Nikon D90's 720p movie mode gets critiqued
by Darren Murph 
posted Oct 25th 2008 at 7:48PM
While being the first DSLR to shoot HD video sounds mighty excellent on paper, it's not worth much if the execution isn't there, right? The general consensus was that Nikon's D90 was a stellar DSLR, but the 720p movie mode was simply a so-so cherry on top. The gurus over at CamcorderInfo decided to take things one step further and actually write up an in-depth review on the movie mode alone. The long and short of it is this: the D90's movie mode simply can't produce the same results as a dedicated HD camcorder, and while it was "often able to produce impressive results (especially in moderately low light)," the unfortunate "wobble effect" really put a damper on things. In essence, the aforementioned problem causes objects to look like Jell-o when the user pans quickly from left to right, and the only real way to avoid it is to utilize a tripod or slow down your pans -- neither of which are terribly convenient. Critics did find quite a bit to praise, and they certainly appreciated the inclusion in an otherwise amazing camera, but it's still far from being ideal in all scenarios.
Filed under: Reviews, Other hardware
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
why not the LS2LS7? @ Oct 25th 2008 8:10PM
All HD Camcorders on the market except for the Canon XL use CMOS sensors and have rolling shutter artifacts (as seen here) also, although to various degrees. It's really sad too.
yincrash @ Oct 25th 2008 9:16PM
you could attach some weights to the tripod mount or something to increase the inertia of the camera and counteract a lot of the jitter.
yincrash @ Oct 25th 2008 9:16PM
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/steadycam/
plonk420 @ Oct 26th 2008 8:14PM
steadiness of the shot is hardly the issue... just check out the video in the link. it's quite visible even in youtube-crap-o-vision. i'm assuming "why not the LS2LS7?"'s term "rolling shutter artifact" is more accurate than i could describe.
the Canon EOS 5D Mark II may be a price bracket higher, but i would say it's a pretty big challenger to a $10k "dedicated HD camera" 3-4 times more expensive (if people can convince Canon to implement 24p ... which some make out to be "just a firmware fix away from reality" (and canon's desire))
GhostDoggy @ Oct 26th 2008 9:17AM
Why a still camera should ever be used as a video camera (or the reverse) is simply stupid. I know of few photographers or videographers that do both to the same level of practice. Its a dilution of the practice and 'averages' the results.
plonk420 @ Oct 26th 2008 8:15PM
i'm going to ignore GhostDoggy's troll-level comment...
the 5D Mark II is supposedly making a splash in the indy film circuit. last i read they're still trying to petition Canon to make a 1080p24 mode (it's currently 1080p30). here's a short film someone made with a preproduction...
watch it first: http://www.vincentlaforet.com/ (if you don't have quicktime to stream it with, you can download it @ http://s2.video2.blip.tv/0180000215994/Vincentlaforet-REVERIE882.m4v )
then
[spoiler]
let it sink in that there was *no post production* (other than titles and editing).