Nikon Uses Canon 5D2 Footage To Promote D800

Annika1980 writes:

On Mar 21, 10:42*am, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

I remember that backlog. *I bought my D200 at Best Buy because they
actually had stock, none of the camera dealers did (perfectly good price
too). *(I was upgrading from a Fuji S2 and had Nikon lenses going back
to 1980 at that point, so switching to Canon wasn't really an option.)

So there wasn't much of a backlog if Best Buy had them.
I'll bet Toys R' Us had plenty of them as well.

Adorama didn't have them. B&H didn't have them. Locally, National
Camera didn't have them. Turned out Best Buy did, probably because it
was too high a model for their real market, but they'd gotten optimistic
product allocation.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

In article 61c3c372-9645-44bb-9a46-8833ca523887
@fk28g2000vbb.googlegroups.com, says...

On Mar 21, 10:42*am, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

I remember that backlog. *I bought my D200 at Best Buy because they
actually had stock, none of the camera dealers did (perfectly good price
too). *(I was upgrading from a Fuji S2 and had Nikon lenses going back
to 1980 at that point, so switching to Canon wasn't really an option.)
--

So there wasn't much of a backlog if Best Buy had them.
I'll bet Toys R' Us had plenty of them as well.

Oh, there was a backlog. "Best Buy" didn't have them, individual stores
would get one or two in. For a while every morning I'd check the Best
Buy site and the closest one to me that ever had stock was 120 miles
away. I actually went down to B&H to look at a used one, but between
the time I left the house and the time I got there somebody had bought
it (I should have called and put a deposit on it).

On 2012-04-10 22:40 , Annika1980 wrote:
On Mar 6, 4:56 pm, wrote:

I've seen the results from D800 video and they blow any 5D stuff out of
the water. Project it on a big screen cinema and Canon hasn't got a hope
of getting close to it.

Chloe

Watch this, idiot.
http://vimeo.com/40113110

Ouch!

The test should have been conducted for even exposure. The D5's were
way under in the lower ISO range (ISO setting v. real sensitivity issue
seen on many cameras). More latitude for aperture and exp. period
should have been given in the test.

--
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
I said I didn't know."
-Samuel Clemens.

Alan Browne wrote,on my timestamp of 12/04/2012 6:47 AM:
On 2012-04-10 22:40 , Annika1980 wrote:
On Mar 6, 4:56 pm, wrote:

I've seen the results from D800 video and they blow any 5D stuff out of
the water. Project it on a big screen cinema and Canon hasn't got a hope
of getting close to it.

Watch this, idiot.
http://vimeo.com/40113110

Ouch!

The test should have been conducted for even exposure.

Are you out of your mind? Since when has anyone "compared" Canon gear to others
while staying in the realm of apples with apples?
Communist!

The D5's were way under
in the lower ISO range (ISO setting v. real sensitivity issue seen on many
cameras).

Sssshhhhh! You know perfectly well dark images hide the noise that would
otherwise have been clearly visible.

On 23/04/2012 11:57 AM, Annika1980 wrote:
On Apr 19, 12:55 am, wrote:
On Apr 19, 2:27 pm, wrote:



Even if you cranked the Nikon down 2/3 of a stop it would still look
like ****.

Then why didn't they?
Or cranck the 5d3 up 1 stop so that someone can see what the heck it
was shooting?

The point was to simulate what the footage would look like lit by
candlelight. It isn't the tester's fault that Nikon cranks up the
sensitivity and the noise to try to attain a brighter picture. Of
course, the guy who did the test says the difference was caused by the
framing of the shot (the Nikon being a cropped sensor and all), but I
don't see how that would matter if everything is set manually.

Oh Dear...
More expert opinion containing more bull**** than factual information.
Let me help you out dear.

1. Nikon D800 really does have a full frame sensor. Most likely a Sony
Exmore backlit sensor but Nikon aren't saying just yet.

The real experts in making DSLR movies(the ones who make a living with
the gear) have all decreed the Nikon D800 is hands down a better video
camera than the Canon 5d MkIII which is a bucket load better than the
Canon 5D MkII and of course, the mirrors are guaranteed not to fall out
at a critical moment like the 5D itself had a habit of doing.

I'm afraid I won't be upgrading my D700 to D800. I've ordered a D4 which
I believe is a better all round camera than the tightly packed pixel
sensor in the D800. Anyone interested can see the difference between a
D90 (crop factor) and a D700. The extra density of pixels might attract
some people but way back when a D10 Canon cost $3500, it's images would
enlarge much farther and much cleaner than the more tightly packed
pixels from a D60.

Even then, a 3 MP Nikon file would enlarge further and with more detail
than a D60 image. It's the reason I believe we've reached maximum pixel
density in FF sensors at 16 or thereabouts and why I'll buy a D4 instead
of a D800.

No one has said much about its video capabilities but those who have one
or have ordered one can be assured it will at least equal that of a
canon and most probably... Be quite sufficient for any professional
user. The fanboi thing is wearing pretty thin, don't you think?

I've recently made a HD TV commercial with a D700. The last use before
selling it, for politician seeking re-election. Looks pretty good to me
when I see it broadcast on my 55" Sony TV. The software I bought to
overcome the rolling shutter effect works a dream too.

I'd have thought by now Annika that you'd have given up on the brand
bashing but if as I suspect its all that entertains you I suppose moving
out into the real work of accepting people can have an opinion that
differs from yours and still be right.

In summary:
Same crap, same people, same childish behaviour...
Bye bye for me. You lot will squabble this group into oblivion soon
enough, you're nearly there now.

On 2012-04-19 00:27 , Annika1980 wrote:
On Apr 11, 4:47 pm, Alan
wrote:

Watch this, idiot.
http://vimeo.com/40113110

Ouch!

The test should have been conducted for even exposure. The D5's were
way under in the lower ISO range (ISO setting v. real sensitivity issue
seen on many cameras). More latitude for aperture and exp. period
should have been given in the test.


Even if you cranked the Nikon down 2/3 of a stop it would still look
like ****.

If the exposure were correctly adjusted to the lighting (for that
camera/sensor) then the Nikon would have been very good over a good
portion of its ISO range - but not as a high a range as the Canon.

--
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
I said I didn't know."
-Samuel Clemens.

On 2012-04-22 21:57 , Annika1980 wrote:
On Apr 19, 12:55 am, wrote:
On Apr 19, 2:27 pm, wrote:



Even if you cranked the Nikon down 2/3 of a stop it would still look
like ****.

Then why didn't they?
Or cranck the 5d3 up 1 stop so that someone can see what the heck it
was shooting?

The point was to simulate what the footage would look like lit by
candlelight. It isn't the tester's fault that Nikon cranks up the
sensitivity and the noise to try to attain a brighter picture. Of
course, the guy who did the test says the difference was caused by the
framing of the shot (the Nikon being a cropped sensor and all), but I
don't see how that would matter if everything is set manually.

If a shooter has the Nikon and has to shoot those conditions, it is
clear enough that he'll find the settings that make it work best for the
Nikon. They don't have to be the same settings as on the Canon. This
is the point about this "test" that I think is unfair to Nikon.

--
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
I said I didn't know."
-Samuel Clemens.