- This topic is empty.
Nikon D3S launched 14th October 2009
-
Nikon announced a new addition to the D3 range the D3s, the main difference that I noticed were the inclusion of video, and a few other more subtle changes.
Does anybody else feel that video has no place on a pro spec stills camera? Surely someone who would drop 4200 GBP on this (calumet.co.uk) would have a decent video camera already. IMO it’s a bit of a gimmick that both Nikon and Canon are guilty of. Low light performace is astounding though, check out these sample pics.
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3s/sample.htm
I have the 5d2 and I don’t use the video on it, but I was at a seminar with Yervant the wedding photographer a few weeks ago and there is a way to import top quality video stills and use them as photos … to quite a stunnning effect in fact!
Great for reportage wedding photography or, as mentioned, papps….
I suppose that it’s only a matter of time before these video cameras take raw images ….
randomway wrote:
It will be handy for the paparazzi.
Or some digital wedding photographers who seem to shoot thousands of insurance shoots, they might as well be making a video some of them, this might be their answer :idea: I know im going to get flamed for saying this this… im only joking of course :wink:
A friend of mine has a Canon 1D MKIIn and shoots rally events
he is seriously thinking of upgrading to the 7D.anyway he was in ISS last week to test it and one of the guys there told him
that some film company in Dublin took 2 out on loan to test particularly
the FULL HD movie capabilities . . . they came back and ordered 7 !semingly these new generation of camera will be very popular with
the likes of news reporters who can shoot mini scenes at a decent res
ready for publishing.also the movie crowd use them to shoot certain scenes . . .
there is obviously a market
oh and the 7d is supposedly going to blow the nikon competition
away . . . allegedlymmmm some interesting points, I guess it broadens the possibilties of your photography. I’ve never really desired to make videos though. Maybe like when digital first came loads of people said ‘it’s not for me’, then when the quality inproved – changed their minds. Myself included – I jumped on the digital bandwagon quite late. It’s early days still with all of this video development.
I Like the little dig at Nikon at the end there, Aolain. :wink: Even though I’m a Nikon man, I agree that Canon might (probably) be better in this aspect, purely because of there experience in the video market. All of the Nikon vs. Canon argument is exagerated anyway. I’d like to say that I shoot Nikon because of it’s low light performace, accurate autofocus, 51 AF points, lens compatiblity, or superior speedlights; but if I’m honest it’s because I was given a Nikon as a gift years ago and stuck with the system. Saying that, I wouldn’t want to leave the Dark Side…
Folks, we not going to have a Nikon vs Canon discussion.
Mentioning it, just in case…Thanks
I use the video function of my compact fujifilm all the time as it is alot more convient than lugging around seperate video camera when out and about. most of the time you take a video you only want to record a few minutes of action and this works a treat. I stopped using my video a long time ago. only problem is that its eats up memory card space.
just 2 wee notes:
1 did anyone spot the iso range on the D3…. up to H3 = 102,000 aprox
2 video on pro level cameras are used by certain types of photographers and are seen to be a great advantage. such as interior and exterior property photography. videos are pretty poor here and are a bit gimky like 360s in most cases but they are really nice and used well in places like Aus. and the ability to put good quality wide angle glass on the front for a reasonable price also no need for extra kit is atttacting a few people to the 5d mkII and the 7 D and I am sure it will do the same for the D3. with current broad band speeds here it has less of an impact but as this improves many photographers doing comercial stuff such as property, hotels or tourist stuff may need to do video as well and a camera that does it all will help.
Sorry Mark,
I just posted that about the Canon as a general remark about
the possible requiremants for video.The last comment regarding canon v’s nikon didnt help, doesnt help.
The point of video on a DSLR is not the ‘handiness’ feature of not having to bring a camcorder like you would buy in Currys etc., the video feature in a DSLR is extremely powerful for the money. Having easily focused lenses which are capable of very shallow depth of field and being able to shift focus in a scene quickly and accurately makes a DSLR a very cheap introduction to very high quality video that allows you to show off your ‘arty’ side too. That’s not even taking into account the extraordinarily high iso quality compared even to camcorders outside the mainstream budget due to the much larger sensors.
Video isn’t my thing but if I was a film industry student I’d be praising hosanna for a realtively cheap high quality and control video tool. Imagine being able to use macro lenses, extreme wide angles and relatively dirt cheap long range zooms for high definition video (where absolute pixel peeping sharpness isn’t much of an issue).
I have the 7D …its good – but not completely happy with it … video function is the best part and auto ISO :D
(maybe I just need to give the 7D a chance and learn more about it but at the moment it stays at home and I’ll stick with my 1D mk2’s)comparing it to the 1D mk2 I’d prefer my 1D mk2…. images are just better quality and focusing is faster.
Also the 7D is only supposed to last 100,000 shutters.
photos wrote:
I have the 7D …its good – but not completely happy with it … video function is the best part and auto ISO :D
(maybe I just need to give the 7D a chance and learn more about it but at the moment it stays at home and I’ll stick with my 1D mk2’s)comparing it to the 1D mk2 I’d prefer my 1D mk2…. images are just better quality and focusing is faster.
Also the 7D is only supposed to last 100,000 shutters.
The 1D range is, at minimum, double the price. There’s a reason for that :)
A lot of points raised. I think I should reiterate what I was talking about in the first post, I meant video for Top of the Range caremas, ie. the flagships, like the Nikon D3S or Canon D1 MkIII, the ones that cost 5 grand or up. This seems to have been lost in the thread, there’s a lot of talk about the new Canon 7D. No offence to any 7D owners, I wouldn’t count this higher than prosumer level.
For the reasons Cian mentioned,
which are the same reasons as the last time this topic came up.I really don’t get the flagship reference,
the prestige is to do with the manufacturer,
not the user- although some people do like to wear their brands on their sleeve…
(sorry Lousy…)The effect of getting shot with a flagship or a frigate is usually the same,
if you’re on the receiving end-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
