Nikson D90 does video! Will an Alpha do the same?

[destrian]

Obviously this feature will be low end which is why it has been added to the D90 instead of D700. The real question is.... since Nikon uses Sony sensors, is this a sign of what will come to us happy Sony users? I think a Sony A450 probably would have a much improved version... what do you think?

[David Kilpatrick]

Nikon states that the sensor is an 'improved 12.3 megapixel sensor' which means they have either got something later than the IMX021 (A700, D300) or they have tweaked it some way.

If Sony has done the improvement, then it will hit Alpha in due course - if Nikon has done it, perhaps not.

All DSLRs at this level will have HD video and the goal is clearly to have 1080p not 720p as offered by the D90 - and faster than 24fps, ideally 30fps. That's almost trebling the processing load and storage required, so it will not happen tomorrow.

David

[KevinBarrett]

I remember reading that the sensor used in the D90 uses on-chip A/D conversion for reduced noise...more or less just like the a700. When I went back to find the quote, all the pages had changed overnight. It may well be the a700's sensor, but what does it matter?

I certainly hope Sony doesn't follow suit in this game. It appears to be a half-baked gimmick poorly adapted from the digital P&S set list. Sony may well go and perfect it like they did live view, but at what cost? These are features I'm not looking for in a dSLR. Of course, I understand that the lower-end models these days have to be competitive against P&S cameras to keep prospective customers from thinking about "what you lose when you step up to a dSLR." I thought that was what the super-zoom models like the P80 and S5IS were for.

[pakodominguez]

David, why do you say that "The D90 is an A700-class camera"?

I think it is, like the A350, a half way between entry-level camera (A200 or D60) and the A700/D300

[David Kilpatrick]

I mean in market position. The A700 is not a D300 class camera, and the D90 is arriving at a price which indicates it will be head-to-head in street price with the A700 - hopefully the A700 will drop. We can expect the D90 to fall rapidly from £699 to £599 in the UK. It has been possible (occasionally) to find the A700 at under £599. So they are sharing a market sector. Features and build are not what determines this. It's the price.

David

[pakodominguez]

I mean in market position. The A700 is not a D300 class camera, and the D90 is arriving at a price which indicates it will be head-to-head in street price with the A700 - hopefully the A700 will drop. We can expect the D90 to fall rapidly from £699 to £599 in the UK. It has been possible (occasionally) to find the A700 at under £599. So they are sharing a market sector. Features and build are not what determines this. It's the price.

David

Hum..
I recon the D300 is a great camera -and as a former Nikon user, I'm glad Nikon came back to the game and hit Canon on their marketing true (I expect Sony second that...) But I dont feel any envy: the A700 is a great camera too, with less functions than the D300, but as good (or better in some regards) as the D300.

[pakodominguez]

[quote="Sonolta
I sure would like the lens fine tuning, the maximum FPS, and the live view the D300 has...

-Sonolta[/quote]
I prefer the live view the A300/A350 has (keaping the A700 viewfinder, of curse). The AF tuning isn't bad either.

[RubberDials]

All DSLRs at this level will have HD video and the goal is clearly to have 1080p not 720p as offered by the D90 - and faster than 24fps, ideally 30fps. That's almost trebling the processing load and storage required, so it will not happen tomorrow.

David

Firstly, hello to everyone!

David, whilst you're right that the goal with video must be to raise it 1080p, it will never be acquired at 30fps as this would only really benefit making an NTSC interlaced conversion (60i). It is hard to imagine that anyone would want to do this when almost all HD capable displays and players can handle 24p natively, and industry video production is standardising on 24p.

[David Kilpatrick]

Don, I know what good HDTV looks like - I have stood in Sony's reception for half an hour and watched the best HDTV in the world on the largest and most expensive HDTV system. I also know what bad HDTV looks like as you can't go into a Tesco or ASDA without being confronted by a wall of HDTVs all playing the same demo source. It is the difference between these - not just in contrast or sharpness, but in the stability of the image - which puts me off investing in an HDTV yet. When I do it will be a Full HD 1080p model, it will probably be a Sony Bravia, it may not necessarily be very large (32" is fine)

You have spent years watching NTSC TV, which is so bad that most Brits could not believe it when visiting the States. We have had a better 625-line PAL system since the early 1970s in Britain, and the difference between a moderate quality HDTV and top grade large screen PAL analogue TV is not as great as the shift which has happened in the States.

I have never mentioned anything about progressive scan or interlaced so how would you know whether I am not well informed?

In the UK at least, HD broadcast = satellite or cable for the moment. Terrestrial is promised for a few trial broadcasts but BBC and ITV are hoping to compete with Sky by offering Freesat, and their efforts will all be put into that. None of this has any relevance to people outside the UK though I guess the Freesat service could be picked up from other regions.

David

[David Kilpatrick]

Don, I have no idea what your repeated long rambles are all about. I have never claimed anything about HDTV being worse than analogue or anything much else about it. I haven't actually said much about HDTV, or digital TV, beyond repeating Sony's own advice given in the A700 manual and referring to Bravia TVs with Photo-HD.

I know exactly what true HDTV movies look like - I have no idea about HDTV transmissions, as I don't believe I have yet seen a live HDTV reception. I also know exactly what a Sony Alpha 700 image(s) looks like on a Bravia using Photo-HD mode. Do you really think I could attend press conferences, go to imaging exhibitions, interview professional photographers without seeing HDTV still images? How do you think most of my professional readers now present their viewings to clients?

It is clear that you really miss selling/installing televisions!

I was not at the Nikon launch, our son Richard went. He says that the presentation of the HD video clips on HDTVs (he did not note the brand used - presumably not Sony!) was impressive. I took a very close look at a bunch of 40" plus HDTVs today - as always in the UK, some carry misleading labels like '1080p input' - Sony is guilty - when actually they are 720p or not even that. Of the true 1080p models, LG, Samsung and Sony had the most artefact-free images.

We will one day see DSLRs able to shoot 1080p at 60fps, maybe even 300fps. We will see slow-mo and time lapse capabilities and eventually some kind of 3D. Lenticular screen 3D was not possible with analogue CRT screens, but digital screens are addressable by pixel co-ordinate. Back in 1979, I was one of the photographers for Nimslo (my 3D industrial, studio and aerial shots were exhibited at photokina 1980). I used the 9-lens camera as well as the multishot carrier for 35mm, and later did the factory shots for Timex Dundee who made the ill-fated Nimslo 35mm camera. Back then we made transilluminated lightboxes with lenticular 3D, one day there will be HDTVs doing the same, or something much better.

So, answering the OP's subject title question, yes - an Alpha will do the same, and then more, and then more still.

David

[Birma]

Congratulations on reaching Grand Caliph status Sonalta - you now need to get a hat like the Doc's !

[PhotoTraveler]

First, we really don't know a lot on that sensor in the D90. Just from the shots of it over at the other website it does look to be a Sony sensor, but it's not the same sensor. Just look at the trace wiring coming off it. Maybe it's the same core, but it's definitely different. Probably different read out setup for the video capability.

Might be a bit till we see what Sony does. I expect an A500 at PMA, this would be the camera to do it, especially since it would be direct competition to the D90 as the A700 gets replaced with something closer to the D300/"D400".

Still, look at sony so far with stuff like LV. They don't do what the others are doing, even if they produce the bits the other use. If Sony found off the main sensor LV to not be the correct way to do LV and went and made the second sensor method. They very likely can find the nikon approach not the way to do it. The very well could skip it, or wait till they make an EVIL (lets call that A400, even digits for EVIL cameras). Or maybe they just make a small video module that has an A mount on it.

Time will also tell if people find this very useful. I suspect people will find it to not be very useful at all. It doesn't help that the end product is video, which people have been realizing for decades isn't a very useful medium. Aside from YouTube clips people have found it's a bad medium. It's a TV/Movie medium. And that's about it. People don't watch their home movies, lord knows how many parents have 100s of hours of VHS of their children that have never been watched by anyone. Digital increase the chance of looking at it, but still limited. I'm sure lots of people are like me and often take shots but never get around to processing them, we push it back to a time when we have time and go take more photos. Video is way worse. You can't use it as a wall paper, can't put it up on your cork board at work, can't send it to the family very easy, can't put it on a wall at home, can't print it out. It's just not a great thing. It sounds great, you take some clips, but then you don't do much of anything with them. A system like this that produces short clips in a rather awkward way is not going to go far. HD YouTube clips may be the extent of it's use. And people are running out of dumb things their pets or friends do to tape.

[Greg Beetham]

Where are you at in the world PT, the Azores or somewhere? going by the time of your post that is

Yep, I agree with that assessment of yours that movies initially sound very appealing....so you take a disc drive full then what??
Still digicams are very useful for getting those elusive/rare or candid type moments that hardly anyone is ready for when they happen, but still it might be worth it too have a good HD digicam handy whenever you go out just like having the DSLR on the floor (in it's toploader of course) in the back, or in my case in the front, just in case, cause you just never know what's coming next in this day and age.
Greg

[destrian]

Quit having a stupid 1080p VS 720p argument guys! better than what we have quality is better than what we have quality regardless. Truth: I PRAY THE ALPHA A900 Does NOT have LiveView! LiveView and video in pro use - sept for FEW applications - is not that well regarded! As for journalist however.... its great! Just give me a: $1,700.00 (US) Sony Alpha A850, full frame, 14Mp DSLR, at 6 frames per second with improved DRO (up to 11 stops like the Hassleblad Phase One!), 36 continuous RAW images, unlimited jpgs till camera is full, built in SSD disk 16GB, transfer jet capability and built in Vertical Grip and it runs for 599 consecutive hours with 1 AA battery. Give me that and I'm happy as Crappy! Now let us pray for it... all together now.

[KevinBarrett]

I should hope that if Sony were to implement a video capture mode in a D-SLR, that they would execute it somewhat better than Nikon has. For instance, Sony's new slim P&S, the DSC-T500, will shoot twice the length of video that a Nikon D90 can accomodate, at the same resolution (720p), but at a faster frame rate (30 fps). If similar capability were put into an SLR but, unlike the Nikon, offer dynamic exposure settings throughout a continuous video, it would be a very powerful tool indeed. I do trust Sony to get it right, if anybody, but it isn't necessarily what I'd be looking for if I were shopping for an SLR today. I certainly don't look forward to how such a feature, properly implemented, might inflate SLR prices.