Nikon D90 has 720p24 over HDMI

[Vincent Oliver]

Thanks for this info Steve, I was going to publish this link also but thouight it might be more diplomatic not to do so - I didn't want to rub Chris up the wrong way. I have spoken with Nikon and they confirmed it is a tax thing, although as someone else has pointed out, many users might not mind paying the extra for longer recording times. However, once we get the camera in I will be able to let you know if the video function is going to be useful or not.

BTW. I was aware that Canon were also developing something along similar lines at least two years ago, but so far I haven't seen anything - who knows maybe the 6D may offer a few surprises?

http://www.canon.com/moon/en/index.html

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Steve Brady

...Here's a reference to the relevant Combined Nomenclature Explanatory Note:

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver

I didn't want to rub Chris up the wrong way.

Hey, this won't be the first or the last time I've had to eat crow around here, not by a long shot. Thanks fellows for posting the link and for following up with Nikon. Pardon me for saying that it doesn't make very much sense to me and I still find it very hard to swallow. Much appreciated,

[Vincent Oliver]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Hey, this won't be the first or the last time I've had to eat crow around here, not by a long shot.

BBQ crow and chips is a good combination, but don't cook it for any longer than 5 minutes or the chips may become frazzled.

Best wishes from a very wet day in London :-(

[Chris Hurd]

Thanks for the suggestion, and for allowing me to cook it. I'll fire it up on some Mesquite.

[Chris Hurd]

Meanwhile, check out this point of view from Stu Maschwitz:

ProLost: DSLR Movies, Pros and Cons

[John Sandel]

Huh. Well, it's good to know, because it suggests the cam may not heat up too much to shoot again right after reaching the 5-min limit.

[Steve Brady]

Wait, wait, wait...

The CNEN says that thirty minutes is the criterion for classifying the device as a video camera recorder. I posted the link to show that it's not a tax thing.

[Chris Hurd]

Thanks, Steve -- does this mean I can cling-wrap this plate of crow and stuff it in the freezer for a later date? There's plenty left over, believe me. Like I said, it was hard to swallow.

[Vincent Oliver]

Keep on chewing Chris, but save some for me too.


This is an extract from an article published on techradar.com

"Yes, that's right, video capture. It was only a matter of time before someone worked out how to incorporate video capture in a DSLR, and here it is. As well as full-resolution 12 million pixel still capture, the D90 can capture 1280x720 High-definition video, with (monaural) sound in five minute bursts.

The official reason for the five minute limit is to prevent heat build-up in the DX-format CMOS sensor, but rather conveniently, this limit also means that the D90 is categorised as a stills camera with an HD video capture function, rather than the other way round, which means that a lower rate of duty is payable on the bodies, keeping the price down for consumers."

Link to article

Hands-on review: Nikon D90 | Review | TechRadar UK

[Jon Fairhurst]

Is there a crow button, or is it buried in the menus?

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver

This is an extract from an article published on techradar.com...

I don't know, Vincent... that seems to conflict with the published Customs info referenced by Steve Brady above. I'm inclined to take the word of the official gov.uk source over a tech review site....

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

Is there a crow button, or is it buried in the menus?

Attached with my compliments.

[Martin Labelle]

Is it for Usa only because tax law are different in any country, so Canada should have longer recording time for the D-90. Or maybe shorther recording time since we are more taxed than Usa, and camera cost more even if the dollar is equal.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Thanks for the dinner, Chris!

Yeah, the exposure locking thing is HUGE. Sure, you can correct it in post to some degree, but what a frame-by-frame pain in the rear.

It seems the downsides of the camera are...

1) The rolling shutter. This isn't a problem on all shots, so plan accordingly.
2) The 5-minute limit. No problem for most narrative work. Don't try shooting a wedding.
3) 720p, rather than 1080p. No problem if you're going to the web or DVD.
4) Aliasing. It seems that the sub-sampling from the full sensor to 720p isn't ideal. Again, reduce to the web or DVD, and it should be fine.
5) The codec. It's not the best, but could be worse. I tried color correcting the heck out of the skateboard clip, and it stood up reasonably well. Bottom line: the audience (DVD/web) won't care.
6) It's not RAW, but I was able to color correct with a much smoother result than on many 8-bit cams. The low-noise seems to really help.
7) limited to 24p. No over/under-cranking, unless you count ~4fps photo modes.
8) Limited video features. (Though we'd be shooting mostly manually anyway, right?)
9) No audio input. The built-in mic will help us sync things up, but either the audio needs to be added in post, or you need an audio recorder.

The upsides are:
1) A Red One sized sensor for good light sensitivity.
2) A Red One sized sensor for shallow DOF.
3) Takes most any Nikon lens.
4) $1,299 for body and glass.
5) You happen to get a digital SLR for free with this video camera.
6) Do time lapse or stutter time, and you can have 4k RAW.
7) It will be available very soon.
8) When something better comes out, or if it sucks, you can sell it on eBay!

Overall, if you want to do traditional video, such as record a soccer game, forget it. If you want to do something more artistic or experimental on a budget, this could be the ticket. Especially, if you're willing to plan your shots to match the camera's strengths.

At the end of the day, it's just another tool. How good it is depends on the job at hand - and the skills of the artist.

[Vincent Oliver]

Chris,

The bottom line on this matter is that the camera will only record for 5 minutes or 20 minutes at a lower resolution, whether this is for tax or heat reasons I am not sure anymore. I may just pass on the bird this time, but keep it in the freezer.

As Jon rightly points out, it is just another tool. The exciting aspect is that other manufacturers will follow suit and I am sure that we will get higher specified DSLR video capability in future models. Canon have something up their sleeve and although I do not have any information on their new product, I do know that they were looking at movie capability at least two years ago. Canon UK has a press brief on 17 September and Photokina is a couple of weeks time, so we won't have long to wait.

I do know that I will be getting the camera within the next two weeks and I will do a full review on it. I will also make available some untouched footage to your readers so they can tinker about with it. I will also be working on a DVD user guide for the camera and hope to have it ready in about 6 to 8 weeks.


Best wishes

[Steve Brady]

I'm intrigued by the sub-sampling theory. It certainly would explain those jaggies.

I think that it would be necessary to sample every third pixel (ie 1 pixel in a 3 x 3 block) in order to maintain the bayer pattern, so the video frame would either occupy a 3840 x 2160 window of the sensor's overall 4288 x 2848 pixels, or the sampled image dimensions would be 1429 x 804 and would require scaling to 1280 x 720. It should be a trivial task to determine whether the video image is windowed or scaled by taking a still and some video of the same subject and comparing the FOV.

If the jaggies are caused by windowed sub-sampling, it should be possible, in theory at least, to alleviate them using a "soft f/x" type filter with the appropriate (very small) amount of diffusion.

Also interesting to note is that in order to achieve 1920 x 1080 video from a sensor which is capable of producing traditional 3:2 aspect ratio stills using such a sub-sampling method would require a 22 megapixel sensor!