Nikon D5000

[Superangel]

Hi guys,

I guess someone will post this eventually, but the D5000 has been officially announced (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1788/overview.html).

Most of the rumors were true :)

Kind regards,

[XaiLo]

Well blow me down, Olive! Another new camera very... interesting, OK nikon enough with the cameras can we have a lens or two?

Edit: the 10-24 is a reality maybe I might be happy :rolleyes: not! lol

[r3g]

I didnt get to look too hard but at first glance it seems like a D90 with a swivel LCD.

[Superangel]

I didnt get to look too hard but at first glance it seems like a D90 with a swivel LCD.
I think the official position is below the D90, but above the D60. It lacks some of the D90's nicer features, but obviously it's cheaper and smaller etc.

I guess it's designed to be 'recession friendly' to those on a budget, but Canon's T1i/500D seems like a bit better bang for buck. Anyway, time (and reviews) will tell :)

Kind regards,

[swpars]

For the price, I'm impressed. Articulating LCD, 4 FPS drive with buffer for 11 RAW images, 11 point AF system.

The Rebel T1i has some stiff competition. Nikon entry level cameras sold well even when they were down on features compared to the Rebels, and now the feature gap has been closed.

[K1W1]

I didnt get to look too hard but at first glance it seems like a D90 with a swivel LCD.

No top LCD.

It's interesting that Nikon is once again in the position of having all their DX cameras with the same basic MP (12.3) size. I don't recall that happening since the D50, D70, D100 times.
A D400 can't be too far away just to break the symmetry.

Now, does anybody want to join in my "KR says buy it" sweep stakes?

The question is how long will it be before he announces that this is the best Nikon camera ever and that you no longer need anything else to shoot jpeg which as we all know is the best file format.

Post your answer here.

Closest to the actual time wins nothing. :)

[Rooz]

this is as close to the perfect entry dslr as one can get. they just knocked one out of the park.

[K1W1]

I beg to disagree.
Perfect is a combination of features and price. I think that the D5000 stacks up nicely on features but will suffer in the current climate in the price stakes. Methinks there is an opening for a D4000 in the not too distant future.

[Rooz]

I beg to disagree.
Perfect is a combination of features and price. I think that the D5000 stacks up nicely on features but will suffer in the current climate in the price stakes. Methinks there is an opening for a D4000 in the not too distant future.

true, this is no d60 replacmenet. its almost like a new category altogether sitting in between the 90/60. even reading more about it, looks alot more advanced than a d60 and a bit bigger too. i'm impressed.

i dont think it will suffer though. i reckon the d5000 will sell more than anything else within cooee, (including the d90). one thing thats great news for us is the articualting screen, love it and a sign of thigns to come. not sure about why it had to be low-res though. cost i suppose ?

[Prospero]

Seems like a great camera!
However, it's a pity that it only auto-focusses with af-s (for me, anyway).

[faisal]

I agree with Rooz...looks like a completely new category that might be a more direct competitor to the Canon 500D (with the D60 left to compete with the 1000D). The rotating screen is great....I wonder why Canon never bothered borrowing the idea from the S3/5 ages ago...the 11-AF point is also interesting move....A good camera overall IMO....wonder what Sony is upto!!!

[K1W1]

The rotating screen is great....I wonder why Canon never bothered borrowing the idea from the S3/5 ages ago...

Or even from as far back as the G1 in mid 2000. :)

[faisal]

Or even from as far back as the G1 in mid 2000. :)

Thats one thing I'd really like to have...well I'll just have to wait to see what Canon does with it's next releases....:rolleyes:

[swpars]

My guess is the 550D/Rebel T?? will definitely have an articulating LCD screen.

[BikerJohn]

This is interesting:
Quiet shooting mode: perfect for photographing a sleeping baby, Quiet mode noticeably reduces the sound of the camera’s internal mechanisms when the shutter is pressed.

Has that been done on other Nikons?

[Aldor88]

For the release price i'd rather have a D90 since it's about the same price here for body only. The swivel display is nice but the D90 has the top LCD, screw and bigger viewfinder.

It's still a solid camera tho and once the price drops a bit it will compete nicely.

[swpars]

This is interesting:
Quiet shooting mode: perfect for photographing a sleeping baby, Quiet mode noticeably reduces the sound of the camera’s internal mechanisms when the shutter is pressed.

Has that been done on other Nikons?

Don't know of that, but I do know the Canon 40D and 50D have a "stealth" mode that involves shooting in live view.

[fionndruinne]

This is almost a direct counterpart to Canon's series, which Nikon really hasn't had since the days of the D50 and XT.

You guys think this will the the cheapest incarnation with the 12MP CMOS sensor? If Nikon hopes to put out a D60 replacement at a cheap enough price-point, I'm thinking they may not load it with the D90 sensor.

Can't wait to play with this one in the stores.

[laydros]

Color me impressed. If this came out a month earlier, when I bought my 40D, I might have gone this route instead. I felt like the D90 was still a little small and slow for the price compared to the 40D. D40 and D60 were out because of the combination of 3 point AF, no LV, one wheel, need for AF-S, and perhaps most importantly size. 40D felt best, but D90 was ok. If this (bigger) body was available, plus the LV and better AF, I might have been sold. With HD video as icing on the cake.

I have heard many say that the only reason to buy the D300 over the D90 was AF speed (and points), weather sealing, and FPS. Well this has the same things missing (FPS is only a little slower) but comes in much cheaper.

The tilting screen on the A300 was nice, but that was because it had fast AF in LV. So I dunno about that part. I guess it will still help on the tripod.

Does anyone know if the AF during movie mode is better?

I expect I'll tell newcomers to go for this over the T1i. In part because I really dig that 12MP sensor from the D90 and D300.

[swpars]

I don't think this cam has AF in movie mode (like the D90).

[laydros]

I don't think this cam has AF in movie mode (like the D90).

Yeah, I didn't catch that from the dpreview preview (I didn't read 100%) but I did catch it in the preview here.

[scupking]

Take out the movie mode, keep the LCD as a none swivel, make it the same size as the D40,D60 and bring the price to $500.

[Rooz]

Take out the movie mode, keep the LCD as a none swivel, make it the same size as the D40,D60 and bring the price to $500.

that camera already exists. you own it.

[Rooz]

one wheel, need for AF-S, Does anyone know if the AF during movie mode is better?

I expect I'll tell newcomers to go for this over the T1i. In part because I really dig that 12MP sensor from the D90 and D300.

this still needs af-s lens', (no motor), AF in LV i suspect will be exactly the same and video doesnt have AF. the swivel screen is awesome. much better idea than the sony version, im glad nikon got this right.

[btuner]

I still don't understand why you need video on a DSLR!??! never once have I been some place and thought "man, I wish I had some sub-par video of this picture that I am taking" This is a soccer mom camera, period. It's seems like nikon has only been focusing on the extreme ends of their photography segments lately.

[scupking]

that camera already exists. you own it.

There are other features on the D5000 that would make it a good D40, D60 replacement if made into the same D40/D60 body.

[RED_Partizan]

I still don't understand why you need video on a DSLR!??! never once have I been some place and thought "man, I wish I had some sub-par video of this picture that I am taking" This is a soccer mom camera, period. It's seems like nikon has only been focusing on the extreme ends of their photography segments lately.

I'm with you on that. I actually find the video function on DSLR's quite offensive for some reason

[Elisha]

that's what people said about cameras on their cell phones many years back. now almost everyone makes sure their new cell has a camera.

[RED_Partizan]

And tbh I still haven't really actually accepted cameras on cellphones lol!

[K1W1]

This is a soccer mom camera, period.

In that case there are going to be a heck of a lot of disappointed Soccer Moms when they find that the camera will not focus during video so little Johnny is only going to be clearly in focus for brief periods when he is standing in the correct spot.

Video is just a natural progression from live view it probably adds next to nothing to the price so it's quite simple if you don't want to use it don't.

[craigyc]

I'm stumpted that this thing body only, costs the same as the D90 with 18-105mm!

[btuner]

I'm stumpted that this thing body only, costs the same as the D90 with 18-105mm!

i thought it was $750 for the body

[K1W1]

I'm stumpted that this thing body only, costs the same as the D90 with 18-105mm!


Wait till the real pricing arrives.
What you are getting on web sites are people just throwing prices up there so that the product is listed. When stock arrives in a couple of weeks you will see the price fall to more realistic levels.

[btuner]

ritz has it on pre order for $729(body only)
http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541533873.htm

[Aldor88]

There are other features on the D5000 that would make it a good D40, D60 replacement if made into the same D40/D60 body. Yet the features YOU feel are unnessesary restrict your use of the camera in no way and may benefit others(like me). The swivel display is awesome and movie mode would be fun to try. I do think the D5000 is a bit expensive tho and maybe without video or the swivel display it might be cheaper.

Oh and cameras on phones are totally awesome now that they actually take decent(for the purpose) pictures. They were awful at first aswell(kinda like the current movie mode:) )

The DSLR industry has to be the only one where people whine when they get more features :D.

[jcon]

I still don't understand why you need video on a DSLR!??! never once have I been some place and thought "man, I wish I had some sub-par video of this picture that I am taking" This is a soccer mom camera, period. It's seems like nikon has only been focusing on the extreme ends of their photography segments lately.

Amen! Agree 100%

Maybe some day they will add texting to the back of video DSLRs so we can text while recording a soccer game!:rolleyes:

[XaiLo]

I still don't understand why you need video on a DSLR!??! never once have I been some place and thought "man, I wish I had some sub-par video of this picture that I am taking" This is a soccer mom camera, period. It's seems like nikon has only been focusing on the extreme ends of their photography segments lately.

I don't own a camcorder and in the past 4 years I only had one project that I wanted one to use, fortunately my S3 had a video mode. Which I'm positive I didn't use until that day.

Now tomorrow I'm headed to a Tea Party and a certain website voiced interests in video. I will be taking two cameras so it's fortunate one of them has video if the need arises.

So while I personally don't care either way, there's still that odd chance that it may come in handy.

Edit: Kiwi the MSRP prices are on Nikon USA's site in the press release section.

[Superangel]

I don't think it's worth getting riled up about video, it's just a business decision :) As more and more people upgrade from P&S cameras, or look for reasons to upgrade their existing DSLRs, companies need ways to encourage people to buy. Adding common features that people understand is an easy option.

As with most multifunctional devices, of course you can get better results with dedicated devices. However, sometimes it's just convenient to have an all-in-one device (and if you've seen what enthusiasts can do with today's first-generation video DSLRs, it's still very impressive).

Given that you're not really paying a price premium for including video, the only major concern is it detracts a little R&D focus away from other areas. I don't think it's worth losing sleep over, though :) Every generation of cameras is an iterative improvement. If video is in vogue in 2009, it will be something else in 2010, and so on and so forth.

[fionndruinne]

Geez, what a lotta whining on the video mode! What I don't like is calling it sub-par. Video from a D90 with a nice lens attached is far from sub-par. It's nicer quality than you'll get with any P&S cam, or camcorder, because the optics are potentially much better.

I don't think it's essential... but I'd defninitely like to try it.

[K1W1]

The video output is crap, it's so rotten that it's only suitable for kids to use while they are standing in the surf in Sydney. As an adult who likes photography I wouldn't lower myself to use a device that creates such an inferior output.

:mad: :confused: :) :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeChp9FDEFU

[XaiLo]

The video output is crap, it's so rotten that it's only suitable for kids to use while they are standing in the surf in Sydney. As an adult who likes photography I wouldn't lower myself to use a device that creates such an inferior output.

:mad: :confused: :) :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeChp9FDEFU

Didn't you say something about never owning a particular crappy camera once upon a time? :p

[K1W1]

Yeah but that was before I became a snob black shutter release camera owner.
Now I look down my nose at anything that is so easy a 9yo can use it. :D

[craigyc]

The video mode is far from useless. Granted I have never used it on my D90 but that was'nt why I chose the D90 it was the other features and the price. Having the video capability included was a bonus and I often forget its even there but im sure I will use it one day.

I have seen some decent video output from dslr movie mode. The DOF looks great and normal camcorders just cant get that effect. Not to mention lenses such as the fisheye or a super telephoto! Just make sure you bring a tripod and lock the exposure to get rid of that ghastly shutter rolling effect and the constant exposure changing!

[XaiLo]

Yeah but that was before I became a snob black shutter release camera owner.
Now I look down my nose at anything that is so easy a 9yo can use it. :D

Oh I see! :eek::D

[Rooz]

someone make a case for dslr NOT having video. i dare ya.

[K1W1]

someone make a case for dslr NOT having video. i dare ya.

Because your daughter will want to stand in water up to her knees filming her younger brother with YOUR new camera!

[Rooz]

lol ok...someone else then. :p

[XaiLo]

Because you'll be too busy playing with video, "to get the shot"! Ooops :p

[K1W1]

BTW did you notice that those kids appeared to have at least two lenses on the camera during the course of the day.

[achuang]

I saw quite a few lenses. 18-105VR, 105VR, 10.5mm fisheye. Talk about entry level user friendliness with expensive lenses.

[Thronsen]

I love my D90 and take alot of pictures. I also take alot of video, but I rarely do that on the D90.

The D90 video *can* be great. Where else can you get so many lenses at a (relatively) low price. Unfortunately you really need to know what you are doing, and take time in preparation, to pull off the 'great'. You really need to be a specialist/expert.

And of course the usual D90 user is more of a generalist, who doesnt want to screw around with things like focus. Which is actually fairly tough to do off the LCD in daylight even for the experienced.

I like to travel light, but I do find myself lugging my camcorder along with my D90 if I think I will need to video something. And if I do get caught out without the camcorder, I would probably pull out my Flip HD before cranking up the D90 movie mode.

So yes, I would be a perfect customer for DSLR movie mode. I would frankly love it. But the way it is currently implemented is of little use.

[r3g]

I feel like when it comes to video mode people are way too close minded. Sure YOU may not have use for video but you cant speak for the masses. When I purchased my D90 Liveview and video mode meant absolutely nothing. Even after unboxing itand snapping away a few hundred pics video mode was still never ever entered my mind. Then I took a trip to Monterey and wished I had a video camera as well as my DSLR. Oh snap I do!!! And let me tell you the video on the D90 is in no way sub-par. I got the hang of MF in less than 5 minutes and thats having never MF a video camera before in my life. As we speak in on a get away in Tahoe and I'm almost taking more videos than pictures. The quality in 720p is just amazing.

Ok enough rambling.. Basically my point is what makes DSLRs so above having video capability? How can one justify saying a camera shouldnt have a certain feature just because that particuar person doesnt need it? If you dont want it dont use it.

On the other hand.. Im still coming down from a long night of drinking so feel free to ignore all this :p

For anyone who doubts the quality of video mode heres the very first video i took with the camera. http://www.flickr.com/photos/reg_00/3434327011/

[Elisha]

ok so it is not quite as long as the D90 but thicker most likely cause of the screen.
but the screen is not as nice as the D90.
but still a superb replacement for the D60 nonetheless.
the icing on the cake would be if it uses the same sensor as the D90.

[K1W1]

but still a superb replacement for the D60 nonetheless.

I don't think that the D5000 is a D60 replacement. The feature set, capabilities and price are way above what would be expected in the typical entry level DSLR these days. I suspect that this is the first in a new range of DSLR's and that there will be another lower spec'ed lower priced unit released to actually replace the D60.
Just to hypothesise for a moment I could see the D5000 as being the middle of a three unit consumer DSLR range with say a D4000 as the lower end and a D7000 (which would be the D90 replacement) as being the upper end.

[btuner]

someone make a case for dslr NOT having video. i dare ya.

so what's next then? wifi access with full qwerty keyboard, with flicker apps so we can upload on the fly? built in mp3 player with headphone jack to jam out while shooting? built in photoshop with full touch-screen controls so you can clone on the go?

[r3g]

You can be sarcastic all you want but there has yet to be ONE good reason (or any reason at all) why having video on a DSLR is a bad idea. P&S cameras have it. What makes DSLRs too good for video?

[btuner]

Why doesn't the new D3x have video?

[nsjuice]

This reminds me of the time I was anxiously awaiting to purchase Canon's 5DII. It made me jump ship to Nikon due to the mere fact that it wasn't affordable with its added Video capabilities. And I wasn't going to revert back to the previous version.

Im glad I did.

I don't need video.

That's just me. To each their own.

[Elisha]

you guys don't have to use if if you don't need it! complaining about it won't make Nikon redesign the D5000.

[K1W1]

built in mp3 player with headphone jack to jam out while shooting?


Yes please but I'd rather have A2DP enabled Bluetooth so I can have wireless headphones. :D

[Rooz]

so what's next then? wifi access with full qwerty keyboard, with flicker apps so we can upload on the fly? built in mp3 player with headphone jack to jam out while shooting? built in photoshop with full touch-screen controls so you can clone on the go?

not relevant. thers no point to this statement.


there has yet to be ONE good reason (or any reason at all) why having video on a DSLR is a bad idea.

correct.

[jcon]

Well, its been alright for other members to whine and complain about too many megapixels, or too small of an LCD or no AF motor, etc...etc... so why cant myself and others voice their feelings and opinions on this?

This kind of reminds me when all-in-one pocket knives were popular, they were sooo cool because they had scissors, screwdriver, cork screw, finger nail file and a dull ass knife all in one.. and hey, it fit in your pocket to boot! But those that wanted a real knife would actually buy a REAL knife, not some all-in-one consumer friendly piece of crap.

If someone is happy with it, great for them, doesnt mean I have to like it or even accept it.

[XaiLo]

On the other hand.. Im still coming down from a long night of drinking so feel free to ignore all this :p

For anyone who doubts the quality of video mode heres the very first video i took with the camera. http://www.flickr.com/photos/reg_00/3434327011/


R3g, I see blue people! :p but the squid was looking good ;)

[K1W1]

I'm thinking that this is one of those threads that is getting out of hand because some of us are just having fun and "taking the Micky" as they say here and others are either misunderstanding or being serious and are being misunderstood.

[r3g]

For the record I didnt come into this thread to argue. I read posts and saw that there was a lot of posts basically saying video on a DSLR is stupid. To that I say if you dont want it dont use it but just because you wont use it doesnt make it a bad idea and doesnt mean the camera shouldnt have it. There was also talk that the video quality of the D90 is sub-par, this is simply not true.

Its totally ok to not need a feature any certain camera offers.. But not everyones needs are the same. Dont knock it till youve tried it in real world day to day bases.

[Rooz]

Well, its been alright for other members to whine and complain about too many megapixels, or too small of an LCD or no AF motor, etc...etc... so why cant myself and others voice their feelings and opinions on this?.

its not the same thing jason. more MP's in a camera does have an effect on the final product; it introduces more noise if it goes overboard. and its not something one can choose to use or not as they see fit. you either get it or you dont. the LCD is another example where there is no choice...you either have a 2.5 or a 3inch LCD. it cant be turned on or off. same as no AF motor. you either have it or you dont. rational, logical arguements and preferences can be made on the absense or inclusion of such features given that there is no CHOICE post purchase if you want to use those features. like i said...its eitehr there or its not. no choice

video on the other hand is an option you can choose to use or not as it so pleases you. more importantly if you choose NOT to use it, it has absolutely no effect on the purpose you bought the camera for.

so, no, i do not accept thats a valid anology at all. someone else have a go....but let me just preface this by saying this...no one can make a single case for video not being in a dslr apart from "i dont like it".

it does not degrade image quality
it does not make it heavier
it does not make it harder to use
it does not increase price
it does not make it less reliable

the fact is that it does not come at the expense of anything whatsoever. there is zero comprimise of the dslr as a photographic tool. so no kind of rational argument can be made against putting it in there. i';m not taking the piss out of anyone here. i;m serious, someone make a rational case...

[faisal]

Video is great for people who want it while it's completely useless to those who don't care about it....people will buy these cameras for it's video modes especially the oens coming from the P&S crowd which will result in hopefully more cash inflows to the companies and that money might be used for R&D to make better cameras. As long as they don't forget the main focus of a DSLR is great IQ...

[btuner]

it does not degrade image quality
it does not make it heavier
it does not make it harder to use
it does not increase price
it does not make it less reliable

the fact is that it does not come at the expense of anything whatsoever. there is zero comprimise of the dslr as a photographic tool. so no kind of rational argument can be made against putting it in there. i';m not taking the piss out of anyone here. i;m serious, someone make a rational case...

So like I said before, why doesn't the D3x have video then?

[Rooz]

who cares ? what dos one thing have to do with anohter ?

[XaiLo]

it does not degrade image quality
it does not make it heavier
it does not make it harder to use
it does not increase price
it does not make it less reliable

the fact is that it does not come at the expense of anything whatsoever. there is zero comprimise of the dslr as a photographic tool. so no kind of rational argument can be made against putting it in there. i';m not taking the piss out of anyone here. i;m serious, someone make a rational case...

OK I'll make a case, quite a few professional photographers have moved into what's being refered to as fusion which is a mixture of images and video incorporated into a slideshow. And the tool of choice is in camera video and it's only in it's infancy in DSLR's. I have seen some really great stuff produced from in camera video. So just remember sometimes the limitation is in our own minds. OK Rooz that's my case :p

Here's an example and some cool videos.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Karen-Alsop/702860134#/pages/Clematis-Australia/Emerald-Eye-Photography/20132473040

http://lastoriafoto.xanga.com/689617607/canon-5d-mark-ii-movie----448---voyage-by-bob-davis/

http://vimeo.com/2704645

[r3g]

So like I said before, why doesn't the D3x have video then?

That would definitely be a question for the guys who design Nikon cameras not us. But does it really matter? Are you implying that just because the D90 and 5000 have video that all the higher end models are supposed to have it too? Or are you wondering because of the fact that the D3x is the flagship model and should have everything the lower end models have? Just to be clear this is not sarcasm Im seriously asking.

[nsjuice]

I don't know about the 5000 because it is moderately priced.

So if the 5dII didn't have the 1080 vid capabilities it's price would still be the same?

I'm not trying to be smart, just asking cuz I don't know what goes into making these cameras.

[Aldor88]

The D3x is mainly a studio camera right? then what the hell would ya do with video on it? I could see the D3 replacement with video tho, like the 5d markII.

I really can't see why people argue against video, its lot like its an mp3 player or something...

[r3g]

I really can't see why people argue against video, its lot like its an mp3 player or something...


Psh who doesnt love music during their photoshoot?? :p:cool:

[faisal]

Psh who doesnt love music during their photoshoot?? :p:cool:

Yeah...true....just should make sure it doesn't slow that fps.... ;)

[mark123]

hi

i was reading the preview and just like it was for d90 i see no mention of face tracking in phase focus. shouldn't we tell the reviewer? it's a fun feature using the metering sensor.

[scupking]

its not the same thing jason. more MP's in a camera does have an effect on the final product; it introduces more noise if it goes overboard. and its not something one can choose to use or not as they see fit. you either get it or you dont. the LCD is another example where there is no choice...you either have a 2.5 or a 3inch LCD. it cant be turned on or off. same as no AF motor. you either have it or you dont. rational, logical arguements and preferences can be made on the absense or inclusion of such features given that there is no CHOICE post purchase if you want to use those features. like i said...its eitehr there or its not. no choice

video on the other hand is an option you can choose to use or not as it so pleases you. more importantly if you choose NOT to use it, it has absolutely no effect on the purpose you bought the camera for.

so, no, i do not accept thats a valid anology at all. someone else have a go....but let me just preface this by saying this...no one can make a single case for video not being in a dslr apart from "i dont like it".

it does not degrade image quality
it does not make it heavier
it does not make it harder to use
it does not increase price
it does not make it less reliable

the fact is that it does not come at the expense of anything whatsoever. there is zero comprimise of the dslr as a photographic tool. so no kind of rational argument can be made against putting it in there. i';m not taking the piss out of anyone here. i;m serious, someone make a rational case...

Of course it comes with an expense you don't think it cost nothing to put a microphone in and redesign a body for a flip screen.

[fionndruinne]

The flip screen is not a video implementation, it's a live-view implementation. So all you really have is the microphone. And no, I don't think it costs much to implement a microphone. It's like quibbling over computer models. "Oh, for twenty dollars more I can get an extra gig of RAM... but come on, will I ever use that extra gig?" The point is we're talking very small amounts of money here. Not $100, more like $15-50. That's a frugal dinner out these days.

[VTEC_EATER]

The flip screen is not a video implementation, it's a live-view implementation. So all you really have is the microphone. And no, I don't think it costs much to implement a microphone. It's like quibbling over computer models. "Oh, for twenty dollars more I can get an extra gig of RAM... but come on, will I ever use that extra gig?" The point is we're talking very small amounts of money here. Not $100, more like $15-50. That's a frugal dinner out these days.


Who knows exactly where this model camera will end up when the year is over with but if this is meant to be a replacement for the D60, then all those little $15-50 additions add up in price pretty quickly. $15 here, another $50 there, maybe a $35 option there, you are looking at another $100 on the camera body price. On a D3 its not that big of a deal. I don't think $100 will make or break anyone's decision if they are looking at a D3. But, on a camera that is $799 its a big deal. What if they could have made the camera $699 by not introducing a flip screen, and not giving it video capability? Live view? Sure, but video? Who knows how much that added to the cost of the camera. Probably $100 at a minimum. That's a pretty expensive option on a camera that is less than $1000.

[K1W1]

Who knows how much that added to the cost of the camera. Probably $100 at a minimum.

More like $5 max.
The video is a function of live view. EVERY DSLR with live view has the ability to take video all that is required is an algorithm in the firmware to capture it and possibly another small chip on the motherboard. The only hardware required is the microphone which would cost cents at the factory pricing.
The flip out screen would more than likely be cost neutral as the actual screen is smaller and has less resolution that the screen Nikon would otherwise of used. What you have to remember is that these things are not built in some form of isolation. There are millions of flip screens being built every week for mobile phones, PDA's cameras, laptop PCs and specialist devices. The basic hinge, connection and screen components would all be available of the shelf from the people who manufacture those things. All Nikon have to do is design a body that integrates all of them.

[Rooz]

Of course it comes with an expense you don't think it cost nothing to put a microphone in and redesign a body for a flip screen.

wheres your evidence to back that up ? since video has be implemented dslr prices have significantly dropped. check the prices of curent models compared to previous models.

[jcon]

Here is a link to a poll/forum on this exact same topic that I found interesting. Its not a "new" thread, but its the same point of views.

http://digital-photography-school.com/video-on-a-dslr-forum-poll

One of the comments that caught my eye...



"My biggest concern with video on a DSLR is the heat generated by the constant use of the sensor while taking a video. If you take a normal photo after that (with the hot sensor) the extra heat will cause more noise in the photos, thereby degrading image quality.
It’s this reason why Canon and Nikon recommend not using ‘Live View’ for extended periods.
So in my opinion, having video on a DSLR DOES compromise the camera’s ability to function."

[Rooz]

first of all, there is no evidence of that happening Jason. just speculation by people who dont want video. and the speculation is based on nothing rational. and secondly, if you dont want to use video, then you dont use it and the first point becomes moot cos theres zero chance of it happening without using video. end of that argument aswell.

a "poll" is irrelevant. its just peoples opinions based on no evidence or rational thought at all. so i ask again, give me one REAL rational thought why video should not be included.

[RED_Partizan]

Here is a link to a poll/forum on this exact same topic that I found interesting. Its not a "new" thread, but its the same point of views.

http://digital-photography-school.com/video-on-a-dslr-forum-poll

One of the comments that caught my eye...



"My biggest concern with video on a DSLR is the heat generated by the constant use of the sensor while taking a video. If you take a normal photo after that (with the hot sensor) the extra heat will cause more noise in the photos, thereby degrading image quality.
It’s this reason why Canon and Nikon recommend not using ‘Live View’ for extended periods.
So in my opinion, having video on a DSLR DOES compromise the camera’s ability to function."

Another turn in this debate. Although it may not as the function isn't the primary purpose. Otherwise...built-in fan :p

[fionndruinne]

Or... built-in fan/sensor cleaning! Aha.

[jcon]

so i ask again, give me one REAL rational thought why video should not be included.

Because I dont want it.. and thats the only reason that matters to me! Personally, I could give two sh!ts about the D5000 but if Nikon decides to start adding gimmicks to the D3 and the other high end bodies, it may be time for me to choose a new career path!

We will have to agree to disagree on this one, Rooz. Respectfully, ofcourse!

[Rooz]

We will have to agree to disagree on this one, Rooz. Respectfully, ofcourse!

jason, i think we're being respectful. :)


Because I dont want it.. and thats the only reason that matters to me!

thats fair enuf mate, but my answer to that is as it was before...just dont use it. whether video is in the dslr or not, it has no bearing whatsoever on how you will use it as a regular dslr. why is video so emotive ? are you telling me you use EVERY single other feature in a dslr ? if not, then whats the difference between video and the other features you dont use ?



if Nikon decides to start adding gimmicks to the D3 and the other high end bodies, it may be time for me to choose a new career path!


a gimick is somethign that serves no real useful purpose... video DOES serve a purpose. whether you want to take advantage of it or not is entirely up to the user, but it DOES serve a purpose. by your logic, anything that one person doesnt find useful is a gimick. i dont use dof preview, or bracketing, or in-camera processing like overlay etc. that doesnt mean they are gimicks, it just means i have no use for them and i can, (and do), choose to ignore such features.

its not the same as a digital video camera unless you invest in something like a RED system. with the current digital video camera system, you cant get high end exchangeable glass, can get the dof, cant get the low light performance.

its also nothing to do with "nikon" per se. this is the way dslr is headed. every dslr will have video from now on, period. so like you said bro, either you come to terms with it, or change career paths. everything below a D3 will certianly have it, and eventiually the D3 level WILL have it. i can guarantee it.

yet again, i just dont understand such hostility and irrational thought about a feature that can either be used or not as the customer sees fit.

[jcon]

jason, i think we're being respectful. :)




Agreed.



yet again, i just dont understand such hostility and irrational thought about a feature that can either be used or not as the customer sees fit.

No hostility here. I simply gave my opinion a few posts ago, and others(not you) decided they wanted to jump all over my opinion. This is a forum and I can post my opinion when I see fit, just like anyone else can.

Now, im off to figure out how I can video record an upcoming wedding....


Just kidding! :D

[XaiLo]

Who knows exactly where this model camera will end up when the year is over with but if this is meant to be a replacement for the D60, then all those little $15-50 additions add up in price pretty quickly. $15 here, another $50 there, maybe a $35 option there, you are looking at another $100 on the camera body price. On a D3 its not that big of a deal. I don't think $100 will make or break anyone's decision if they are looking at a D3. But, on a camera that is $799 its a big deal. What if they could have made the camera $699 by not introducing a flip screen, and not giving it video capability? Live view? Sure, but video? Who knows how much that added to the cost of the camera. Probably $100 at a minimum. That's a pretty expensive option on a camera that is less than $1000.

Looking at this cameras design and functionality... I'd have to argue it was designed was premised heavy wih an emphasis on video usage. And that the primary consumer here for Nikon is one who wants to stop carrying two pieces of equipment. In addition the size, weight, cost, and capacity of SD media will make this an attractive solution for consumers.

[K1W1]

It’s this reason why Canon and Nikon recommend not using ‘Live View’ for extended periods.

The actual reason why the ability of DSLRs to take video for extended periods is crippled is that the time limit is set in firmware deliberately so that the cameras cannot be taxed in the EU as video cameras which attract a higher tax rate than still cameras.

[Rooz]

Now, im off to figure out how I can video record an upcoming wedding....


Just kidding! :D

are any of your wedding jobs requesting digital slideshows ? my last job only wanted 1 print. everything else they wanted on a digital slide show to play on their LCD. i see this becoming increasingly popular.

so from my POV if i was able to add a few snippets of video to that slideshow, i reckon it will be a killer thing to add to the package. all the while i'm not missing anything, and not using any other sort of equipment.

jason, i reckon you;ll be using video freely sooner than you think.

[K1W1]

jason, i reckon you;ll be using video freely sooner than you think.

He has to accept colour first then when he's comfortable with that he may be ready to move to digital. :D :D :D

[rawpaw18]

I love the distortion correction feature, anyone else with the 18-70 will know
what a blessing this would be. Time lapse up to 24 hours and 999 intervals,
not exactly sure what you want to take a picture of once a day for the next three
years but I guess you could :)

[K1W1]

not exactly sure what you want to take a picture of once a day for the next three years but I guess you could :)

Paint drying? :D

[Rooz]

ITime lapse up to 24 hours and 999 interval.

i idnt know it had that feature. :mad:
thats it...i REFUSE to buy this hunk of junk now.:mad::mad:

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

he has to accept colour first then when he's comfortable with that he may be ready to move to digital. :d :d :d

rotfl......

[Gintaras]

i guess you miss Coldy in this Nikon discussion ;-)

[jcon]

are any of your wedding jobs requesting digital slideshows ? my last job only wanted 1 print. everything else they wanted on a digital slide show to play on their LCD. i see this becoming increasingly popular.

so from my POV if i was able to add a few snippets of video to that slideshow, i reckon it will be a killer thing to add to the package. all the while i'm not missing anything, and not using any other sort of equipment.

jason, i reckon you;ll be using video freely sooner than you think.

Yes, one of my weddings that I have booked for June asked if I could record video, and I said no, but that I could refer them to people that handle video recordings, they said thanks but it wasnt a major thing for them.

I do offer DVD slideshows that are made custom for the client, they pick the images and the songs then I add transitions and special effects.



i guess you miss Coldy in this Nikon discussion ;-)

Video on a DSLR isnt just a Nikon topic. FWIW, Coldrain and I got along just fine for the most part, I respected him for the fact that MOST of the time he could be unbias. There arent many on this forum that can do that, Rooz is one that comes to mind that can, but alot of others on the Nikon forums arent.

[Gintaras]

jcon, forgive me, i was just pulling your Nikonian leg ;-)

since technology advanced in a serious way and all major DSLR manufacturers made huge leaps forward there is no issue anymore in debating principal issues while gimmicks and etc boil down to personal preferences. i for instance could not care less for movie mode on DSLR as i strongly believe DSLR is for taking photos and for movies one picks newest HD HDD camcoders.

[raven15]

Slightly off topic, but...


Time lapse up to 24 hours and 999 intervals, not exactly sure what you want to take a picture of once a day for the next three years but I guess you could

I have been on construction projects where a picture was taken at intervals for many months or years. In fact, it is quite common. Later a slide show, series of small prints, or time-lapse video can show it being assembled, it actually looks pretty freakin' cool to see a building grow out of the ground in two minutes. I have used this feature on an old Olympus C7000 point-and-shoot to show a student construction project, and I wish my current camera had it. Though, I imagine the user base for this ability is in fact pretty small. It would be quite weird to buy a DSLR just to take one shot a day for it's anticipated lifetime.

[Cyberwlf]

I have no problem with technological advances, infact i encourage it, ie Panasonic's recent progressions plus other ideas from the world of no SLR Bridge/Compacts helping to move technology forward, but I do have issue with Nikon/Canon's Video implementation.

But my reasoning is the underlying reasoning for its existence is the same reasoning behind the MP race and related technology, ideas implemented with poor forethought and greater focus towards what's good for marketing it. I'll grant all technology has to start somewhere, but dSLR's are traditionally the realms of matured technology, not gimmicks, and the current implementations demonstrate this lack of maturity.

Not a single review of either the D90 or the 5D Mk2 has contradicted this view either, pointing out that short of being an expert it is currently an impractical technology for the average user. The Panasonic GH1 got it right by comparison, but the markets two biggest players Nikon and Canon just rushed it to market, with Nikon just wanting to be the 'first' (as they cant claim the highest resolution HD either due to the 5d Mk2).

So yeah, I would've preferred no video in those models till they had the chance to release something which matches the quality that both those cameras otherwise offer in the rest of their feature set. Marketing hype is for the dogs.

[VTEC_EATER]

More like $5 max.
The video is a function of live view. EVERY DSLR with live view has the ability to take video all that is required is an algorithm in the firmware to capture it and possibly another small chip on the motherboard. The only hardware required is the microphone which would cost cents at the factory pricing.
The flip out screen would more than likely be cost neutral as the actual screen is smaller and has less resolution that the screen Nikon would otherwise of used. What you have to remember is that these things are not built in some form of isolation. There are millions of flip screens being built every week for mobile phones, PDA's cameras, laptop PCs and specialist devices. The basic hinge, connection and screen components would all be available of the shelf from the people who manufacture those things. All Nikon have to do is design a body that integrates all of them.

The problem is, you forgot to add in "the cost of business." Implementing new technologies into the mix makes for a more expensive product to manufacture. While small on the front end, its quite large on the back end. Heck, you make a product, you need to get it into the peoples hands some how. The manufacturer sells their product for a small profit to his brokers who sell it for another profit to a warehouse, who makes another profit selling to a retailer who needs to jack up the price to cover their costs and add in their profit.

Soon that $5 increase in manufacturing price makes for $100 in consumer price increase. On the low end cameras, $100 is a lot of money. On something like a D3, who cares? Its not going to change anyone's mind on buying one or not.

[Elisha]

i doubt there is much of an engineering cost in this model as the previously released model already has video.

[r3g]

I have no problem with technological advances, infact i encourage it, ie Panasonic's recent progressions plus other ideas from the world of no SLR Bridge/Compacts helping to move technology forward, but I do have issue with Nikon/Canon's Video implementation.

But my reasoning is the underlying reasoning for its existence is the same reasoning behind the MP race and related technology, ideas implemented with poor forethought and greater focus towards what's good for marketing it. I'll grant all technology has to start somewhere, but dSLR's are traditionally the realms of matured technology, not gimmicks, and the current implementations demonstrate this lack of maturity.

Not a single review of either the D90 or the 5D Mk2 has contradicted this view either, pointing out that short of being an expert it is currently an impractical technology for the average user. The Panasonic GH1 got it right by comparison, but the markets two biggest players Nikon and Canon just rushed it to market, with Nikon just wanting to be the 'first' (as they cant claim the highest resolution HD either due to the 5d Mk2).

So yeah, I would've preferred no video in those models till they had the chance to release something which matches the quality that both those cameras otherwise offer in the rest of their feature set. Marketing hype is for the dogs.

Can you go into a little more detail about how you think the D90s video is lacking quality? Personally the only thing I'd add is the option to auto focus and higher FPS. Granted I'm not a pro videographer but I think the output quality in standard and 720p is par with video cameras in the same price range. Its just slower while capturing fast moving things due to its 24fps. I feel like the video will be improved much in a not so long time period for Canon and Nikon.. I really feel like this was a good starting point though. Many of the key components are already there.. Good IQ, doable fps, decent audio.. Where exactly is the feature falling short for you?

[Cyberwlf]

Your confusing the use of word quality here and missing the context I used it in. I'm not referring to IQ, obviously the IQ benefits from a dSLR's glass which far out matches a P&S's and low end DigiCams too. But if you look at the word within its context you'll see I referred to the quality of the feature set, not the IQ, or any other single aspect alone.

Take Nikon's AF system for still images for example, you have a vast range of options you can do with it, it's matured. Then compare it to say a P&S, chances are unless its a higher end one, you'll get no or limited AF options. So the feature set of AF on the still image side is a professional one.

So much like the analogy above, what both Nikon and Canon currently offers is a simple offering, not a matured idea. Heck i'd be willing to bet in R&D they had a 1080 model, but as management wanted to be first to market i'd bet they said 'Can we get something with functional HD out sooner?' and Dev said 'Okay but we can only deliver the kind of IQ were expecting at 720 if we rush it'. May not be the case, but given Canon's ability to deliver 1080 I see no technological reason Nikon couldn't have too.

Then there is the lack of AF. Seriously, wtf? This is 2009. You would not find a single DigiCam on the market without AF abilities, and if someone tried to release such a product, the reviews would scathe it. There's also plenty of HD DigiCam's on the market these days too. It'd be like Nikon going, actually, sorry folks, no AF for stills, MF only for still images. People would think Nikon were smoking crack or something if they did such a move, but here are people embracing a half baked technology that's semi functional and lacks a feature even all P&S's offering HD video already offer, AF ability!

I'm sorry, but this is purely a marketing move through and through from the 2 big players. The advertisements for the D90 even demonstrates this too in Nikon's case, and the D5000 advertorial content linked to shows very few segments of video produced by the camera itself, more shots of the camera being used and stills from it. It's a weak move, and i'm happy to call it out as such where I see it, as I do really respect and like much Nikon do and also think a fair bit of the 5d Mk2 otherwise.

EDIT: And for the record i'm not knocking the IQ of the camera at all, but video is more than about the quality of the image, it's also a lot about how the image is captured in a movie format. Also have recommended to people Nikon systems, recommending the D90 in particular for those newer to dSLR's, but not for it's video 'features'.

[RED_Partizan]

....

Couldn't agree more

[Rooz]

Take Nikon's AF system for still images for example, you have a vast range of options you can do with it, it's matured.

yes lets take the AF system. nikons AF system is indeed a refined, mature and complex system. how long did it take to get that way ? 3d tracking is not perfect, neither is face detection. both of those features are still in their infancy so by your logic neither of those should have been put into the camera either.

it also took years of implementation in the field for it to be that way. any new idea requires time to get right...to massage and iron out the bumps, to perfect. there are a multitude of features that have followed the same path. matrix metering, bracketing, iTTL, iso performance, shutter life...hell even something as basic as the LCD on the back of the camera. LV still leaves alot to be deired, but its there as an early incarnation and will only get better. no one batted an eyelid at that though.

video is absolutely no different. this is the first incarnation of this feature and we should all expect it to drastically improve but you must start somewhere with it implemeted IN THE FIELD, not in a lab.

this is indeed no different to ANY industry or product that implements a new feature. if we waited till the feature was perfect, progress would be far slower, nor would it be progress necessarily. so, i revert back to my previous position. if you do not think its a useful feature as yet, dont use it. remember its an added feature, not something that takes away from another.

vtec - there have been NO price increases, nor will they be. that arguement is again, not factual. the complete opposite is true as a matter of fact.

[Cyberwlf]

I acknowledged all technology needs to start somewhere, but in Canon's case for example they put it on their 2nd from top of the line Pro camera. D90 is no entry level either. If the D5000 had been the only one with it out of those 3 i'd call it a fair place to trial out such technology as it is a lower end oriented model.

And yes lets take your example of LV ;) It started on lower end dSLR's too (Olympus didn't stick originally it in their high end, they first used it on the Olympus E-330, their entry level) and as it matured higher end models with already evolved versions of the technology included it, but in this case you have an enthusiast and semi-pro camera implementing something right off the bat.

Also can you explain why Panasonic by comparison, a newer player into the dSLR market can release HD Video capabilities with AF in a dSLR-based system from the get-go? Or even just address the lack of AF and the (im)practicality of such an implementation?

I am sure things will drastically improve, and for all we know we'll be seeing a D400 and D700x with Video incl AF in the near future (hypothetically speaking..), but to go back to my original point in this post, if you're going to do it on a system which otherwise is largely compromised of matured/evolved technologies then why go against it with such a move?

I realise its additional, so whether or not the R&D, electrical components, etc actually added to the cameras cost or not is irrelevant to the point of whether it was a move which was rushed to market for marketing reasons or because it would be of genuine use to those in the enthusiast and semi-pro fields? And to the latter point, from all reviews i've seen, it's not been.

[Screenclutter]

If these manufacturers want to improve video on their dSLRs, the fastest way to expose its flaws is to put it on on the market. These dSLR manufacturers ensured that video would not take away from their dSLR picture taking capabilities while knowing that video would have no impact on an experienced users evaluation of buying a camera.

So the rushed release of video really served two purposes-marketing and R&D.

[scupking]

Video should not be put in DSLRs that’s why they have video cameras. I have a Canon HF-100 for HD video, a Canon A590IS for point and shoot and my D40 for the advanced shots. Each camera has its use and I don’t like when companies start making the jack-of-all-trades master of none devices.

[jcon]

So the rushed release of video really served two purposes-marketing and R&D.

You forgot the 3rd reason.. ripping off those that dont know any better...

Those that will be buying based on video more than likely wont be looking to upgrade or purchase a new body any time soon, so to tell them to buy something that is a "beta" or only for R&D and that its still in its infant development stage, is wrong. Atleast software developers let you know if something is "beta" or not so you have the choice. These "soccer moms" wont know that its not fully developed, they only know what they see in a commercial on TV and hey, if its good for Ashton Kutcher, it must be good for them too...

[r3g]

Video should not be put in DSLRs that’s why they have video cameras. I have a Canon HF-100 for HD video, a Canon A590IS for point and shoot and my D40 for the advanced shots. Each camera has its use and I don’t like when companies start making the jack-of-all-trades master of none devices.



If thats the case then boy have camera manufacturers been messing up big time for putting video in P&S cameras all these years... Who in there right mind would ever want multi-functioning devices in their life :rolleyes: . Seriously.. Just because it can do video doesnt mean its intended to replace video cameras. Just like cameraphones were never intended to replace P&S cameras. A serious videographer would never use a DSLR as a dedicated video camera but someone who like to take videos and pictures while out but doesnt want to have to carry around 2 pieces of equitment would greatly benifit from the feature. As I said before some may not have any use for it at all but others have much use for it. Thats why it has an off switch. No one is forcing anyone to use it. Seeing as it hasnt changed the price and it has an off switch, theres absolutely no harm in putting video capability on a DSLR.

[fionndruinne]

Movie cams don't have AF.

[K1W1]

Did we get 12 pages of argument about movie features when the D90 was introduced?
If not why not?

[Rooz]

I acknowledged all technology needs to start somewhere, but in Canon's case for example they put it on their 2nd from top of the line Pro camera.D90 is no entry level either.

so what ? i dont know how that contributed to your argument ?


If the D5000 had been the only one with it out of those 3 i'd call it a fair place to trial out such technology as it is a lower end oriented model.

its not a TRIAL at all. its just the first incarnation. this debate is not about the how good or bad video is. it is about why it should or should not be included in a dslr.


And yes lets take your example of LV ;) It started on lower end dSLR's too (Olympus didn't stick originally it in their high end, they first used it on the Olympus E-330, their entry level) and as it matured higher end models with already evolved versions of the technology included it, but in this case you have an enthusiast and semi-pro camera implementing something right off the bat.

frstly, LV in nikons was implemeted first in the d300 wasnt it ? (cant remember), and secondly, who cares ?


Also can you explain why Panasonic by comparison, a newer player into the dSLR market can release HD Video capabilities with AF in a dSLR-based system from the get-go? Or even just address the lack of AF and the (im)practicality of such an implementation?

no i cant explain it, nor is it relevant.


I am sure things will drastically improve, and for all we know we'll be seeing a D400 and D700x with Video incl AF in the near future (hypothetically speaking..), but to go back to my original point in this post, if you're going to do it on a system which otherwise is largely compromised of matured/evolved technologies then why go against it with such a move?

i dont understand how this effects the believe of whether video is incliuded in dslr's or not.


I realise its additional, so whether or not the R&D, electrical components, etc actually added to the cameras cost or not is irrelevant to the point of whether it was a move which was rushed to market for marketing reasons or because it would be of genuine use to those in the enthusiast and semi-pro fields? And to the latter point, from all reviews i've seen, it's not been.

this discussion has seemed to morph a little, you have created a 3rd side tothe argument...

side one: video has a place in dslr
side two: video has no place in dslr
side three: video has a place as long as it is implemeted correctly.

this is a view i can actually understand. i dont agree with it mind you, but i can certianly understand it and its rational.

[Rooz]

Video should not be put in DSLRs that’s why they have video cameras. I have a Canon HF-100 for HD video, a Canon A590IS for point and shoot and my D40 for the advanced shots. Each camera has its use and I don’t like when companies start making the jack-of-all-trades master of none devices.

if your going to enter this discussion, which you are welcome to do, please take the time to read the previous posts. your above post is complete nonsense and i've proven that to be the case. none of your cameras can take video like a dslr can...period.


Those that will be buying based on video more than likely wont be looking to upgrade or purchase a new body any time soon, so to tell them to buy something that is a "beta" or only for R&D and that its still in its infant development stage, is wrong. Atleast software developers let you know if something is "beta" or not so you have the choice. These "soccer moms" wont know that its not fully developed, they only know what they see in a commercial on TV and hey, if its good for Ashton Kutcher, it must be good for them too...

its no more beta version than ANY technology is at any one point in time. technology NEVER stays still. its always improving. so by your logic, beta is in fact every feature of every camera.

its also adds nothing to your point about why it shouldnt be included. if people are stupid enuf to buy a product without testing/ researching/ reading then theres nothing anyone can do for them. besdies...if those idiots didnt exist, sony would never sell a dslr. :p

[Cyberwlf]

K1W1 - There was never a thread debating video on dSLR's here though when the D90 came out to discuss the subject ;)

r3g - P&S manufacturers havent actually been integrating more than two types of functionality into their devices though, and due to the way their technology worked with no prism, no optical viewfinder and a completely electronically based system video integration came easier. The introduction of LV into dSLRs provided the underlying technology which has now made video possible based on my understanding.

But i am of the belief that the jack of all trades master of none has tended to hold true to most of the P&S market (and various Sony dSLRs too...) as they trying to offer the kitchen sink but their implementation is often flawed, providing weaker results.

I actually look forward to HD video capabilities in a future Nikon dSLR I buy, but only when the technology is at a state that can be used functionally in a similar way to dSLR's can take stills now or DigiCams/P&S's can take video now.

It's more a matter of principal (than the fact video is optional here) that technology which normally works its way up from lower end devices and then implemented in a matured version into more professional gear has been stuck first off into pro-end gear.

I do think however that its a very valid point though as well that people who are the target market for this model (the D5000) will most likely be disappointed by the implementation of video, and as pointed out not likely to regularly upgrade camera bodies like enthusiasts or pros who have more money than sense! :p :p

PS. I am not blind to the fact that there are pros who will be able to make use of the technology, but the barrier to entry (usage wise) still is set too high for everyone else.

[Cyberwlf]

Rooz - You're right i created a 3rd side to it, because I am not against technological innovation where it can provide related functionality which then expands the feature set, I am just a believer of quality over quantity and believe whether something gets implemented or not should come down to how its implemented, just look at as you mentioned Sony dSLRs or for example Windows Vista! :p

[r3g]

Cyberwlf - I totally agree that when a manufacturer trys to make a jack of all trades no one wins. I just don't feel like that's what Nikon (or Canon for that mater) is trying to do. I feel like the whole point of it is to make life easier for those who like to take high quality stills and video but doesn't want to carry around 2 bodies. Is it perfect now? No. Will it ever be perfect? No, but that's because the soul purpose of a DSLR will always be to take stills. There may be a reason the introduced it into the mid and high range cameras first. Of course owners of a D90/300 will be more critical on camera performance than those owning a D40/60. That puts Nikon in a position to get more valid and useful feedback. If anything I think video should be put on the mid and high end models first. That way when it does get improved and thrown in the low end models it will be at a point where those low end users will have an easier time using it. But no matter how much it improves over time itll never be a prime function of a DSLR, just a very very useful tool for those who choose/need to use it.

Look at cellphones. They are constantly improving the cameras they put on phones yet the sould purpose of a phone will always be to make calls. Though having a small camera in your pocket has proven to be EXTREMELY useful for many people time after time. Having been using the video on my D90, something I never thought I'd even be doing when I decided to get the camera I can honestly say that the video functionality on the camera is already very solid. Sure its not perfect but I would under no circumstances call it a beta. IMO the only thing that's missing is AF. Though with that gorgeous 3" LCD MF is waaaay easier than I ever expected.

As Rooz said, if people buy the 5000 or 90 for its video expecting it to be gold without doing their research that's there mistake.

My bottom line for this whole arguement (and not specifically to you) is that like it or not video on a DSLR is hear and its hear to stay. And while its not perfect, it is an excellent starting point and I can't wait to see where Canikon takes it from here. But then again no feature on a DSLR is perfect so why is video taking all the heat?

Buying a DSLR with video won't hurt a buyer who doesn't desire to use it in any way. It won't hurt your pocket, and it won't hurt your ability to use the DSLR in any way. To all who are crying about the feature I ask.. Have you even tried it? And my try it I don't mean head over to your local electronics store and played with it for 5 minutes. I mean have you actually tried it in real world applications? If the answer is no then I invite you to give it a shot before making tunnel visioned judgments on it. Take it from someone who his video mode would never see the light of day.


I am also curious why this didn't come up when the D90 was released. I cant help but feel like theres a bit of bandwagon boarding in this thread.

[XaiLo]

You know I worked in a auto body shop some years ago, where you could find just about every tool you would need, including many job specific tools. Outside of most of the office personel everyone else walked around with a Leatherman or a variant.

I really don't see the problem here, the D5000 is surrounded by the D90 on one side and the D60 on the other... if it's too much or not enough there are two excellent options available. Nikon is not forceing anyone into this product by any means.

But I remeber not too long ago there were predictions of the demise and usefulness of another Nikon camera, well we saw how that turned out for Nikon and their customers... Nikon was happy their customers were happy, everybody was happy except for the people who never had any intention on ever owning the camera... sounds a bit like selfishness 'If they can't make it the way I think it should be made it shouldn't be made at all'??? Oh really?

This is not to say a company does not owe it to put out a product that will serve a purpose. But the market will be the final judge, will pros rush out to buy this camera. I doubt it nor do I see the product being positioned as a pro product.

[Cyberwlf]

r3g, It's good to hear you have found it useful but it begs the question why then do highly experienced reviewers like Jeff and other reviewers on other sites (including DPReview) pretty much unanimously find its implementation flawed? (To quote Jeff's D5000/D90 Reviews - "Now comes the hard part. If you want to zoom in or out, or if you subject is moving, you will need to focus the lens -- manually." in relation to it's lack of AF abilities)

Xailo, if you put a product into a pro camera then one would assume the intended target market is pros correct? And by that logic if its not suitable to pros then why is it included with such a package?

And you're getting the wrong end of the stick if you are thinking i ever implied it shouldn't be made at all, i never said, intended or inferred such a thing, so to come to that conclusion is mislead, especially as i said in numerous posts how I look forward to a matured video offering. Also call me crazy here, but last time I checked wasn't the purpose of movies to capture motion?

But I am talking horses for courses, you produce a pro product it should exhibit the level of quality a pro oriented product is expected to deliver. Entry level products are known for their short comings in particular, but users are more tolerant of issues, thus why context is critical to such a point. 'The way I think it should be made' is only calling for it to match a similar level of functionality P&S's offer, is that really such a crazy thing to expect when such things are implemented in a pro-level camera?? And my point is more directed at the D90/5D Mk2 than the D5000, but this thread has become as Rooz pointed out one about Video in dSLR, so it is on-topic.

I think some people here are so blind sightedly defending Nikon here rather than applying some balanced rational to their arguments.

In case it provides any insight to my thoughts on the subject I happen to work in Quality Assurance in the technology field, so when it comes to being particular on the importance of quality within a release I am a bit of a stick on the subject.

[r3g]

r3g, It's good to hear you have found it useful but it begs the question why then do highly experienced reviewers like Jeff and other reviewers on other sites (including DPReview) pretty much unanimously find its implementation flawed?

No one is saying that the implemention isnt flawed. But its not flawed to the point where it should be considered a "beta". I have absolutely no experience as a videographer. If I can pick the camera up and get a good feel for manually focusing in video mode in a matter of minutes I dont see why anyone else cant. I just feel like the lack of AF is being made too big of a deal. Much like the lack of an internal focusing motor was when the D40 was released. Yes Jeff and others are highly experienced and respected photographers, but with all respect at the end of the day their opinion is just that, their opinion. And I dont believe opinions should be viewed as facts. One man's trash is another man's treasure. As I said best the video isnt perfect, nor will it ever be perfect but it is damn good. Can anyone point out a major flaw besides lack of AF? I dont think so seeing as the image quality is stunning and the audio is great seeing as its not stereo. One can complain about it only being 24fps but thats not a big deal unless your trying to film fast moving objects, something the camera was never ment to do in video mode.

I'm not trying to make this about me. Nor am I trying to change anyones opinion about the usefullness of video for them. This is a matter of facts not opinions. Thats the fact is the video mode though not perfect was implemented quite well for it bring the first DSLR Nikon has tried this feature on. AF will come... But I have a feeling even when it does people are still going to cry about video mode, and for what? It's not hurting anyone, its only helping those who find its functionality useful.

Not gonna argue whether or not video shouldve been put in a lower end model first becuase its irrelevant. It already happened so lets get over it. I have no problem with people finding the feature useless for them but to say it shouldnt be on a DSLR at all is just wrong. I acknowledge that you are not one of those people though Cyberwlf.

[jcon]

I think some people here are so blind sightedly defending Nikon here rather than applying some balanced rational to their arguments.



Agree 100%

[XaiLo]

r3g, It's good to hear you have found it useful but it begs the question why then do highly experienced reviewers like Jeff and other reviewers on other sites (including DPReview) pretty much unanimously find its implementation flawed? (To quote Jeff's D5000/D90 Reviews - "Now comes the hard part. If you want to zoom in or out, or if you subject is moving, you will need to focus the lens -- manually." in relation to it's lack of AF abilities)

Xailo, if you put a product into a pro camera then one would assume the intended target market is pros correct? And by that logic if its not suitable to pros then why is it included with such a package?


In this case let's ask what kind of pro are we talking about photographer or videographer. On the one hand to a pro videographer I can see them saying no thank you, on the other hand the photographer maybe satisfied knowing it's there if they need it.




And you're getting the wrong end of the stick if you are thinking i ever implied it shouldn't be made at all, i never said, intended or inferred such a thing, so to come to that conclusion is mislead, especially as i said in numerous posts how I look forward to a matured video offering. Also call me crazy here, but last time I checked wasn't the purpose of movies to capture motion?


That was not my assumption or expressed position... I understand it's purpose but also the context in which we are having this discussion. The primary user of DSLR's is buying one to take pictures. The pro even more so their concern is not focused on video.



But I am talking horses for courses, you produce a pro product it should exhibit the level of quality a pro oriented product is expected to deliver. Entry level products are known for their short comings in particular, but users are more tolerant of issues, thus why context is critical to such a point. 'The way I think it should be made' is only calling for it to match a similar level of functionality P&S's offer, is that really such a crazy thing to expect when such things are implemented in a pro-level camera?? And my point is more directed at the D90/5D Mk2 than the D5000, but this thread has become as Rooz pointed out one about Video in dSLR, so it is on-topic.


Unless such implentation infringes on the main purpose of the camera in either perfomance or cost. While pros use these cameras, they are not either companies, pro offering. Nevertheless, in both cases it's the implementaion that's in question not the quality of the end product. Admittedly this is not that big an issue to me... I'm sure if the demand is there and it's cost efficient they'll implement changes. Hopefully they pay attention to posts on photography forums. If they don't by now I think they do so at there own peril. And this will be the voice of change.

I suggest that there is no camera that i've used which has not ticked me off in some respect as to how functionality was implemented. But it did not stop me from using the product.




I think some people here are so blind sightedly defending Nikon here rather than applying some balanced rational to their arguments.

In case it provides any insight to my thoughts on the subject I happen to work in Quality Assurance in the technology field, so when it comes to being particular on the importance of quality within a release I am a bit of a stick on the subject.

I think there are different arguments going on and some have no bearing on others, yet they're being intertwined.

[GaryS]

My take on all video, etc on DSLRs is this... I don't want it. But that is me, and putting it into a camera doesn't seem to affect the camera at all, so whatever... but it won't be on my list of requirements.

I want my phone (meaning the multipurpose device I carry everywhere) to have phone / email / photos / video / web / gps / etc.... average quality is fine.

If I want best quality from any of these functions, then I want specialized tools. DSLR for photos, video camera for HD video, laptop/desktop for web and so on.

I do think the manufacturers are all caught up in 'feature competition' right now, because megapixels have stopped selling cameras, so they need new 'spec-sheet' features. At the entry-level, '720p' video sells a lot more cameras than '50% more dynamic range' ever would.

just my 2 cdn cents...

[jcon]

From Jeff Kellers preview of the D5000..

Movie Mode
The D5000 has exactly the same movie mode as the D90. It can record high definition video at 1280 x 720, at a cinematic 24 frames/second. Sound is recorded, as well. You are limited to 5 minutes per clip, so you can't film your son's soccer game from beginning to end.

For longer movies, you can drop the resolution to either 640 x 424 or 320 x 216 (the frame rate remains the same). You can record up to 20 minutes of continuous video at both of these settings.

So here's how you record a movie on the D5000. First, you must have live view turned on. Compose your shot, then press the "OK" button to start recording. Now comes the hard part. If you want to zoom in or out, or if you subject is moving, you will need to focus the lens -- manually. This takes a lot of getting used to, especially if you're coming from a point-and-shoot camera that does it automatically. You can take a still image while you're taking a movie by pressing the shutter release button, though this will stop the movie recording.


If its the same as in the D90, wheres the R&D from Nikon? If there are no improvements, then they must be completely satisified?

Being able to only record in 5 minute intervals? Oh wait, make that 20 mins if you lower video quality... what a load of crap!

For the market this is suppose to be targeting, I dont think those customers will be very pleased with it!

[K1W1]

Being able to only record in 5 minute intervals? Oh wait, make that 20 mins if you lower video quality... what a load of crap!

I explained the reason for that.

[Prospero]

Personally, I would love to have video on my DSLR because:

1. I don't have the money to buy a digital video camera
2. I don't want to carry a digital video around along with all the lenses I own.
3. I shoot lot's of pictures at parties, where I could also make great videos.
4. With the lenses I own, I think I would have many more possibilities for making nice videos than you would have with a small sensored digital video camera.

The 5 minute limit would not bother me. Usually scenes longer than that filmed uncut are boring to look at anyway. Besides, you can get 20 minutes in 640*424, which is still quite decent quality.

While I do think that video could use a lot of improvement - for instance in terms of autofocus, better fps, etc.- I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be implemented in a digital SLR. After all, given that live view has already become standard, the only thing that has to be added to make it work is a few buttons and a microphone.

[Screenclutter]

A local store has a $200 dollar difference between the D5000 and D90. How many here would pay an extra $200 for the D90? I would, partially because I'm not that comfortable with the flip-screen on the dSLR.

About this video thing, how easy is it to use versus a camcorder? If it is very easy and convenient, all of the typical customers (which is not us posting on these forums) will very much consider a dSLR with video.

Does Nikon make video camcorders? If not, and all the other camera companies do, a very successful implementation of video in cameras may begin to hurt their camcorder business. In the long term, I think there will be only dSLRs/high end camcorders and cell phone cameras with video.

[tim11]

Manual focus on video is useless for people who don't have perfect vision. So it's a wasted feature for many people.

[Cyberwlf]

Screenclutter - Re-read the last 10-15 posts before yours and you'll get your answers Also i'd pick a D90 over a D5000 at the drop of a hat, regardless of the D5000's advantages in the LCD Flip Screen department, the D90 is a more professional oriented camera (technically an enthusiasts camera) where as the D5000 is more a family camera and closer to an entry level one. If you have a D40 then the D90 makes more sense of the two to upgrade to.

[VTEC_EATER]

I wonder how VR works in video mode. Does it even work? If not, I would recommend at least a monopod for video shooting if you want it to look smooth. Of course this wouldnt be possible for all situations, but that crappy, shaky, hand held look with amateur video is the biggest turnoff to me. I cant stand watching shaky videos.

Oops, found this:


On one day I found that starting with a new, freshly charged battery, and shooting a total of about 20 minutes of video with VR on all the time was enough to cause the battery indicator to show red. My suggestion is to have several extra batteries along if you plan on shooting video with this camera.

Looks like VR works, but I'm not sure how exactly.


Found this too:


Before we get too excited about the D90's video capabilities we need to understand how Nikon has implemented it. At the core of the issue is that there is almost no control over the camera's shutter speed, aperture or ISO when in video mode. The camera essentially goes into a fully automatic mode and the only control over exposure that one has is the exposure compensation dial.

Here's the reason why. In still camera Live View what camera makers try and do is show you the best possible view of the subject, adjusting the LCD display to make it as accurate and pleasant looking as possible. This is regardless of whether or not the exposure is correct.

What Nikon appears to have done is simply take this adjusted (good looking) image and used it for video. So, if you have dreams of using a very wide aperture to achieve narrow depth of field, a high shutter speed for creative purposes, or low ISO to minimize noise – fugedaboutit. It ain't gunna happen unless Nikon decides to or is able to release a firmware upgrade. (Or, maybe they're saving this capability for the D3x.)

Just to be clear then – shooting in video mode is the same as having the camera in full auto mode, with auto ISO also activated. The actual current settings of the camera for stills shooting are irrelevant. (Yes, there are some klugy partial work-arounds that require the use of older manual iris lenses that are being discussed on the DVXUSER forum, but for most people these are not going to be terribly helpful.)

What does affect the image are, of course, focus and focal length via manual focusing (no AF), and manual zooming. Also, all of the camera's shooting parameters such as white balance, sharpening, tone curves and so forth are also user settable prior to filming.

[r3g]

Screenclutter - Re-read the last 10-15 posts before yours and you'll get your answers Also i'd pick a D90 over a D5000 at the drop of a hat, regardless of the D5000's advantages in the LCD Flip Screen department, the D90 is a more professional oriented camera (technically an enthusiasts camera) where as the D5000 is more a family camera and closer to an entry level one. If you have a D40 then the D90 makes more sense of the two to upgrade to.


+1. I wouldn't really even say the 5000 has an advantage in the LCD department because sure it flips but its also lower resolution. It took me to get a D90 to see how much detail the 40/60 are missing. I'm on not mistakened the 5000 uses the same LCD as the 60.

[Rooz]

IFound this too:


Before we get too excited about the D90's video capabilities we need to understand how Nikon has implemented it. At the core of the issue is that there is almost no control over the camera's shutter speed, aperture or ISO when in video mode. The camera essentially goes into a fully automatic mode and the only control over exposure that one has is the exposure compensation dial.

Here's the reason why. In still camera Live View what camera makers try and do is show you the best possible view of the subject, adjusting the LCD display to make it as accurate and pleasant looking as possible. This is regardless of whether or not the exposure is correct.

What Nikon appears to have done is simply take this adjusted (good looking) image and used it for video. So, if you have dreams of using a very wide aperture to achieve narrow depth of field, a high shutter speed for creative purposes, or low ISO to minimize noise – fugedaboutit. It ain't gunna happen unless Nikon decides to or is able to release a firmware upgrade. (Or, maybe they're saving this capability for the D3x.)

Just to be clear then – shooting in video mode is the same as having the camera in full auto mode, with auto ISO also activated. The actual current settings of the camera for stills shooting are irrelevant. (Yes, there are some klugy partial work-arounds that require the use of older manual iris lenses that are being discussed on the DVXUSER forum, but for most people these are not going to be terribly helpful.)

where, pray tell, did you obtain this pearl of wisdom ?

[VTEC_EATER]

where, pray tell, did you obtain this pearl of wisdom ?

Luminous Landscapes:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d90.shtml

See: Upfront – The D90's Dirty Little Secret

[Rooz]

Luminous Landscapes:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d90.shtml

See: Upfront – The D90's Dirty Little Secret

so let me get this straight...hes saying, you cannot select the aperture
at all when taking video ? which basically means, as he says in your quote above, you cannot use a shallow depth of field.

[XaiLo]

Sometimes ignorance is bliss, good find VTEC.

[K1W1]

Luminous Landscapes:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d90.shtml

See: Upfront – The D90's Dirty Little Secret

I guess I should selectively quote from the same article just to keep this pointless thread going a little longer. :)

"There's little doubt that stills / video convergence is on the way. The Nikon D90 though is simply a harbinger, and shouldn't be seen as much more than that. As discussed above, while it is no replacement for a camcorder (even a consumer grade one), in the hands of Indy film makers it will likely turn out to be a productive tool, filling in when shallow DOF or special lens use is required.

I expect that over the next 24 months virtually every new DSLR at every price point will have video capability built in. Now that Live View is de rigueur it costs manufacturers almost nothing to add. And like Live View, some people will ignore it and some will embrace it.

The challenge though will be for mainstream companies such as Nikon and Canon to find ways to make a true hybrid that meets the real needs of both still photographers and videographers. This is going to be no easy feat. Of the two market leaders, Canon has the most to lose because they are a major player in the consumer as well as pro level video camera business. Nikon on the other hand does not make video gear and so for them this is virgin territory and a great opportunity to expand into a new and growing market.

Newcomers like RED are going to be all over this, and indeed Jim Jannard the founder of RED announced earlier this month that they have gone back to the drawing board on their forthcoming Scarlet camera, no doubt because of the writing on the wall from Nikon with the D90 and Canon with the 5D MKII.

So – don't be too hasty in poo-pooing stills / video convergence and Combocams in general based on what we see with the Nikon D90. These are early days, and the next couple of years should be fun to both watch and participate in. "

[r3g]

so let me get this straight...hes saying, you cannot select the aperture
at all when taking video ? which basically means, as he says in your quote above, you cannot use a shallow depth of field.



I use a shallow DOF in my videos all the time o_O

[jcon]

I guess I should selectively quote from the same article just to keep this pointless thread going a little longer. :)



I hardly find a discussion where people are voicing there opinions on a hot topic to be "pointless".



So – don't be too hasty in poo-pooing stills / video convergence and Combocams in general based on what we see with the Nikon D90. These are early days, and the next couple of years should be fun to both watch and participate in. "

Early days? Where are the improvements then in the D5000, its the same as whats in the D90.

[K1W1]

Early days? Where are the improvements then in the D5000, its the same as whats in the D90.

So you have first hand experience taking videos with a D5000 then?
I guess you have been holding out on us all. :)

[jcon]

Just repeating what Jeff Keller posted.:)

So if you wanted to contact him about it, im sure hed be more than willing.:)

:)

:)

:)

[Rooz]

I use a shallow DOF in my videos all the time o_O

i know reggie. it was a rhetorical type question. ;) i used video on a d90 this morning.


Early days? Where are the improvements then in the D5000, its the same as whats in the D90.

its less than 12 months old ! lol

i'm confused here Jason. i thought you said video had no place on a dslr, so what do you care how good it is or how it improves ? :confused:

the quality, usefulness, useability etc of video is a COMPLETELY different debate. the debate was originally about whether video should or should not be included in a dslr. nothing has changed since then...there was no logical reason then and theres no logical reason now.

[Cyberwlf]

12 months is a long time in technology Rooz. The average turnaround period for new technology / technological developments is typically 3-6 months, the way dSLR's has been generally advancing across all brands has been good proof of this. It's also why most camera manafacturers have a rolling schedule of new models throughout the year, so new technology is being constantly implemented, and within 12 months typically replaces older models with their next generation.

[Rooz]

12 months is a long time in technology Rooz. The average turnaround period for new technology / technological developments is typically 3-6 months, the way dSLR's has been generally advancing across all brands has been good proof of this. It's also why most camera manafacturers have a rolling schedule of new models throughout the year, so new technology is being constantly implemented, and within 12 months typically replaces older models with their next generation.

LV has been around for a heck of alot longer and they still havent improved the AF. rear LCD's have been around even lomnger than that and only now are startign to get them as a flipscreen...and even then...still no 3inch hi def flip.

so while i agree in principal, i think this stuff with the mirror and OVF is more complex.

[Cyberwlf]

The Law of Accelerating Returns/Moore's Law still applies though across camera development/evolution. And LV has seen advances on a semi regular basis across various manufacturers dSLR releases since Olympus first released the E-330.

The AF has actually been improved for LV, and several times, just some companies have fallen behind in keeping their technology upto date here. Rear LCD's are also worlds apart from what they once were. Heck they grew from tiny low res 1.x" <100k screens to the likes of the 920k 3" we have now.

As you said only now we are getting Flip Screen Tech, but it was obviously not a priority in the dSLR world as few have even released attempts at it to even make a claim that there is no progress there, with the D5000 being Nikon's first. Unlike video (from the D90->D5000) i am of the belief that you can be certain that from (and i doubt i'll regret these words) the D5000 to Nikons next implementation of it they WILL advance it with higher res for their next use of it, continuing the path of technological progression.

[Cyberwlf]

PS. Recent history has shown Nikon has developed a trend of actually leap frogging others progression (in particular Canon), notably with the D300, D700, D3 in terms of what each of these represented over existing offerings. D3x and D90 were more typical technological progressions in the dSLR market by comparison and the D5000 mirroring more the development path of Canon in the lower end market. The 5D Mk2 was the biggest advance the Canon line had seen in ages by comparison.

[jcon]

Rooz, I still feel it has no place on a DSLR and nothing will change my mind on that. The reason I made the statement on how it hasnt improved is because the conversation started leaning towards it being new and not perfect, so I just wanted to point out that there has been time for it to be improved and it wasnt.

[XaiLo]

Hey let's cut to the chase on this, Canon, Nikon, and the rest of their ilk are in the business of sell cameras. And they are going to do what it takes to keep selling them. Sometimes we will profit by their innovation, sometimes we don't! When the next gen or two start getting fitted for uber super SD cards, other new technology and improvements on the video front this will be a completely different conversation.

[K1W1]

I see that pricing has appeared on Australian websites

D5000 Aus$1349.00
D90 Aus$1459.00
Body only.

For $110 I think I would forgo the swivel screen and get the commander mode, top LCD, screw drive, better rear LCD and dual command dials.

[Rooz]

me too. that pricings out of whack imo

[XaiLo]

fo sure! 2thumbs down on pricing!

[faisal]

Why would they price both of them so closely...I'm guessing a quick price drop for the D5000 is eminent!!!

[wnaegele]

I think the official position is below the D90, but above the D60. It lacks some of the D90's nicer features, but obviously it's cheaper and smaller etc.

I guess it's designed to be 'recession friendly' to those on a budget, but Canon's T1i/500D seems like a bit better bang for buck. Anyway, time (and reviews) will tell :)

Kind regards,


Despite the fewer pixels [12mp vs 15mp], tests I've seen indicate the Nikon 5000/90's sensor has better image rendition at high ISOs [1600, 3200, 6400] than the that of the Canon 500D/50D's, which may be significant when using a slower zoom in lesser light.

[Screenclutter]

I feel sorry for you guys down under, those prices are not the lowest...

In Canada
Nikon D90: $1100
Nikon D5000: $900

On an unrelated note, I was talking to the camera store guy yesterday-the store is selling D700s at a rate of about one per day, D3s-not as well as the D700 but they are moving very well, while they have only sold 6 D3x cameras since it was introduced.

[K1W1]

I feel sorry for you guys down under, those prices are not the lowest...

In Canada
Nikon D90: $1100
Nikon D5000: $900

The prices I quoted also include all taxes and charges, not sure about Canada but I know that in the USA in most states you need to add state taxes to whatever the published price is.

[XaiLo]

The prices I quoted also include all taxes and charges, not sure about Canada but I know that in the USA in most states you need to add state taxes to whatever the published price is.

Not when you order online and out of state.

[rawpaw18]

Not when you order online and out of state.

My state is trying desperately to tax online sales shipped to our state.

[XaiLo]

My state is trying desperately to tax online sales shipped to our state.

I bet they are! Government doesn't seem to get that taxes slow the economy especially when it goes towards wasteful spending.

[worthmining]

Thought I should point out a few "be aware", which none of the top line reviewers have indicated in their review. I personally tried numerous times with D5000 (bought/returned and in store), with sdhc class 6 or extreme III sandisk, that d5000's burst buffer even with jpeg, is nowhere near 13 (in fine,large) as in the display when shooting or in spec., it slows down after 5 shot accurately, becomes 1,2 fps. Tried in jpege large/fine with T1i/500D (3.4 fps) and D90 (4.5 fps) with sdhc class 6, both are doing what the spec. says about their buffer, no earlier buffer fill up problem. The buffer problem however doesn't persist if choose jpeg less than large/fine, it can continue on 4 fps possibly near 100. With RAW or raw+jpg, none of these camera can meet their fps claim, which makes me wondering abut Canon 50D or Nikon D300 if high burst rate is what you want. (while on the subject, I also tried D40 (2 fps), D60 (3 fps) with the same sd card. D60 carries a similar buffer problem, can't even last more than 2, 3 shots before slows down. D40 doesn't have this issue, the burst is fluid).

Another flaw of d5000 is underexposure consistently, although a personal perspective, but I've found many reviews vaguely mentioned this too, so be aware. D90 however seems to have the same problem but not to the extend d5000 has (neither does D40, D60 allegedly), which in P,T,V mode I found routinely add 1 EV or more to add bright.

The third is arguable, d5000 has less direct access button than T1i/500D and D90, going through menu to change settings and pre-made scene options at finger tip are features more resemble to typical compact DC type of use. Will first time dslr consumer eventual grow hate about this spoil and prefer more controls on the camera surface? I can't answer since I'm myself about the experience that process.

These are the only problems I don't like about D5000 via first hand experience while top reviewers do not cover for unknown reasons, otherwise it possesses many advantages over others in its class, the size,weight, 4 fps burst rate, articulate lcd (AF is awful in lv though, it will jerk a couple seconds before focus, T1i seems to be faster in lv), video clip (but don't mind, a cheap compact can do better video these days) are all making d5000 a decent feature combination to beginner like me.


For the price, I'm impressed. Articulating LCD, 4 FPS drive with buffer for 11 RAW images, 11 point AF system.

The Rebel T1i has some stiff competition. Nikon entry level cameras sold well even when they were down on features compared to the Rebels, and now the feature gap has been closed.

[K1W1]

Thought I should point out a few "be aware", which none of the top line reviewers have indicated in their review. I personally tried numerous times with D5000 (bought/returned and in store), with sdhc class 6 or extreme III sandisk, that d5000's burst buffer even with jpeg, is nowhere near 13 (in fine,large) as in the display when shooting or in spec., it slows down after 5 shot accurately, becomes 1,2 fps.

So are you saying that Jeff Kellar is providing inaccurate information in his review (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d5000-review/compare)?


The D5000 has an impressive continuous shooting mode, able to take up to 9 RAW or 100 JPEGs at 4 frames/second.

and that DP Review are plain lying in their D5000 review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5000/page14.asp)?

Maybe you could let us know your methodology particularly the in camera settings that you used and the number of tests your perfprmed before reaching your conclusions.

[worthmining]

I don't believe Jeff and dpreview intended to lie, although I tend to think they're not as diligent as they're appeared to be. Besides, I haven't found any reviewer (except one or two dont' recall now) mentioned this buffer issue at all. Searching google with "d5000 burst depth" returns almost none. I even learnt the formal name of the buffer is called "burst depth" however the term is used rarely.

It's very simple and easy. Pick one of your class 6 sdhc card (mine is pqi and kingston, go to a nearby bestbuy (I went to two of them in my area), ask to try D5000 with your own card, unless there is a sd already in the camera. At costco and one of bestbuy, they have sandisk extreme III in the displayed D5000.

Make sure the jpeg size is set to large and fine in the menu, then select continue shoot mode. Point the camera to a bright side with dial turn to "sports" so the shutter speed is fast enough to test the highest burst rate. When you look into the viewfinder, you should check the buffer indicator in the lower right start with "r" about how many shot the buffer will hold (13 when I tested). Then simply keep pressing the shutter to let the burst go on and watch the buffer indicator. I assure you the number goes like this, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 0 then burst speed slows down.

I learnt this first from a costco sales when he persuaded to buy T1i since D5000 was fresh out of stock. Ever since then I tried this (I bought again from costco and returned it) every time I stopped by a store and had found no exception. Now imaging what it's like when you set to raw or raw+jpg. which is why I personally discount any formal review but searching for "hint" from forum like this.

When I had a chance, I also test D90 with the same jpg setting, although its buffer indicator shows only 9, it was able to maintain the highest speed until 9 before slows down. Same is Canon T1i/500d though it's burst only 3.4 fps but it was bursting more than 20 with no slow down and I gave up. Again, this problem is not alone with D5000, I mentioned in another post that I tested D40, D60 too, D40 has no problem whereas d60's burst is a joke. It hardly burst after two shot begin to slows down irrespective its claim of 3 fps.

Now sure this is an manufacture issue or by design. However, in practical use unless I'm in extreme shooting frenzy, a 3,4 burst each time seems to be normal hence the buffer might not be as annoying as it may be. But as a consumer, I don't like to be cheated if not concerned about Nikon's quality.


So are you saying that Jeff Kellar is providing inaccurate information in his review (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d5000-review/compare)?



and that DP Review are plain lying in their D5000 review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5000/page14.asp)?

Maybe you could let us know your methodology particularly the in camera settings that you used and the number of tests your perfprmed before reaching your conclusions.

[jcon]

I don't believe Jeff and dpreview intended to lie, although I tend to think they're not as diligent as they're appeared to be.........

I learnt this first from a costco sales when he persuaded to buy T1i since D5000 was fresh out of stock........


Ill take Jeffs word over yours and a Costco salesmen(LOL!!). I will also trust a controlled environment test, such as the one Jeff ALWAYS uses in his reviews, over someone playing with a camera at Costco or other store.

[worthmining]

Laugh as you want, as if I just took someone's words and never tried myself. I bought twice D5000 and used a couple weeks totally. Then I went to several stores to try this. I know it's hard to believe, which is why I wonder if someone who currently owns a D5000 in this forum can testify. Or anyone who has doubt just go to nearby store and try it out. It's my best interest to confirm if it's true. If it's merely a firmware update then it'll be one less reason for me not to buy d5000.


Ill take Jeffs word over yours and a Costco salesmen(LOL!!). I will also trust a controlled environment test, such as the one Jeff ALWAYS uses in his reviews, over someone playing with a camera at Costco or other store.

[kjmdrumz3]

Dude, don't come on this board and start badmouthing people. You are a troll, now go away!

[worthmining]

Dude, don't come on this board and start badmouthing people. You are a troll, now go away!

Please relax. I went through a number of reviews and forums to look for advice to help my buy decision. Just take a look at the RSS I recently subscribed in my google reader (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=47544&stc=1&d=1247450046), this site and Jeff's review is one of the best therefore I decided to register and came in to dig more inside the forum.

Excellent product like Nikon's still can have flaw, which is normal. I came to look for help while contribute what I've found to help others. In my posts, I simply pointed out something about D5000 are not mentioned in most of reviews, nor in Jeff's, nor dpreviews, nor camera labs, why would you consider this is a badmouthing? In fact, I don't even consider these flaws are critical, specially I myself is a beginner.

However regardless what I said and what you want to believe, simply pick an demo D5000 and find out for yourself. There is no need to argue. btw, I'm not begging anyone to believe me, I'd hope I'm wrong which is why I post here hoping someone could help out with some insight. It could be due to my limit knowledge about dslr and nikon. However, in any rate I thought the potential buyer deserve the right to know, above and beyond anyone's reputation or credibility.

[jcon]

I simply pointed out something about D5000 are not mentioned in most of reviews, nor in Jeff's, nor dpreviews, nor camera labs, why would you consider this is a badmouthing? In fact, I don't even consider these flaws are critical, specially I myself is a beginner.



If no other credible reviewers dont mention it, then I suspect its not an issue and doesnt exist at all.

And if you dont consider these "flaws" critical, then why have you returned it two times???

This has reached the pointless stage.

[worthmining]

You certainly have a good point and might just be right. However, I prefer to keep my doubt until there is no doubt.

I returned the camera for price reason. Costco higher price + CA tax vs. Amazon lower price with no CA tax. I bought simply to take advantage of costco's 90 days return policy to test the camera. There is no way I can decide about a camera and lock down with the brand for many more thousands dollar glass investment in the future purely based on a few minutes of touching the demo camera and chat with a lovely sales, and of course the online reviews.

It might be a lot easier and simpler if I've already owned a dslr. The hard part is I don't have history of dslr hence this becomes a big decision to me. I guess many first time dslr consumers might share the same feeling if they realize what's waiting down the road. The more I learnt about dslr the more I realized what I didn't know. for example, I came to understand now choosing dslr can never be based on camera alone. The lense pricing and availability won't become a priority until I can understand how hard it is to take a decent picture under certain condition with the "cheap" lense. Thanks to forums like this and people like you, I can simply spend sometime here now and save a lot trouble in the future being regret.

[XaiLo]

I don't believe Jeff and dpreview intended to lie, although I tend to think they're not as diligent as they're appeared to be. Besides, I haven't found any reviewer (except one or two dont' recall now) mentioned this buffer issue at all. Searching google with "d5000 burst depth" returns almost none. I even learnt the formal name of the buffer is called "burst depth" however the term is used rarely.

It's very simple and easy. Pick one of your class 6 sdhc card (mine is pqi and kingston, go to a nearby bestbuy (I went to two of them in my area), ask to try D5000 with your own card, unless there is a sd already in the camera. At costco and one of bestbuy, they have sandisk extreme III in the displayed D5000.

Make sure the jpeg size is set to large and fine in the menu, then select continue shoot mode. Point the camera to a bright side with dial turn to "sports" so the shutter speed is fast enough to test the highest burst rate. When you look into the viewfinder, you should check the buffer indicator in the lower right start with "r" about how many shot the buffer will hold (13 when I tested). Then simply keep pressing the shutter to let the burst go on and watch the buffer indicator. I assure you the number goes like this, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 0 then burst speed slows down.

I learnt this first from a costco sales when he persuaded to buy T1i since D5000 was fresh out of stock. Ever since then I tried this (I bought again from costco and returned it) every time I stopped by a store and had found no exception. Now imaging what it's like when you set to raw or raw+jpg. which is why I personally discount any formal review but searching for "hint" from forum like this.

When I had a chance, I also test D90 with the same jpg setting, although its buffer indicator shows only 9, it was able to maintain the highest speed until 9 before slows down. Same is Canon T1i/500d though it's burst only 3.4 fps but it was bursting more than 20 with no slow down and I gave up. Again, this problem is not alone with D5000, I mentioned in another post that I tested D40, D60 too, D40 has no problem whereas d60's burst is a joke. It hardly burst after two shot begin to slows down irrespective its claim of 3 fps.

Now sure this is an manufacture issue or by design. However, in practical use unless I'm in extreme shooting frenzy, a 3,4 burst each time seems to be normal hence the buffer might not be as annoying as it may be. But as a consumer, I don't like to be cheated if not concerned about Nikon's quality.



I'd hope I'm wrong which is why I post here hoping someone could help out with some insight.

Well in that case I have no doubt that the results you state are indeed accurate. The problem is with the test methodology, logic and conclusion... I use Transcend SD 150x cards. And shooting in continuous mode, in manual, this way auto settings have no influence on the test I can eek out 11 'RAW' images before the buffer slows and in jpeg fine it sailed past 20 with ease but even those numbers can differ depending on the setting and subject matter.

Comparing a D60 to a D40 is irrelevant because the parameters are not equal. The logical expectation would be the D40 out preforms the D60... the D40s buffer has approximately 40% less information to process per image. And none of this really matters unless you pair burst rate with an adequate AF system.

[K1W1]

I learnt this first from a costco sales when he persuaded to buy T1i since D5000 was fresh out of stock.


The very first thing any decent salesperson learns is this saying; "Sell what you can see, don't see what you can sell".

Mate, you fell for the sucker punch, you took it right between the eyes and didn't didn't even see it coming, you took it so bad that your head is still spinning and you are now repeating the sales trick as if it were some form of gospel.

[Rooz]

i recall reading some of the comments worthmining wrote here and in another thread about the d5000 and d90. they gave me a laugh then and now reading that he learnt something from a cosco salesman made me really laugh my ass off. so lets ignore all the evidence, ignore all the experience, the technical knowhow, the labs, the wealth of credibility built up by alot of review sites and lets trade all that for the advice from a bloke in a cut price supermarket who is TRYING to sell you something with a name tag. of course...makes PERFECT sense. lol

i've shot quite a few frames with the d5K and i have shot a heck of alot with the d90. there are no exposure issues whatsoever. what the d90 does is offer a neutral to under meter which is in contrast to the d80's over metering to try and preserve highlight detail. it has sweet FA to do with a "fault". its simply a camera characteristic that can be adjusted if its not to the user's liking.

perhaps rather than be duped by a saleman you should have researched a little more thoroughly. apart from the linked reviews there are these aswell...

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Canon/EOS-500D
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Nikon/D5000

the d5000 offers the same superb sensor thats in the d300 and d90. there are a few tweaks here and there but essentially its the same best peforming aps-c sensor around. if you prefer the canon 500d then thats cool, canon offer a superb product, but dont spin a whole bunch of bullshit to try and justify your decision and try and pass it off as some sort of factual evidence.

[kjmdrumz3]

...canon offer a superb product, but dont spin a whole bunch of bullshit to try and justify your decision and try and pass it off as some sort of factual evidence.

WHOA! Calm down my brother from down under! LOL But seriously, I didn't even bother reading this whole thread. I got the jist of it when he was telling everybody that all the reviews are wrong and the Costco salesman was right.

[kjmdrumz3]

My state is trying desperately to tax online sales shipped to our state.

Good ole liberal ass Maryland for you. OMalley is really taking care of you guys back home huh? God, I'm glad to be in Oklahoma but I do miss the Chesapeake Bay Crabs!

[seo]

Make sure the jpeg size is set to large and fine in the menu, then select continue shoot mode. Point the camera to a bright side with dial turn to "sports" so the shutter speed is fast enough to test the highest burst rate. When you look into the viewfinder, you should check the buffer indicator in the lower right start with "r" about how many shot the buffer will hold (13 when I tested). Then simply keep pressing the shutter to let the burst go on and watch the buffer indicator. I assure you the number goes like this, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 0 then burst speed slows down.



Dude - you must have the Auto Distortion Control turned on. On my D5k if I turn this on, ny buffer drops from 21 to 13. Add ADL and High Iso NR and the buffer drops to 5. Turn all 3 of these off and it will shoot as long as you want @ 4 fps(in jpg) until you have reached 100