oh boy is this going to have opinions or what!

[andrewvid]

So....

First of all.. i'm a nikon kid. Second of all, canon seems good as well..
now i think you know where this is headed.

As much as i love nikon and their interface.. I also really do like the video side of things.. which i know, canon is a great successor in. I also do like the prices.. I am using a Nikon D5100 currently and the quality of it isn't cutting it for me anymore. (been about a year and a half and really wanting to upgrade)

All my friends have canon's (650D) and the more i see them and use them a bit.. i regret that i actually am beginning to like them, even after the amount of bragging i've done about how nikon is :p not saying they are not!!

I've been looking at the Canon 7D and it seems great. The only thing stopping me is, I have a Tamron 90 macro that is obviously for a nikon mount.. though i'll still be keeping the d5100 so it could still be used and perhaps all my friends will say.. i told you so! not that that matters at all :D

I don't know.. I need opinions, Is it worth the change? Should I even be thinking about this? Are there any other choices that i have in Nikon?
and all you nikon fans out there must be thinking.. what! are you crazy! well at least I am!!

So the main thing i want to get out of my next camera is, great video quality, Low ISO noise, decent amount of features inc. mic/headphone (not totally necessary) and great sharp, image quality which will obviously depend on the lens i know. budget is <$2000 preferably..

Please help :)

Andrew.

Let the brand war begin! - joking

[fess67]

Well, I think I might jump in here :)

No brand war is required, both Canon and Nikon have very good offerings which will fulfil your stated requirements. I think you have already started to ask yourself the question I am going to ask. How much will it really cost you to change to Canon? If you have a lot invested in lenses etc then getting into another brand is going to be expensive. However if you have few lenses then obviously not so much in $$ terms. If you do intend to keep the Nikon then not a problem anyway.

I have Canon gear and I like it but the truth is I chose Canon because when I was 14 I saw a Canon in a shop window and I wanted it. Now many years later when I decided to get back into photography that was the only brand I considered.

[andrewvid]

Well thanks for being the first one!

Twas kidding with the brand war.. (edited it) indeed, I only have the one lens that i bought separate from the twin kit so not much of a loss there and indeed not if i keep my nikon which i will.
With how you came to be with canons, it was the exact same for me. First thing i saw on the shelf, liked it, researched it and bought it.
Still trying to make up my mind, been meaning to post this for a while now.. guess i'll have to wait for some more and make up my mind.

[Lance B]

You really need to get to a shop and discuss your requirements.

As for comparos, DP Review has a good side by side comparison system:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras

[andrewvid]

Thanks for that Lance, that actually is a great idea.
Ive been looking around on DP review, they certainly have some great information.
Thanks again

Andrew

[Wayne]

Simple, D800/D4
I have both, and both are excellent for full HD video, D4 does uncompressed HDMI out and is the king of low light, the D800 is no slouch, and then with a D800, you will also have huge macro files for super crops.

Your questions have been answered young Jedi, go forth to your nearest Nikon dealer.

[arthurking83]

D800 and D4 are probably a wee bit over the <$2000 price range, but a D600 is not.

It's not about what gear you have, it's about how creatively you can use it all! ;)

I'm quite confident that the quality of output of the D600's video feature should be on par of will exceed that of the 7D.
Low light performance should blitz 'em all, but I'm not sure if you can output the video feed via a HDMI interface into a portable device tho .. if that's important to 'ya.

D600 is available online for below $2K now. A Tammy 90 would be a good lens for a D600 too BTW .. what other lenses do you have?
If you only have Dx kit type lenses for the D5100, then you may have to assess the acquisition of more lenses eventually, but in the interim, Nikon's Dx only lenses are a straight fit on to a full frame camera too .. it's just that they don't cover the entire image frame of the sensor. The Tammy 90 will tho :th3:

[Mathy]

Well the D3200 has HDMI output so I'd be totally shocked if the D600 didn't :D

[Wayne]

D800 and D4 are probably a wee bit over the <$2000 price range, but a D600 is not.



I missed that bit AK:lol2:

[arthurking83]

Well the D3200 has HDMI output so I'd be totally shocked if the D600 didn't :D

Ah! there you go .. everything you could ever need .. plus more than you really need(or could afford anyhow!) .. the OP that is, not you Mathy.


I missed that bit AK:lol2:
I just wished it wasn't a part of my reality either! ... and being hogtied to tight fiscal pressures myself, it's the first thing that distracts me from dreamworld too!

[ricktas]

If your video is not 'cutting it' then maybe it is more the operator than the camera. Yes you have a entry level camera and comparing a D5100 to a 7D is going to show differences, but try comparing a D800 video to a 7D video and see what you think.

If you want an accurate comparison of the D5100, try a Canon D1100

Also your lenses are integral to the video as well, you mention the Tamron 90mm but no others. You will find if you use high quality glass the results jump up quite a bit when shooting video as the depth of field thing comes into play quite dramatically with video.

[Steve Axford]

I doubt that you will get much useful comment here as few of the posters ever shoot much video. Canon got into video dslr first, but whether they are still better is quite debateable. If I were you, I'd search the net for video reviews of the equivalent Canon and Nikon cameras and take your pick.
In your case you have Nikon so there is an incentive to stay with Nikon, but all your friends have Canon so they can help if you get Canon. I doubt there is a huge difference now but you need to do your own comparisons.

[Lance B]

I doubt that you will get much useful comment here as few of the posters ever shoot much video. Canon got into video dslr first, but whether they are still better is quite debateable. If I were you, I'd search the net for video reviews of the equivalent Canon and Nikon cameras and take your pick.
In your case you have Nikon so there is an incentive to stay with Nikon, but all your friends have Canon so they can help if you get Canon. I doubt there is a huge difference now but you need to do your own comparisons.

You are quite correct, Steve. From what I have seen and read, Canon generally has the slight upper hand in the video stakes.

[nwhc]

One thing for me is the ability to change the aperture and such while recording video you can do this with canon not sure about nikon ( at least the d600 ) maybe a canon 6D would be worth looking at or a 5D MKII second hand for not much more than 1K

[swifty]

A hacked GH2 probably has the best bang for buck video wise.
But yea, agree with everyone the equipment is only one piece of the puzzle. Investing in the skill set would yield far better improvements usually.

[Steve Axford]

You are quite correct, Steve. From what I have seen and read, Canon generally has the slight upper hand in the video stakes.
Generally I suspect you are correct, Lance, but I think it depends on what sort of video you want to take. For absolutely the highest quality, the best Nikon camera has the lead, but for usability, I suspect it is Canon (though I have never used a Nikon for video). I use a Canon 5D mk3 and I usually take the lower quality video because it takes less space on the card, so I don't have a problem with the quality. No dslr is a perfect video camera as it can be quite hard to read a screen on a camera back, etc, etc Pro's use remote screens and more gizmos than you can poke a stick at, but then they get paid for it. They do it because they love the lens options with a dslr.

[andrewvid]

Thanks everyone for your opinions, i have looked at the D600 for a while too, And yes it does have uncompressed video via HDMI which is something i do want.
nwhc: That is something that is a definate in me for video, Having complete manual control over video is a really great thing to have, I know that Canons have that feature, Not sure if Nikon does though.. Research is the key i guess.
Rick: I see what you are saying here and indeed.. you can't really compare those two types of cameras since there is a huge jump in quality.

As much as i would love to get a D800 or go extreme and get a D4.. if my weak arms can hold that thing up.. My budget isn't too much unfortunately..
Still thinking and thinking.. but i hope i end up with a nikon again :D

[nwhc]

another thing with the canons not sure if there is a Nikon equivalent: http://www.magiclantern.fm
The 7D and 5D are very popular with people making videos so there must be good reason.

[ROA44]

The other questions you need to consider are

Do you want to go crop or full sensor and what extra features are you looking for. Other than that the only other item that will improve quality is as already stated is the lens and your own abilities. I don't know that the brand will make that much extra difference. Which ever way you decide to go with the make of body realize and accept like most of us on low budgets is that eventually $$$$'s are the problem. I have a Nikon D5000 but what ever I buy now I try to look at with the possibility of purchasing a higher level body late to minimize having to re-spend again unnecessarily. I'm not unhappy with Nikon and have sometimes wondered if I should have gone Cannon but I don't think in my case it matters but I wish I hadn't bought the twin lens kit and got a separate body & bought the 105mm f/2.8 but that's history now and am working towards it. So good luck with what ever you choose.

[andrewvid]

another thing with the canons not sure if there is a Nikon equivalent: http://www.magiclantern.fm
The 7D and 5D are very popular with people making videos so there must be good reason.

I have heard about magic lantern firmware, but don't think there is an equivalent for nikon.

[arthurking83]

Not quite yet.

There is a group dedicating their time to hacking Nikon's firmware, and so far they've managed to do some mild yet interesting developments on the D3100(IIRC) .. but I don't think it's ready for prime time yet.

I guess most Nikon users think that Nikon features are close to spot on! ;)

[steved200]

I have made movies with Nikons, I have d3100 d3200 and d7000.
My advice for $2,000 budget is get eithe d3200 or d7000 (great price at present) and as many prime lenses as you can. Don't bother with zoom lenses for movie making.
So perhaps a 50 1.4 and the tamron you have. Plus something a bit longer?
The bigger issue is you need way more than just the camera body and lenses. You need lights, and sound recording equipment, dollys, steadycams.....think $4,000

[andrewvid]

Not quite yet.

There is a group dedicating their time to hacking Nikon's firmware, and so far they've managed to do some mild yet interesting developments on the D3100(IIRC) .. but I don't think it's ready for prime time yet.

I guess most Nikon users think that Nikon features are close to spot on! ;)

is that so! What else can't be hacked these days hey! and yes.. Nikon's are mighty fine.

- - - Updated - - -


I have made movies with Nikons, I have d3100 d3200 and d7000.
My advice for $2,000 budget is get eithe d3200 or d7000 (great price at present) and as many prime lenses as you can. Don't bother with zoom lenses for movie making.
So perhaps a 50 1.4 and the tamron you have. Plus something a bit longer?
The bigger issue is you need way more than just the camera body and lenses. You need lights, and sound recording equipment, dollys, steadycams.....think $4,000

Well that is good to hear, I've been looking at the D7000 and D3200, most features of it seem decent, As for the video equipment, i won't be taking it seriously so not intending to go that far ahead with lighting equipment, steadycam's etc.. But i will keep those cameras in mind.. Though I wouldn't mind a full frame i guess even though i said earlier i don't mind.. Not sure, I will have to do some more research and definitely get some hands on time with these choices.

[Wayne]

I have heard about magic lantern firmware, but don't think there is an equivalent for nikon.

Correct

[Steve Axford]

I have made movies with Nikons, I have d3100 d3200 and d7000.
My advice for $2,000 budget is get eithe d3200 or d7000 (great price at present) and as many prime lenses as you can. Don't bother with zoom lenses for movie making.
So perhaps a 50 1.4 and the tamron you have. Plus something a bit longer?
The bigger issue is you need way more than just the camera body and lenses. You need lights, and sound recording equipment, dollys, steadycams.....think $4,000

Not sure why you say primes only. That will depend on the type of movies you are making. For documentary stuff, a zoom is essential - and for low budget stuff (or zero budget stuff). For drama, maybe not, but then you will need a whole crew, and funding - not to mention the steadycam plus operator which is going to cost more than $4,000 .

[arthurking83]

is that so! What else can't be hacked these days hey! .....

I just checked and it seems that the D5100 was on the list.
Some improvements to video are available .. such as HDMI output to a device.

But be warned firmware hacking is not for the faint hearted, and (the way I'm reading it) .. is that it's not a straight load a new firmware and away you go .. it's at a point where you need to adapt and enable features yourself, running the supplied software .. etc.

If you're interested, have a look at nikonhacker.com

[andrewvid]

I just checked and it seems that the D5100 was on the list.
Some improvements to video are available .. such as HDMI output to a device.

But be warned firmware hacking is not for the faint hearted, and (the way I'm reading it) .. is that it's not a straight load a new firmware and away you go .. it's at a point where you need to adapt and enable features yourself, running the supplied software .. etc.

If you're interested, have a look at nikonhacker.com

Oh.. yeah, i don't think i want to do that sort of thing to a camera.. while sometimes it may be worth it, I won't take any risks, I bought it how it was and will stick to it..

[steved200]

Well from his answer it is clear he is not really serious about it anyway, so no more comment needed.
Zooms ok if fixed apperture, but many are not.


Not sure why you say primes only. That will depend on the type of movies you are making. For documentary stuff, a zoom is essential - and for low budget stuff (or zero budget stuff). For drama, maybe not, but then you will need a whole crew, and funding - not to mention the steadycam plus operator which is going to cost more than $4,000 .

[Mark L]

Well from his answer it is clear he is not really serious about it anyway, so no more comment needed.
.....

He's a student finding his way in the world. Serious enough to start this thread! So maybe no comment was needed!

[davidd]

I believe you can change aperture while shooting video with the D600 if you have a lens with aperture ring.

http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=435&topic_id=3970&mesg_id=3970&page=

[andrewvid]

Thanks for the replies ans sorry for the late reply.. I don't seem to get any emails on subscribed posts like i set it too.. hmm.

I'm not overly serious about the video side as i really do love photography more but, I am planning to get into the film industry as a career so wouldn't mind to have a decent camera with good video capability.
I have been looking at the D7000 and watching comparison videos, It really does seem like a great camera but is missing some helpful features that the D600 has such as a Headphone jack and not to mention the better ISO noise capability. Though If i go towards the D600 it's pretty much another $1000 more not to mention I currently have DX kit lenses which aren't great.

Think I'll have to wait and see how the money goes and make my mind up on that as I've heard and know bodies don't last forever so might as well wait a little bit and get a good one right away..
Am i approaching it right?

[arthurking83]

D600 is always going to be a better video device, than a D7000, as I suspect a D5200 will also be as well.
It's simple technology progression.

If $ are a concern, which I suspect they are, have you looked at the video capabilities of the D5200 too.
I only really look at the specs of cameras I'm interested in, so I don't know how good or not, the 5200 is compared to the 7000, but my feeling is that the D5200 will have better specs in terms of video.

If you're not in a rush, then waiting a bit longer, will always see the D600 drop in retail price .. this level camera always does.

At intro, when everyone rushed to get one, they were over $2K .. $2.2K, sometimes $2.4K .. and now a quick spot check reveals they're already in the $1.6K price range from the usual maffia of grey onliners.
In 6 months, they'll be below $1500 for sure, and in about a years time they'll probably be as low as $1300, maybe even $1200 ... possibly lower(but I doubt it).

This is just the way the camera world operates, so if price is a priority then patience will be your best virtue.
I'm pretty sure that the D5100 does video as it currently is ... practice your craft to the best of your ability, and produce better videos than your mates with their 7D's and whatnot.
I think there's more cache and kudos in producing a video of notable quality with lower spec gear, then there is if using higher specced gear!

Having achieved this, makes you a better video maker than your mates ;)

FWIW: I got into photography as a hobby through video/film/tv/media studies in upper high school. I was always interested in film and tv media studies .. hated print media, etc .. but one of the studies was photography and darkroom procedures, which made me ill .. physically ill, with headaches, dizziniess and nausea within a short time frame of developing a roll of film. I must have had some allergic reaction to the chemicals, remember seeing the film develop and loved it. Still had more interest in making videos tho .. the technology we had 30 years ago tho was far more rudimentary than we have now.



.....
Zooms ok if fixed apperture, but many are not.

You serious?? ... LOL!

[andrewvid]

I can agree with you there. I haven't thought about the D5200.. probably because i have a D5100 already lol.
I just had a look at the specs and woah! talk about packed features.. hmm... It seems good, I like the 60fps! slow mo.. not really.

I see what you mean, $1300 for a D600 sounds good haha just, my weakness is patience.. i gotta learn some of that.

I have made some short films and my canon friends are impressed.. the only thing is that in some scenes, there is just an unbearable amount of noise which really is the ruiner. Even at ISO 800 gets bad!

I pretty much started the exact same way as you did. Just end of last year when i had to choose my subjects for this year, I chose Photography(wet) which is film, but had to drop it as my doctors said the chemicals can be risky for a transplant patient.. a bit of a let down. But instead, sticking to digital photography and media! Good enough for me :D

well, it looks like i'll have to explore my options much further, be patient, get some money.. somehow and.. BUY!

Thank you for your help too! it was helpful.

[arthurking83]

LOL on the patience .. it must be a teenager thing(my son is the same) :p

In the mean time, I suppose it's all about practise, and getting more ideas in your head about what you want to do and make.

Note them down, make a few prelim shoots with what you have and then, once the new cam comes, you have a plan of what it is you want to do.
So the patience part is actually easier than you think ... anyhow, I reckon have a look at the prices of a D600 in 6 months and you'll see much more appealing prospects.


I just wanted to mention quickly about the variable aperture lenses again briefly, and why that comment made me laugh a bit.

Normally a variable aperture lens is not a good thing, although it's certainly not as bad a element as made out by others.
But with a DSLR used for video, it can actually be beneficial to have a variable aperture lens!

Unless the camera device has the ability to control aperture in a powered manner .. and I don't know of all the devices and their abilities!! .. but one thing that happens if you vary aperture whilst zooming or after zooming is that your DOF varies.
That means, say if you set the camera/lens to f/2.8 on a constant aperture zoom, it will maintain that constant aperture, so your DOF will become shallow.
This sounds like a great creative aspect to the lens, but it's a two edged sword! As you zoom as well, it will lose focus, as most lenses will do .. not many lenses that i know that won't lose focus(but there are some that don't).

Anyhow, as you zoom, you also have to focus, and AF is not always smooth, not entirely as accurate as it can be .. hence why a good cameraman gets paid big bucks!
But, with a variable aperture zoom, the aperture slowly and smoothly(I'll come back to this) closes itself down, naturally giving you a lot more DOF to maintain focus.

So, imagine the difference between a 70-200/2.8 lens and a 70-300 f/4-5.6 lens .... as you zoom to 200mm, you either have f/2.8 or f/5.6. F/2.8 is great for shallow DOF and subject separation, but it will require careful focusing at the same time. 200mm and f/5.6 gives a much deeper DOF, and in some instances possibly no focus adjustment, although this will be rare.
That will depend on the lens. But even if the lens does shift focus, as the DOF is much deeper, the accuracy of focus isn't as critical.
Not that one is better than the other, but they both have their virtues. Usually the faster lens is better to have for a host of other reasons as you probably already know.

About the slowly and smoothly comment I made earlier, and this may not be important to you, but it is for me, as it affect usability and final video output quality.

If you vary the aperture manually to control DOF(and this isn't just about constant vs variable aperture lenses), you find there is an annoying clicking of the aperture by the camera(remember the camera always controls the lenses aperture). So if you change from f/2.8 to f/5.6, you will get both in the video footage and in the sound, if onboard sound is captured, a clicking sensation of the actual changes in aperture.

This is one reason most lower end cameras won't allow the alteration of video in real time. You preset the aperture and that's it. Dome cameras do allow this change of aperture tho, D600 does, D7000 doesn't, D800 does too.

And there is a major difference in the way the D800 does, when compared to the D600. Possibly not important, but explaining this may be something you want to know, as not many folks look for this sort of feature.
D800 has a power aperture feature, that allow you to control the opening and closing of the aperture in a smooth transitional manner .. no clicks, not sudden changes in exposure, no sound.
So as you change DOF to suit, you don't see and hear the annoying clicks. The sound is negated if you use off camera sound recording .. eg. mic or external sound recorder.
This means that there is a third way you can control the aperture on the D800 if the lens has an aperture ring, when shooting video, and that is to use the Function or Preview buttons.
One of them opens the aperturee up, the other closes it down again.
if you choose to make a video and you want to alter the DOF whilst shooting, there is a massive difference in the quality of video when using power aperture controls.

A variable aperture lens tho gives you this for free! ;)
(say on a 18-200mm f/3.5 to f/5.6 lens), if you set the aperture to f/3.5 when at 18mm, the lens has to change aperture to the min setting as you zoom to the long end.
The transition is smooth and not noticeable in the video.

Of course we don't know what sort of videos it is you prefer to make, so of this ability is important to you or not.

I found it by accident on the D800, not knowing it has this ability .. just pushing buttons all over the place and saw this in the menu sets.



.. sorry. long post, totally unavoidable :D

[Steve Axford]

Just a small comment Arthur. With a good lens you shouldn't have to focus as you zoom. Anyway, focusing with video is always tough. That's why they have focus pullers to do the job. They mark from and to points on the focus ring and move the ring to match the location. It's another world, and not one that a basic dslr is suited to - apart from the price and beautiful pictures when you get it right.

[steved200]

This is what you can get in video from a D7000 and D3200. Did this today in my home setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0JJWKbewSI&feature=youtu.be

[andrewvid]

Thanks Arthur.. what did you say in that post? haha Had to read it about 3 times for my sleep deprived brain to get it :p but i got it! Indeed.. teens like me are VERY impatient. Want something.. want it NOW! lol
As for the prices, either way i will have to wait around 6 months before i can get a sufficient amount. So it seems like a plan!
I get what you say about the constant aperture and how it can effect the video/pros and cons. To be honest (tbh, hey! you learnt a teen abbreviation :p) I like the manual aperture control during live view prettu much only because i can see it in real time. But an extra step to change it won't hurt at all.
Using my kit 18-55, i can see when you zoom in the difference of not only light but the DOF as well and focusing as you say definitely isn't as important. I used my friend's canon 650D once with his recently purchased 70-200mm f2.8 sigma lens and i can see the difference in focus/DOF. I definitely prefer the non constant aperture as manual focus can be quite frustrating while filming, especially when your subject is running everywhere.

But then again, i do like to take photos a lot more than videos, but than again, i like video too. Though not as much as photos.. Tis my passion.

I also have noticed the shake/noise when changing aperture with the canon, Me don't like. But I don't really change aperture during filming itself and neither use AF as the noise is.. loud.
So this will be the time to really test my patience.. Need to save up around $14,000 for what i want. The D600, a kawasaki Ninja 300 and last but not least, a private pilot license haha! ok i should keep this to the F/stop forum.

Again thanks for your very informative words! It really does help!

- - - Updated - - -


Just a small comment Arthur. With a good lens you shouldn't have to focus as you zoom. Anyway, focusing with video is always tough. That's why they have focus pullers to do the job. They mark from and to points on the focus ring and move the ring to match the location. It's another world, and not one that a basic dslr is suited to - apart from the price and beautiful pictures when you get it right.

I've seen them in action, it is definitely one handy thing to have!

- - - Updated - - -


This is what you can get in video from a D7000 and D3200. Did this today in my home setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0JJWKbewSI&feature=youtu.be

Thanks steved for the link! the video looks pretty decent and great music!

[Steve Axford]

This is what you can get in video from a D7000 and D3200. Did this today in my home setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0JJWKbewSI&feature=youtu.be

Great violinist and not bad video. I notice that you missed focus once or twice and the lighting was a bit harsh, particularly from one angle. Also, maybe a greater variety of focal lengths and angles would have added something (that's where a zoom can be very useful), but the violinist makes up for all that. Well done

[Roosta]

If you're not, as you say "taking it to serious" have you thought about a video camera that's better suited to what you want to film? and keep your Nikon as is. Maybe invest in some better glass for the Nikon for later upgrading.

You sound like you haven't put a lot into this, I'd first really work out what it is you want, yes you can have the best of both worlds, but a DSLR will cost you to get it, along with the required matching accessories.

Compare it to buying a car, first you start of with the base model, but you like the aftermarket wheels of choice, then tint the windows, different CD Player, and so on. By the time you pay for all this, you could have gone out and just got the better model in the first place.

So I'd ask you to work out what you really want firstly, we can recommend all sorts here, but in the end, it's you that makes the end decision.

$2000 will get you a very good lens and a Video Camera. This would be my recommendation. Or invest in one good bit of glass for your current DSLR, and improve your video taking skill set, till you can afford to get what you need to suit your requirements, as apposed to wants.

[andrewvid]

Thanks Roosta,

Indeed, I haven't thought in depth about this.

What I really want is great quality pictures and especially High ISO performance. Forget the Video part for now. Also the only bad thing about the video quality on my current camera is the ISO noise. That is perhaps my main problem.

As i said before in a previous post, i am more into photography than anything else.. But also an enthusiast in video. But that can wait a bit..
I'd have to wait at least 6 months at least either way, by then the prices would have come down.. hopefully!

so i guess my requirements would be:
Good ISO/low light performance
A camera that will take my current DX lenses.. so Nikon.

and features i would like to have.. or want in some cases.
dual card slots
60fps.. again perhaps want, gives some good effects in some cases
external mic input which most have i think
User preset mode would be helpful too..

Hope i put it out appropriately and well..

again, i have most likely 6 months to go till anything happens.. unless i get a job. But who knows, the rumoured D7200 might come out!

[Tannin]

Brand war? Ffft! I'm a Canon man but brands mean nothing when you start thinking about ditching the fine and graceful art of still photography in order to take up that godless evil, low-brow moving pictures rubbish. Canon, Nikon, who cares? Use a Pentax if you have to, just so long as you take real photographs!

[andrewvid]

Brand war? Ffft! I'm a Canon man but brands mean nothing when you start thinking about ditching the fine and graceful art of still photography in order to take up that godless evil, low-brow moving pictures rubbish. Canon, Nikon, who cares? Use a Pentax if you have to, just so long as you take real photographs!

I agree 100% with you on that! heck even use an iPhone to take quality shots! ok maybe not that far.. :p

[Steve Axford]

Just because most motion pictures are rubbish doesn't mean the art isn't worth something. After all, most still pictures are rubbish too.
You just have to know when the capture of time really means something.

[andrewvid]

Just because most motion pictures are rubbish doesn't mean the art isn't worth something. After all, most still pictures are rubbish too.
You just have to know when the capture of time really means something.

Yep, it's also what meaning it has to certain people, the atmosphere it creates. Not always necessarily the quality of the pic. Just received a gift form my sister today, it is a book called 'a day in the world' Barely any of the pictures in there are of quality. Yet it shows what is happening everyday around the world, from everyday people living their lives to the poor in Africa, sleeping living on the streets.

[AVALANCHE]

So....

First of all.. i'm a nikon kid. Second of all, canon seems good as well..
now i think you know where this is headed.

Actually, I don't.


As much as i love nikon and their interface.. I also really do like the video side of things.. which i know, canon is a great successor in. I also do like the prices.. I am using a Nikon D5100 currently and the quality of it isn't cutting it for me anymore. (been about a year and a half and really wanting to upgrade)

All my friends have canon's (650D) and the more i see them and use them a bit.. i regret that i actually am beginning to like them, even after the amount of bragging i've done about how nikon is :p not saying they are not!!

I've been looking at the Canon 7D and it seems great. The only thing stopping me is, I have a Tamron 90 macro that is obviously for a nikon mount.. though i'll still be keeping the d5100 so it could still be used and perhaps all my friends will say.. i told you so! not that that matters at all :D

With that mindset, you will forever blame your gear for scenes captured rather than asking yourself, 'With my current gear on me, how can I acheive this?'. I suggest you start thinking more about technique and ideas than worrying about gear with your friends. Do you look at images on the net and go "Wow! That was shot with a Nikon D4 obviously!" No? Nobody does.


I don't know.. I need opinions, Is it worth the change? Should I even be thinking about this?

If you have to ask, the answer is no.


Let the brand war begin! - joking

I don't think so.

- - - Updated - - -


I agree 100% with you on that! heck even use an iPhone to take quality shots! ok maybe not that far.. :p

Sometimes the best camera is the one you have on you, which is for most people their smartphone.

I took this a few mornings ago on my iPhone 4, I wouldn't say the quality is terrible;

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/6162/236d.jpg

[andrewvid]

I'm not blaming my gear, It takes some pretty decent shot as is, if the photos it can produce are good enough to have some sales, then hey, it's great. But as i always say and many others, it's what's behind the camera that brings these photos to life. All i'm really looking for is an Upgrade that will allow me to handle certain conditions better than the current one does.. and perhaps better functionality. But as you said in which i agree, look at what you can achieve with what you have.

As for the iPhone, It's a great camera, the quality is great and take photos everywhere i go with this device

[andrewvid]

well!!! after much waiting! i now have something to wait for! the newly released Nikon D7100! excited i am! now... a job... hmm... what ya guys think about this new beauty?
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/1513/D7100.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-Overview

[arthurking83]

Obviously the D7100 will have a few advantages over the D5100 in terms of video capability. I can't tell you how much better it'll be .. but at least the price is more approachable for 'ya.

[andrewvid]

Obviously the D7100 will have a few advantages over the D5100 in terms of video capability. I can't tell you how much better it'll be .. but at least the price is more approachable for 'ya.

Price.. oh boy it looks good. again, I'm more into photography than video any day, was just looking for an option that would have much capability in both.. it is about time nikon adds manual controls to live view though! or so i read it has....