Upgrade with HD Video

Steven001

Steven001

Messages
1,531
Name
Steven
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi folks,

Considering upgrading my Nikon D40 to something a bit more modern and with HD video! I would consider switching to Cannon, as I believed they have much better video quality compared to the equivalent Nikons (and I only have 3 Nikon lenses at the moment).

I had always had my eye on a Nikon D90, but after looking at reviews the video quality doesn't seem to great and can be quite noisy at high ISO levels. The camera would be used for mainly stills, but I would love the option of crisp HD video too.

Budget isn't great, around £350 if one can be had for that.


Thanks,
Steven
 
Hi Steven.

You've been mis-informed about Nikon having inferior video quality, people think this because canon we're the first to incorporate manual control over exposure.

What you are right about though is the D90 beiin rubbish for video.

After the D7000 the video quality is very good (bar the D4 which is evidently only good in cx crop mode).

Anyway, onto your budget.

I would say the D3100 or D5100 used, which both have good quality and manual controls.

Sorry can't help with canons.
Phil.
 
I've just made a similar decision and opted for the D5100. Nikon have just started a cash back offer today taking £55 off the price which brings it in at about your budget through someone like Amazon.

I've actually switched from a Canon 450d so will need to also replace my lenses. I have ordered a 35mm f1.8 at the same time, as 50mm f1.8 is my most used lens. Will also add the 55-200 VR soon to replace 55-250 IS.

I decided to go for the D5100 over 600 or 650d on the basis of better high ISO performance (I use camera indoors a lot and prefer not to use flash) and also it still has an AF illuminator rather than using the flash as strobe for assist which I find tends to annoy people when I have borrowed cameras with this feature.

I think the Canon's edge in video is that there is manual exposure adjustment and if go for 650d allows move focus using the touchscreen.
 
If you're not wedded to any particular manufacturer, then why not include Sony in your options? Any current SLT will give you 1080/50p video (stabilised) with fast PDAF. Plus, with an EVF, you don't have to struggle with the LCD when shooting video on sunny days.

Just a thought.
 
You already have lenses, so a D3200 body only would be ideal for you. 1080P at 24 and 30fps, and 720P up to 60fps... just like the big boys. 24MP stills too, and not a bad camera despite feeling a bit plasticky. One command dial though, which is a step DOWN from your D90 IMO.
 
Thanks guys! Been trying to find out the differences between the D5100, D3100 and D3200; it's been difficult! The D5100 and D3100 seem the most comparable, with the D3200 having a bigger sensor but D5100 having better noise handling, correct?

Not sure which would have the best image quality; the tilt screen of the D5100 would be handy but 60fps at 720p on the D3200 even more so!
 
Adding 60fps footage into a 24p project makes for some very fluid, natural slow motion effects. It's very nice.


As for noise.. there's not much to choose between the 5100 and the 3200 actually.. not in reality.. with a fast lens you'll be surprised how seldom you need to go past ISO1600 when shooting video.
 
Agree that there is very little in it I had the same dilemma.

My decision to go to D5100 was based on wanting tilt screen and also the D5100 has exposure bracketing.

D5200 to be announced in the next few days...?
 
I would be buying second hand and there seems to be more D5100's available then D3200's. From reviews the D5100 seems to be a slightly better camera although lacking the fps rate of the D3200. I think it's slightly cheaper too?

Would the D5100 be considered a good upgrade from the D40? Don't want to waste the money which could possibly be spent on another lens, but the video feature is something I would really enjoy!
 
Steven001 said:
I would be buying second hand and there seems to be more D5100's available then D3200's. From reviews the D5100 seems to be a slightly better camera although lacking the fps rate of the D3200. I think it's slightly cheaper too?

Would the D5100 be considered a good upgrade from the D40? Don't want to waste the money which could possibly be spent on another lens, but the video feature is something I would really enjoy!
Click to expand...

...there is a world of difference between the two. I don't think you'd know what hit you when you use anything that came out within the last couple of years.

I have 100% confidence that you'd be happy with anything discussed.

I didn't mention the 3200 due to the pricing but if you can stretch to it, it'd probably be the best choice.
 
Well my D5100 has arrived and after two days use I'm really happy, particularly with the high ISO performance when used indoors in the evening. It is amazing how much they have moved on from era of D40 and 450d that I owned. I thought the display was a bit of a fad initially but in use it is excellent and a useful tool particularly when using video.

The D3200 and D5100 are currently about the same price new with Nikon cash back and I don't think are substantially cheaper used. If more MP and 60fps video are higher up priority for you, the D3200 would be the one to go for. Either are a great step up from the D40.
 
Phil Young said:
...there is a world of difference between the two. I don't think you'd know what hit you when you use anything that came out within the last couple of years.

I have 100% confidence that you'd be happy with anything discussed.

I didn't mention the 3200 due to the pricing but if you can stretch to it, it'd probably be the best choice.
Click to expand...

Excellent, thanks for that Phil.

Undecided between the D5100 and D90 now. I know the D90 video quality is far less than that of the D5100, but I like the idea of aperture and shutter dials etc!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top