D3s is official

[wheelhot]

Haha, I'm not saying the vid people want the screen, I'm saying by adding swivel it will just add unnecessary bulk and lower res screen to a DSLR and FYI, the GH1 has 460 000 dots vs 920 000 dots on the current DSLR, that is more then double the amount of resolution compared to the GH1. Oh and don't believe me, go check out the forums and see what people seem to complain when a dSLR without swivel screen appears and you will see the demand for having swivel will suddenly appear.

These companies push out real huge updates at a snails pace and get people to bite regardless.

Yeah, because its not cheap and easy to come out with huge updates each time.

And money is still money, video R&D takes money off and since now video on a DSLR is starting to become a trend, it is likely camera manufacturers will cater their R&D more on the video.

 

[cube]

Super high ISO and only 720p ARE useful. You just have to see those night vision shots in the news.

 

[TH3D4RKKN1GH7]

Unnecessary bulk where? Have you used a D5000 or a GH1. There is no added BULK anywhere the damn screen just comes out. It's a concave slot so it just flips out. Don't see how that could be of such a burden. Most video guys that have shot with the GH1 wish it had a higher resolution screen so no REAL video guy wants a low res screen because that makes our job much harder to do.

 

[sarcasticdesign]

Unnecessary bulk where? Have you used a D5000 or a GH1. There is no added BULK anywhere the damn screen just comes out. It's a concave slot so it just flips out. Don't see how that could be of such a burden. Most video guys that have shot with the GH1 wish it had a higher resolution screen so no REAL video guy wants a low res screen because that makes our job much harder to do.

Still. If i'm going to invest $5 grand into a video camera, i'm buying a video camera. It'll get me better quality than a DSLR and have less limitations.

Much as if i'm buying a $5 grand still camera, I'm buying a dedicated SLR or MF (at this point Mayima has a back for the same price as a D3x, so...)

I want the highest quality my money can buy. Why do you think we have specialist doctors? I wouldn't want a plastic surgeon doing open heart...

As for the D3s, as a photojournalist who has the possibility of value-adding my services by offering my newspaper videos that can be put on their site (which is bandwidth limited in both upload and end user viewing) i'm going to be thrilled with the 720p I get on a D3s. It gives me more than enough resolution for the application, remembering too that as a PJ, I may shoot something on Sunday that runs in the Monday edition. I won't have to worry about downsampling, I can just "grab and go" so to speak. this is especially so when most of the D(v)SLRs shoot m-jpeg anyway.

I personally don't want to waste card space and editing time on 1080p for an online newspaper. Now if i'm shooting a commerical, we can grab the HDX and go to town.

As I noted before, Nikon has a history of making specialized cameras. I've been following this for years. It was the D1h for speed and the D1x for resolution. Same with the D2h and the D2x. NOw we have the D3s and the D3x following the same pattern. The d100, d200 and d300 are for the semi-pro and freelance pro photogs. And your d40, d50, d5000, d80, d90 et. all are all the consumer end.

When we get the D3xs with it's currenly 24mp sensor, i have no doubt they'll implement a more hi-res video feature.

As for the consumer end, 720p is more than enough, so it's on the D90, etc. Nikon knows what they're doing. They're making still cameras with a video feature built in.

IMHO, Canon is trying too hard to blur this line, and we can see as Nikon has passed them in sensor noise and they already topped them in AF accuracy and speed not to mention ergonomics and body build. I think Canon trying to be all things to all people is a problem, considering the robust offerings they have in the dedicated video world.

 

[John.B]

I've been enjoying the back and forth on this thread, esp. the video angle.

First, there is no five grand video camera system that has the resolution, interchangable lens system, and depth of field capabilities of a vSLR. The under-a-grand HD camcorders have tiny, tiny sensors. They are more about hyperfocal distance than depth of field; try to "tell a story" with depth of field at those effective apertures -- not gonna happen. Yes, in HD camcorders everything is in focus, but that's *not* considered a good thing in cinematography (though Auntie Martha thinks its great, no doubt).

Yeah, the Red is groundbreaking in that it's cheaper to buy one than it is to rent the big lenses for a video shoot. But all those tiny, high-density pixels are still crammed into a sensor smaller than a Canon or Nikon FF dSLR sensor. Funny that people who care so much about ISO and noise and diffraction in dSLRs don't think that's a shortcoming of the Red system.

Sure, you need to rig together some sort system similar to the Glidecam to shoot proper video. So what? To do it right you always needed that. Small beans to an indie filmmaker/cinematographer who suddenly gets the tools they need to perform their craft at a price they can actually afford. No backing from a big studio producer required.

Personally I think the only reason that Nikon doesn't go with 1080p and a standard codec is that there are technological hurdles they haven't yet figured out how to solve; my guess is that's due to general lack of experience with video formats in general. Which is a shame, because the IMO lazy corporate types at Canon really need someone to push them forward as they've shown a real tendency towards complacency in the past several years.

As for dSLRs being for STILLs only... Meh. I imagine the last horse-and-buggy dealers felt the same way. The fact is, that ship has sailed. You can't stuff the vSLR genie back into the bottle. The worst thing Nikon could do is to not make headway on the newer front and lose the positive buzz they have created for themselves in the dSLR market. As has already been pointed out, history is littered with the carcasses of companies that didn't respond to competitive threats as technology evolved right past them.

 

[pdxflint]

Nikon will go 1080p, and when they do none of this will matter. In the meantime, the D3s is one helluva camera that already can produce better video than 90% of the stuff on the market when you consider depth of field, low light, sensor size, and a huge selection of lenses. I bet they're already working on it, and we'll all wonder what all the fuss was about, and they'll once again sell tons of the new 1080p model - and many to a brand-new market of videographers who for now might hold off. I think they've got plenty of time to get this right - video isn't going anywhere.

 

[wheelhot]

Unnecessary bulk where? Have you used a D5000 or a GH1. There is no added BULK anywhere the damn screen just comes out. It's a concave slot so it just flips out. Don't see how that could be of such a burden. Most video guys that have shot with the GH1 wish it had a higher resolution screen so no REAL video guy wants a low res screen because that makes our job much harder to do.

Haha, can't imagine? Look at the D5000, it has a swivel screen, Nikon decides not to remove the left buttons and look what happen it has a smaller (and not to mention lower res) LCD screen. And look at the GH1, Panasonic decides to remove the left buttons = lack of controls. You think when a pro who buys a pro-DSLR for photography will be pleased when their usual 4 buttons ended up placed somewhere inconvenient or disappeared? No, don't think so. Unless some camera manufacture (hopefully Nikon does this) creates some kind external plug for you to attach your swivel screen, then that's is okay. But as long as adding swivel screen reduces the durability, screen size, screen resolution, adds bulk, removes the location of some very useful button, then no way I'm supporting swivel in a DSLR.

 

[TH3D4RKKN1GH7]

I've been enjoying the back and forth on this thread, esp. the video angle.

First, there is no five grand video camera system that has the resolution, interchangable lens system, and depth of field capabilities of a vSLR. The under-a-grand HD camcorders have tiny, tiny sensors. They are more about hyperfocal distance than depth of field; try to "tell a story" with depth of field at those effective apertures -- not gonna happen. Yes, in HD camcorders everything is in focus, but that's *not* considered a good thing in cinematography (though Auntie Martha thinks its great, no doubt).

Yeah, the Red is groundbreaking in that it's cheaper to buy one than it is to rent the big lenses for a video shoot. But all those tiny, high-density pixels are still crammed into a sensor smaller than a Canon or Nikon FF dSLR sensor. Funny that people who care so much about ISO and noise and diffraction in dSLRs don't think that's a shortcoming of the Red system.

Sure, you need to rig together some sort system similar to the Glidecam to shoot proper video. So what? To do it right you always needed that. Small beans to an indie filmmaker/cinematographer who suddenly gets the tools they need to perform their craft at a price they can actually afford. No backing from a big studio producer required.

Personally I think the only reason that Nikon doesn't go with 1080p and a standard codec is that there are technological hurdles they haven't yet figured out how to solve; my guess is that's due to general lack of experience with video formats in general. Which is a shame, because the IMO lazy corporate types at Canon really need someone to push them forward as they've shown a real tendency towards complacency in the past several years.

As for dSLRs being for STILLs only... Meh. I imagine the last horse-and-buggy dealers felt the same way. The fact is, that ship has sailed. You can't stuff the vSLR genie back into the bottle. The worst thing Nikon could do is to not make headway on the newer front and lose the positive buzz they have created for themselves in the dSLR market. As has already been pointed out, history is littered with the carcasses of companies that didn't respond to competitive threats as technology evolved right past them.

Good lord thank you! I could kiss you right now. Someone gets it!

Again I'm not saying this new D3S is a bad camera at all, but I just thought it was strange for them to not add 1080p considering how much it could have benefited them sales wise and effected Canon's 5D Mark II sales. That's all. It probably has something to do with what this gentlemen above me mentioned.

Oh and to be honest I don't even see the point of a swivel screen to be honest, I know of people who have asked for it and I get their points but I just use a Zacuto Z-Finder for focus or an external monitor hooked up to the camera. That's the best way to check focus and imaging.

 

[sziehr]

from a canon owner i am totally envoius of the nikon iso. I started out with a nikon long ago back in 2003 but it was CCD an very noise at even low iso. I moved to canon which was super smooth at low iso and better at higher. Flash forward to now and nikon is making the right move who needs more than 12 megapixels for most work. If i need more resolution most of the time i think i could more control the situation to use a lower iso and a higher resolution. Nikon almost makes it worth having if your shooting low light alot.

 

[pdxflint]

from a canon owner i am totally envoius of the nikon iso. I started out with a nikon long ago back in 2003 but it was CCD an very noise at even low iso. I moved to canon which was super smooth at low iso and better at higher. Flash forward to now and nikon is making the right move who needs more than 12 megapixels for most work. If i need more resolution most of the time i think i could more control the situation to use a lower iso and a higher resolution. Nikon almost makes it worth having if your shooting low light alot.

"Good lord thank you! I could kiss you right now. Someone gets it!"

 

[pdxflint]

Good lord thank you! I could kiss you right now. Someone gets it!

You mean, "agrees with me!" Right? Okay, just teasing here. I had to chuckle. Didn't know you were feeling so alone..

Again I'm not saying this new D3S is a bad camera at all, but I just thought it was strange for them to not add 1080p considering how much it could have benefited them sales wise and effected Canon's 5D Mark II sales. That's all. It probably has something to do with what this gentlemen above me mentioned.

I doubt if Nikon will have any trouble selling all they make, just the way they are. This is what I, and several folks have tried to explain to you so you would (to use your own words) "get" this. If you think a 5D Mark II would be much better for video, I'm sure Canon will appreciate your business. But if you want the best photojournalist tool out there, I think the D3s might be a better choice.

Oh and to be honest I don't even see the point of a swivel screen to be honest, I know of people who have asked for it and I get their points but I just use a Zacuto Z-Finder for focus or an external monitor hooked up to the camera. That's the best way to check focus and imaging.

I think if you look at the D3s, it doesn't have a swivel screen, so it's not really an issue for this Nikon pro DSLR update. But, on the subject of swivel screens - I can see the point of a swivel screen in pure video cameras, but its implementation in a professional DSLR would be problematic, as mentioned by others. The screen would have to be smaller, and it presents reliability issues with cameras used the way photojournalists use them, where ruggedness and build quality are very important. The swivel would be a definite weak point, and depending on how they rigged it, might not articulate in the directions that are that helpful - like the D5000, which swivels downward, not to the side. With the big, bright, hi-res screens out now, it would be a bit less useful. Also, it would be much harder to weather seal.

I have no idea if the D3s will accomodate a Zacuto Z-Finder (have no experience with one,) but I'd expect an external monitor would be a bit limiting for mobility, and could limit its use to a studio where the D3s's low-light capability might be somewhat moot, (or a movie set with extra equipment, dollies, grips, assistants, umbrellas, etc.) I think the D3s is intended more for field work, available light work, one-man, one-camera type stuff. It's built to handle the weather, is rugged and made for mobility, photojournalism-style.

We've kind of beaten the subject of 1080p vs. 720p on this camera to a pulp, and honestly nobody here really knows why Nikon didn't go 1080p with the D3s, but obviously they had their reasons. All we can do is speculate, and on that note, no one "gets it" more than anybody else. Our priorities may be different (you and me, he and she, John and Harry, etc.) about what features are important, based on how we'd use the camera, but that doesn't make your perspective somehow the only right one, or mine. They're both right - based on our different needs. So, I'd buy a D3s today. You would choose something else for the 1080p video capability. That's what different products and markets are for. Seems pretty simple to me... cheers, and peace - out!

 

[wheelhot]

wow, that was a very long debate/argument whichever you prefer to call it

Glad its finally cool down and sorry if I was rude and hurt anyone feeling or anything Now lets get out there and take more photos

 

[Ruahrc]

Good lord thank you! I could kiss you right now. Someone gets it!

Again I'm not saying this new D3S is a bad camera at all, but I just thought it was strange for them to not add 1080p considering how much it could have benefited them sales wise and effected Canon's 5D Mark II sales. That's all. It probably has something to do with what this gentlemen above me mentioned.

But seeing's as the 5Dmk2 is half the price of the D3s, how many 5Dmk2 customers are out there willing to double their budget and go with the D3s instead? It would seem that Nikon's wager is "not enough to make it worth the effort". They're two different cameras for two different markets.

 

[peskaa]

and we can see as Nikon has passed them in sensor noise and they already topped them in AF accuracy and speed not to mention ergonomics and body build.

Now that's a contentious point I bloody hate Nikon's ergonomics and body design

 

[pdxflint]

Maybe a better comparison to the Nikon D3s from Canon's stable would be the EOS 1D Mark III, not the 5D Mark II. Both of these cameras were designed for the pro photojournalist market, with superior build quality, moisture and dust seals, full-sized extended grip designs and have far superior AF systems than the 5D series, even the plain old D3 fits in this category. In comparing them, the Nikon D'x' series is full frame, the Canon EOS 1D MkIII is not. The D3s has HD (720p) video. The Canon does not. The Nikon has 12.1 full-frame megapixels. The Canon (1.3x crop) has 10.1 megapixels. The Nikon has a better AF system, although it's pretty close. The D3s has more usable ISO range/less noise than the equivalent Canon body currently available.

The higher megapixel, full-frame offerings from Nikon and Canon aren't really relevant to this comparison, but I guess they'd have to be compared to each other, EOS 1 Ds MkIII vs. Nikon D3x.

Even if you just compare the plain jane D3 to the Canon EOS 1 D MkIII, it holds up well, and if you want full frame, there's really no option. By adding video to the old D3, and improving its exposure ISO and low-light capability, it becomes an even more compelling pro camera than the equivalent Canon pro camera.

It seems as if Nikon is focusing their technology on high performance still photography, sports and documentary/journalism etc. and Canon is focusing their development on video capability. A bit of a divergence going on between the two, perhaps, in the middle of a video/still photography convergence overall in the industry. Each playing to their strengths. Canon has been sitting on their laurels in the high-end photojournalism/sports photography market, which was basically theirs for years, and Nikon has passed them there. This isn't exactly news, and has been the case for the last couple of years.

So, to compare the 5D Mark II to the D3s isn't really valid, just because they both have video and are full-frame. They are two completely different beasts, aimed at different audiences. Nikon doesn't really have a camera to compete with the 5D MkII, in its price range at least not now.

For all the criticism the D3s has gotten from folks who haven't even touched one yet, and are lamenting it's lack of 1080p/30fps video, I'm still waiting for Canon to update their pro series 1 D MkIII, because now it can't even do 720p video... or any video for that matter. But... you'll still see a lot of them in the field with big white lenses attached, usually on the sidelines of major sporting events on tv. That's certainly one place you'll see the D3s too, once they hit the market. Probably not any 5D MkII's on the sidelines of big-time NCAA or pro sports would be my guess, despite it's "superior" video resolution.

 

[peskaa]

The 1D Mark III is indeed Canon's competitor for the D3/D3s - and you're right. The D3s is better, plain and simple. However, you then have to go back to the fact that the 1D Mark III is from 2007, and as such isn't a fair comparison. Basically, we're now waiting on the 1D Mark IV for a comparison that could actually be a true head-to-head.

Based on the rumbling from Canon's camp, we'll be seeing something along the lines of:
15-18mp (I'm imagining the 7D sensor or closely similar?)
APS-H (some people quite like it...I'm reasonably fond)
1080p HD video 30/24fps etc
12fps
Mark III AF

Nikon have gotten to market a little faster than Canon this time round. However, I find it interesting that in the time it takes Canon to do a single release (ie: 1D Mark III in May 2007) Nikon do a D3 (August 2007) and a D3s. Personally, I expect pro cameras to be "top of the line" for a bit longer than Nikon want to let them.

Basically, wait until Canon do a launch shortly. Then it'll get interesting. As for Canon ignoring their top end market, I beg to differ. The Mark III AF was a bad move really, generating bad press and a bunch of fixes to get it working, but they've kept moving. We've had the new 200/f2 lens, and now the new Hybrid IS which'll move into the new telephotos over time. Canon did the decent thing and didn't just scrap the Mark III and release an N version either. The D3 certainly didn't offer me enough to want to switch my PJ kit over to Nikon, and the D3s doesn't really either, as I know there's a Mark IV on the horizon which will fix the holes in the lineup.

Oh, and by-the-by, I see a hell of a lot of 5D/5DII in the field - lots of my colleagues shooting Canon are using a 1D/5D combo. The Nikon shooters are usually a D3/D2 and D700. Two full "pro" bodies doesn't make a lot of sense outside of sports - sometimes the smaller size can be an advantage.

 

[dllavaneras]

Basically, wait until Canon do a launch shortly. Then it'll get interesting.

There are rumors of an October 20th event. I'm really looking forward to this!

 

[John.B]

There are rumors of an October 20th event. I'm really looking forward to this!

pdxflint gets to gloat for a couple more days.

 

[peskaa]

There are rumors of an October 20th event. I'm really looking forward to this!

There is also the Pro Event in London that week, and I've been told the Mark IV will be present and available for "hands-on".

 

[TheStrudel]

Now that's a contentious point I bloody hate Nikon's ergonomics and body design

Always a personal choice. Myself and others can't stand Canon's!

In all seriousness, we can argue this till the cows come home, but the features or lack thereof at this price level will not cost either manufacturer sales. At this point, people are already bought into one lens system or the other and a swivel screen or 1080p video is going to budge nobody who has the scratch for full-frame-constant-aperture-pro-quality lenses.

As a Nikon user, I want Canon to come out with something competitive so Nikon has to one-up them on the next cycle. It still bugs me that the software industry isn't competitive in the same way.

 

[TH3D4RKKN1GH7]

I like Nikon's interface more, especially when it comes to custom white balance being that it gives you individual shades and it makes it easier for me.

 

[pdxflint]

pdxflint gets to gloat for a couple more days.

That's pretty funny. Wasn't gloating, and I root for both Canon and Nikon - competition is good in this case. Sure, I agree that Canon will release a killer pro system upgrade... whenever they get around to it. The only reason I even brought up the comparisons was to put it into some perspective based on the folks complaining about the lack of 1080p video in the D3s by comparing it to the 5D MkII. What isn't here today... will likely be here soon. In the meantime... where we stand today, I think I was pretty accurate. Doesn't make it a "gloat."

PS: oh, and just because it's a "pro" system and Canon prefers a longer product cycle (good enough for Peskaa, so wait awhile ) doesn't mean the competition (Nikon, Sony, whoever) shouldn't improve the performance of their own products as rapidly as the technology will allow. It's a competitive world. Nikon leapfrogged Canon in this area, and lots of pro sports shooters did in fact switch, and maybe Canon has finally been spurred to respond - thus all you Canon folks waiting for your turn to "gloat" October 20. And I'll be the first to admire the results.

 

[John.B]

pdxflint, I meant that in jest. I was just pulling your chain, I hope you realize that.

I'm envious at the great ISO performance of the current Nikon cameras. If they'd make a few changes to the D700 like adding a solid 1080p vSLR implementation (D700s? D700x?) I'd be more than willing to take a fresh look, esp. if I could find a 200mm f/2 to compare indoors against the Canon 200mm f/2 I've been renting.

Besides, Canon is the one company that is as secretive as . We could see one or two new 1D-class cameras on Tuesday, or it could be next spring or even later. Who knows, you might get to gloat a long time.

 

[pdxflint]

pdxflint, I meant that in jest. I was just pulling your chain, I hope you realize that.

... of course I knew that. I hope you realize I realized that... and on...and on... Kinda reminds me of the house of mirrors image where the reflection keeps going...and going...and going...and going...
Let's go get a beer and discuss the finer attributes of hops... First round's on me!

 

[peskaa]

Besides, Canon is the one company that is as secretive as . We could see one or two new 1D-class cameras on TuesdayD

You, sir, are a mind reader.