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.