmkIV (had one before as well), for video it doesn't come close to my Canon XF100 and XF300 dedicated video cameras. You say you want still and video in one camera though. I would be looking at a D7000 or Canon 7D at the lower end or a D3s at the very high end. Like you say Nikon doesn't have the best video in DLSRs like Canon does.
Alternatively the Panasonic GH2 is reputed by many in the know to exceed the D7000 and 7D for video quality. It's still quality won't be up there though. If you could afford it how about something like a Nikon D700 (maybe used) for stills and a GH2 for video?
 
Do you back button focus? If so you'll hate the 7k as it's just too small. Maybe better for a right eye dominant shooter though.
 
Can you hang on a bit? If you are happy with your current camera in terms of taking photos then I would stay put. I thought I would use HD video a lot, but I actually use it rarely. I would imagine more and more capable HD video functionality will be included in future nikon cameras. Switching systems can be expensive and Canon isnt better than Nikon, just a slightly different.
 
odd jim said:
What does sky shoot with the 7d?

I've only ever seen them filming with live hd broadcast cams.
Click to expand...

No idea but so I have been told by a few different people including jessops and camera world.
 
I am no video DSLR specialist, and don't pretend to be. But surely the best option would be to get a new / used 550D (or 600D) and upgrade it with Magic Lantern. Add some M42 (or PK) primes and you will have a very capable video DSLR for not a lot of money at all.

As I see it you could get the following for less than £700:
Used Canon 550D - £400
PK - EOS Converter - £20
M42 - EOS Converter - £20
Pentax 50mm F1.7 - £5
Pentax 28mm F2.8 - £30
Jupiter 9 85mm F2 - £80
Meyer Optic 135mm F2.8 - £100
Microphone - £40
 
As danny said earlier on, try and have a go with a D7000 with a grip on. I found it to be many times better and transformed the feel of the camera, and that's only a cheap Meike one! 2 batteries, 2 SD card slots for lots of video, lovely jubbly. The only thing it'll be lacking then is the extent of weathersealing of the bigger boys in the group.

I'm in love with mine, can you tell?
 
Nice they are sending you for final cut pro - prefer sony vegas myself :)


I missed out on video when I got the d300 in march (sept they brought out the d300s) so can't comment on video quality.

D7000 is small then the d300 on body tho, but as people have posted, a grip is available.

Hope you get to choose :) and that it does the job for you. If you go in the stand of one machine for one thing, then you'd be looking a a hd camcorder with solid state or hard drive, around the 500-600 ukp new, or a higher spec used...

Might be worth trying out a few in store? Take a card or two and try them including the d7000 and d300s, take your cards home/work and do some editting on it to see which is better.

Good luck! (sounds like a decent job btw!)
 
POAH said:
:thinking: there are no issues
Click to expand...

Ridiculous statement. There ARE issues if you want to shoot wide open primes and have to use the woeful outer focus points to follow any kind of action in lowish light. The positioning of the points is laughable compared to Nikon and 1 series cameras.

I'm not speaking from internet experience, but direct user experience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
POAH said:
:thinking: there are no issues
Click to expand...

If course there are issues, its bleeding hopeless trying to track moving subjects for a start, if the subject moves off centre point say goodbye to getting the shot, simple really.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The23rdman said:
Do you back button focus? If so you'll hate the 7k as it's just too small. Maybe better for a right eye dominant shooter though.
Click to expand...

nah, it's not something I have got into doing. Mind you, there are a million and one features on cameras that I never use!! :lol:
 
specialman said:
nah, it's not something I have got into doing. Mind you, there are a million and one features on cameras that I never use!! :lol:
Click to expand...

You should be okay then. I've not tested the video out in decent light so can't tell ya how good or not it is. ;)
 
Ecniv - have only ever used iMovie and Premiere (years ago) so editing software is pretty new to me. The rest of the guys all use FCP so it's more a case of keeping everything in line with what we already have, although we're currently weighing up whether to go FCP 10(X) as it's cheaper, or stick with the older FCP7.


EMA747 said:
Hmm hard to say if this influences the choice of equipment. I am trying to set up something similar at the moment in aviation and transport type DVD for enthusiasts. While I love my new 1DmkIV (had one before as well), for video it doesn't come close to my Canon XF100 and XF300 dedicated video cameras. You say you want still and video in one camera though. I would be looking at a D7000 or Canon 7D at the lower end or a D3s at the very high end. Like you say Nikon doesn't have the best video in DLSRs like Canon does.
Alternatively the Panasonic GH2 is reputed by many in the know to exceed the D7000 and 7D for video quality. It's still quality won't be up there though. If you could afford it how about something like a Nikon D700 (maybe used) for stills and a GH2 for video?
Click to expand...

Heard very good things about the GH2 but I really want to keep everything to one set of equipment, hence going with Nikon DSLR. We have some Sony HD cameras but they can't rival a DSLR set-up in terms of focal lengths, especially at the wide end.

The D7000 is a very tempting gap-filler.... could sell one D2x for about £500(ish) and spend £150 or so on a used D7000. But I really, really want a D3 anyway for stills so a D3s would be ideal. Currently working out a plan where I can get one through work if we split the cost.....


arad85 said:
If it's only DVD (and no BluRay) 720p will be fine as long as you can convert to 576i in post (one to ask on your course). You need to understand how you will frame rate convert, but 24p goes well into 25p which goes very nicely into 50i which is DVD for UK.

Audio may be a different matter - high quality may need an external system - but is possible on both Nikon and Canon systems. I guess what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter...
Click to expand...

Have been told by our existing video guy that 720 will be fine, which opens things out a bit, although it seems the D300s is still a bit clunky to be used as a full-time film camera.

As for audio, we have some Sennhieser wireless mics and as long as those fit via a standard audio jack then I'll be fine.
 
Last edited:
It is a huge disadvantage!!

Well known facts:
Every time a Nikon is produced they slaughter a firstborn of one of their employees!
Each lens is manufactured using the blood of new born lambs!
Their technology is still pre-Renaissance (ie before the advent of steam power)
err...that's it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top