Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Nikon D90 - Worth a look?

I'm getting one. For stills.

I will probably play around with the video too, but it's unlikely that it's something i'd use for a real job.
 
Autoexposure?

Autoexposure?

Halsu said:
I'm getting one. For stills.

I will probably play around with the video too, but it's unlikely that it's something i'd use for a real job.
Click to expand...

In some samples I saw before the exposure changes because of autoexposure in the shot, does it still do that?
 
I have both the D90 and RED. D90 should not even come up subjectively in comparison or in terms of professional jobs in these forums.
We also have the HVX200 and JVC HD250, D90 is still not there. having said that it's great fun and you do get the DOP of 35mm, also you get to shoot in places otherwise not possible.
 
You guys have no idea. It's pretty darn good once you get it set up right. The codec may not be the most flexible in post, but it still can make very nice images. If you're wanting to get into using a RED One, the D90 can teach you some things, such as 35mm DOF focusing versus H/DV focusing. Low light performance is fantastic as well. The biggest problem is that the camera, as it is, requires workarounds to get decent results. The audio is pretty bad too, but you can buy a Zoom H4 or something and record sound that way, no biggie.

If you guys read up on the D90 forums, you'll see that the auto exposure is an easy problem to fix, just lock exposure with the AE/L button. But the trick is to lock it down on the correct exposure range you want. After you set up the basic settings to optimize it for video, the locked exposure thing is the only thing you have to worry about really. Scan lines are a problem though, as I've learned, they can pop up quite a bit depending on the light source, mostly on fluorescent sources. But you can cut them down by getting the exposure locked just right. It's a bit of a hassle but you can fix it quickly once you get used to it. Plus, people are still finding out workarounds to get good results, particularly in low light.
 
It's the nasty periodic aliasing that really annoys me about the D90. A clean 720p24 would have been lovely, but without a proper downsample, it's next-to-useless.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
It's the nasty periodic aliasing that really annoys me about the D90. A clean 720p24 would have been lovely, but without a proper downsample, it's next-to-useless.

Graeme
Click to expand...
How do you feel about the 720p24 movies that the panasonic LX3 makes?
 
Got a linky to some camera movies from the panny?

Graeme
 
weird in this review from dpreview it has:

• QuickTime Motion JPEG
• 4:3 Aspect Ratio: 640 x 480 pixels 30 fps or
• 320 x 240 pixels 30 fps/10 fps
• 16:9 Aspect Ratio: 848 x 480 pixels 30 fps
• HD（16:9 Aspect Ratio）: 1280x720 pixels 24fps"

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0807/08072102panasoniclx3.asp#specs
 
Soft, aliassy, some chroma fringing on edges. Over compressed. Don't see the periodic stuff I saw on the Nikon though. It always disappoints me when the movie image just doesn't look as good as a JPEG still from the camera properly downsampled to the movie size.

Graeme
 
Yes, noisy and aliassy. Ouch. I mean, it looks good until you look at say what nice RED One footage looks like properly downsampled to 720p.

Graeme
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top