I wouldn't be surprised if the next Canon flagship (5D Mark III) has the 50Mbps 4:2:2 codec all other new Canon camcorders that have been announced lately (XF series) are using.

That's the right fps for movies.

Compared to the other limitations with this camera e.g. low bit rate the lack of 25fps is only a minor inconvenience. The frame rate is really only of importance if you are producing SD for broadcast (unlikely) or DVDs. BluRay is1080p24 & I would guess that as with the Canon DSLRs that most video produced with this camera is destined for the web where PAL & NTSC are meaningless. If necessary it is in any case a pretty trivial matter to convert 24fps to 25fps.

Plenty of us bought Canon 5DIIs when they were only capable of 30fps & with no indication that there would ever be any other frame rate.

I really don't understand why Nikon only provides 24P at 1920 x 1080. Is it because there is some technical limitation in the Camera? Some people like 24P; others don't. That alone makes this issue a deal killer for those who need full HD at frame rates higher than 24P. I would love to see Nikon take Canon on with a 'killer' DSLR camera but they always pull up just short of the mark.

I thought this thread was discussing the Nikon D7000, not Sony and Canon cameras? What happened?

Dan

Thanks Dan. It's been a long day. I corrected my error.

I was an early adopter of the 5DII in a Pal country and - for the work I do - it was a major headache. True, if you know web is the *only* output it's not a big deal, but for almost all the work I do clients want the flexibility to deliver via web, broadcast and create SD dvds of their work.

When the 5DII was the only option, it was worth the often cumbersome and imperfect workarounds to conform 30p to 25p, but now that other options are readility available in Pal countries (the 7D being the most direct competitiion), the D7000 doesn't make a lot of sense. Even if (like me) you have a lot of Nikon glass, this can be readiliy used with the Canons. For me lack of 25p is a deal breaker (along with possibly bit rate) in an otherwise quite compelling product. YMMV.

Josh

Only for film to ntsc... see this:
24p - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pal users are better off with true 24P, which is not what the d7000 does

Josh, Mikael, that's EXACTLY why I think it's gaffe that Nikon have made with the limited frame rates on this camera (not to mention the low compression bit rate).

When the Canon 5DMkII came out 2-3 years ago the video DSLR landscape was very different (i.e. only about to start!). Canon rectified some of the limited frame rate options a year or so later with the 7D (which is why I got one!) and the 5DMkII firmware update whilst other manufactures scrambled to get on board (and some did pretty successfully).

But now, a whole year later, in the increasingly competitive video DSLR environment that we're all now in, there seems little excuse for Nikon missing the ball on this - at least that's my opinion.

Heck, there are even rumours the last few days that the new Lumix GH2 DSLR will have 1080p60 as one frame rate option. That, if true, would leave the Nikon D7000 in the dust!

When the 5D2 only offered 30.00 fps, that was a minor pain for NTSC users and a major problem for PAL users.

23.976 fps isn't nearly as big an issue. You can speed it up to 24 fps with only a 0.1% speed increase. From there, you can apply the same techniques that have been used to go from film to PAL for the past 60 years: speed it up by 4% or add one frame per second. I believe that the "speed up" method is the most common, as it is nearly imperceptible and has no frame artifacts.

Is it ideal? No. But it shouldn't have to be a deal breaker.

Perhaps Jon, if the Canon's were not already available with 1080/25p, but they are - all 4 of them.

There would have to be a pretty compelling reason to use this camera for video in a Pal Country over the Canon's given the additional time messing around in post...

I agree. To me, the compelling reason would be if the camera offers a clean 1080p output over the HDMI port. Otherwise, I'm afraid that the jello will be worse than on the Canons, and the encoding will be no better.

But, with clean HDMI, that could be worth the conversion time.

Jon, I think the samples show that Nikon has gotten jello very under control. But a clean HDMI signal would be great. I also wonder how much pixel binning is going on to get 24P/48fps off the chip.

B&H has it for pre-order:
nikon d7000

$1,200 for body only would seem to be a bit overpriced on Nikon's part, esp of you don't already own Nikon glass, but as this thread suggests, we don't yet know all the facts.

Nice that it has auto-focus in movie mode - a feature that's missing from the Canon line-up.

Of course, we won't really know until we see some production camera footage, but all in all I think it's good news.

I wonder what the read-reset time is. On the 5D2, the rolling shutter latency is 25ms. That allows 30 fps with some margin. 40 fps would be the theoretical limit.

With Nikon limiting the camera to 23.976 fps, I wonder if Nikon's read times are slower.

If you put it in context with the Canon line-up, it's designed more like the $1500 7D than the $900 550D. The magnesium alloy body, dual cards & 100% pentaprism are all professional features not found at this price, until now. The 7D outspec's it in most areas, but as you said, we'll know more when the production models hit the field.

As one of those Nikon glass owners, I'd prefer Nikon to leapfrog Canon in video quality, but at this stage I'll settle for a close second. Still waiting for them to announce a vertical grip with XLRs and RAID 0 CF slots..maybe the D4?

John,

I am *hoping* that the read time is faster and that the 23.976 limit is due to less pixel binning... meaning higher resolution. But my hopes may very well not be met.

It's interesting, Nikon does not have a video lineup to protect, which would make one think that Nikon should be dominating this space. ButI believe Nikon does not make their own chips and has to buy them from Sony. Well is Sony going to sell Nikon the chips that can help kill Sony's video business? I think probably not.

We'll see.

That might be why Nikon has been working on producing their own chips.

The 800 Lbs gorilla that everyone is anxiously awaiting to break threw the door is of course proper live hdmi out. We know there are various agreements behind the scenes that so far have prevented this. The hope is a company like Nikon with no video lineup to cannibalize, just might be the first. With the other bizarre limitations imposed on the cam, maybe this might be the equalizing feature. But again if they buy from Sony, probably not going to happen.

bitrate/codec are rather dated, framerates are limited and less than ideal, and the 20min limit is only due to the limited bitrate/codec combo. 720P would have been great... in 2005.

i switched from Canons to Nikons for photography in maybe 2006, because the flash and metering systems (canon STILL uses B&W metering in most cameras!) from Nikon were superior, bodies were cheaper, FPS was higher, AF was faster and more accurate, and the interface was easier to use. Canons flash systems are really pathetic. i have a sneaking feeling its due to a B&W low rate metering system.

i still use and love my Nikons, D3s, D300, D50, and a myriad of pro lenses, but i'll not even step into a Nikon for video until they have a full HD, full frame, multiple framerate (24/25/30 progressive at 1080P) with a codec and bitrate to compare to the Canon alternatives.

I still use strictly Nikons for photography (i do a lot of track and sports events, and flash related work), and now Canon T2i's for advertising and B-roll.

That said, the D7000 is just another D90; just doesnt cut the mustard, as the saying goes. I doubt there will be a wave of adverts or other large spots made with the D7000.

"but i'll not even step into a Nikon for video until they have a full HD, full frame, multiple framerate (24/25/30 progressive at 1080P) with a codec and bitrate to compare to the Canon alternatives."

Ditto. Hoping against hope (I'm not brand loyal in the slightest... although I'd say Canon had gotten 2 out of every 3 dollars I've spent on cameras and glass over the years) that it will truly offer something a step forward. This camera and the GH2 seem more like side steps then any sort of leap, although I do think we should wait until more shooters have their hands on production models.

i see the D7000 as another D90; a test. there are a LOT of Nikonians with a LOT invested in glass, and a brand-loyalty chip on their shoulders against Canon, waiting for Nikon to make a serious move into HDSLR. Nikon has let a LOT of people down after releasing the D90; yes they were the first to bat with a DSLR with video, but they have yet to prove that output is worth a damn in the real world.

i am one of these people. But i am not brand biased; i buy whatever works best for what i need. However, i DO have a lot, and i mean A LOT, invested in Nikkor glass and Nikon speedlights.

I have more invested in Nikkor glass, even at used, liquidation prices, than i do in my prized sports car that sits in my garage. i HAD been waiting for Nikon to announce something equivalent to the 7D, or AT LEAST the T2i for video. the day the D7000 was announced, i decided enough was enough, and bought 2 T2i's, one with an 18-55 IS kit lens, and the second with the 18-200 IS lens for backup cameras and tight-angle cameras. They have integrated well, and we have them matched to our preferred XH A1 shooting settings, now i have no reason to buy a D7000 or any other half-backed HDSLR offering from Nikon. We are a budget based, no nonsense ad firm; we are NOT out to make movies, so 24P is totally WORTHLESS to us. We shoot FULL HD, or HDV/Full HD, so 720P doesnt mesh well, and at least to our staff, its obvious; Nikons are OUT.

I will likely always use my nikon gear for stills; the metering, AF, flash, and low-light capabilities do surpass Canons' offerings... But i will NOT buy any further Nikon bodies until they are AT LEAST on par with Canons for video; PERIOD.

i find it appalling, irritating, and ridiculous that i had to go out and buy two Canons and two lenses for backup cameras (i know i could have used adapters, but i prefer OEM lenses and NO 3rd party garbage between lens and bodies) because Nikon is lagging. Shame on Nikon. I have a myriad of lenses, bodies, a pair of 35mm adapters for Nikkors, and a small fortune in Nikon gear that is basically stills-only now, or 35mm-adapter-only now.

If it werent for the superior 3D tracking, metering, and TTL flash work on the Nikons, i would jump ship to Canons totally, but stills are about 45% of our portfolio, and over half of that involves motorsports or compact speedlight usage, so for now we will continue to use Nikons for stills in action and flash work, and Canon for video work.

We have a ton of ARRI lighting, stands, etc for video and stills; i would HATE to have to abandon all my Nikon gear and pay the premium to switch assuming Canon gets metering/flash/AF on par with Nikons, but i am SERIOUSLY disappointed in the technical abominations that Nikon has produced for pseudo HDSLR's. I have a D300/grip with the Nikkor 18-200VR and SB-900 that i use often, also access to a 7D with grip and the Canon 18-200 IS and 580EX II (my girls camera); the AF and flash metering of the D300/grip at 8FPS is simply far more accurate in the sports/motorsports arena, but every time we go on a trip, we take her 7D because it shoots video superbly and great stills. The eTTL system is crap compared to the iTTL system though; and she has more experience in stills with flash than I. She uses my D300 and SB-800/SB-900's more than i do because they just work, and well. I use her 7D and my companies' T2i's for video because they shoot what i need flawlessly.

Brief example; last paid photo/video mixed shoot. Track, tarmac, at night, bad lighting. Subjects are RWD drift cars doing from 20mph to 80mph, from 1/8 mile away to 5 feet away, SIDEWAYS. Lighting is random mercury vapor lamps. Only practical lens for this shoot is the amateur Nikkor 18-200 VR because i cannot POSSIBLY switch lenses that fast, and my 2nd still cam is being used with a 70-200 VR from in the stands as well as our second XH A1 rig in the competent hands of friends/hired guns. girlfriend is shooting video on a 7D with the 18-200 IS lens (again due to the rapid focal length changes) and an XH A1 rig (both on the same tripod) right next to me for web/car club content. I have speedlights hidden and taped to light poles and orange road cones all over the track, 5 SB-900's and 3 SB-800's, some for backlighting, some for fill, some for on-car-glare. A car wings its way though the course, belching smoke while its sideways, my fingers twisting the lens furiously to keep it framed, clicking away. as it passes i can smell tiresmoke and feel bits of rubber pelting me; we are less than 6 feet from the front of the car as it passes at a ridiculous angle before us; im snapping away knowing my speedlights are killing her 7D video due to CMOS/rolling shutter, but bits of it will surpass the XH A1 footage. My shots come out great; i got published and everything. Her videos were on their website (XH A1, flash banding nixed the 7D footage), we were asked to return and shoot other events. Great time too; got to ride/shoot from inside the drift cars. In 2009 i shot at the Monaco Grand Prix; so this is nothing new to me; preset zoom ranges or prefocus and shoot based on the sounds as a car passed a particularly acoustically reflective object, preset speedlight positions, etc. What bothers me is that i had the SAME gear, Nikon branded, sitting in our car not in use because it was incompatible. Wasted money, when IF Nikon had ANYTHING compatible with 1080P 30P i would have ran out and bought two at LEAST that day, JUST for that days' shoot. Instead i lost camera angles. So now i bought 2 Canon HDSLR's; just for video. Client LOVED the final output, but i KNOW we could have done, and WILL do, better on the next event because we will have 2 more backup cameras, even if i have to dish out for better lenses.

pics are from earlier in the day, D50 or D300 shots. I dont upload to Flickr often. Please check em out. Last two pics we were less than 8' from the cars...
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4075/...3b826605_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4137/...d8ba3b49_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/...d10081b1_b.jpg


Apologies for the rant.

Let it out brother! Breath!

But I understand.

With all that Nikkor glass at your finger tips, you'd be afool not to buy a few adapters off e-bay.
3rd party garbage or no 3rd party garbage, it's completely irrelevant - there are no optics in these suckers, it's just a simple aluminum mount adapter. There's just no reason not to.
I have been using Nikon mount lenses on Canon bodies for years to shoot stop-motion animation.

D7000 Test Video
 

Sorry I remove this link because it has already been posted.

Apologies for being an ignoramus, but can you help me with the math here. I'm dividing 2900 by 1200 (seconds) and coming up with ~2.4Mb/s. Clearly I'm missing a trick or two!

Thanks,
Terence

2900MB / 1200 = 2.4MB/s = 19Mb/s ... MB = MBytes, Mb = Mbits

"2900MB / 1200 = 2.4MB/s = 19Mb/s ... MB = MBytes, Mb = Mbits"

Aha! Cheers.

Just a casual observation, and perhaps anecdotal: on a hacked GH1, with the encoding rate at 44 Mb, I often find my overall bitrate to be reported as 28 Mb. That just means that there is not enough detail throughout the video to fully utilize the 44 Mb codec - it's variable...

And remember, all Mbits are not created equal :)

DP Review lists the D7000's 1080p and 720p bit rate as 5.5 megabytes per second in their review. This works out to 44 megabits per second. Obviously that doesn't fit with the maximum file sizes quoted in Nikon's D7000 D-Movie FAQ.

However, a note at the bottom of page 58 in the D7000's user guide states "Each movie file can be up to 4 GB in size and 20 minutes long".

So the question is, what exactly is the D7000's maximum bit rate? Are there any D7000 owners out there who have checked the bit rates of their 1080p and 720p clips recorded at high quality?

I'm also looking for the same info as Lefchik... whats the max bit rate of the D7000?

The Canon DSLRs record 12 minutes of video to a 4GB movie file & the recording bit rate of the Canons is about 40Mbps. So a quick back of an envelope calculation gives the D7000 bit rate as (12/20)*40=24Mbps approximately which is also the maximum bit rate for Panasonic's AVCHD camcorders.

I downloaded some original D7000 video clips recorded in 1080p23.976 at High Quality via the Vimeo links from this Web page. Checking the bit rate on playback yielded a normal range of 17-21 megabits per second.