Well I'm staying with Nikon

It's just a matter of getting the exposure correct-- in some cases it's not a problem to lose the highlights, but usually it means that the image is overexposed.
 
Well I'm not exactly sure what the settings were but when I post them I'll try to remember to add the settings so you can see the ones that were blinking at me .....LOL however it was daytime so I didn't see the need for flash
 
But as noted, upgrading to the D90 isn't about the video. It's about the vastly superior CMOS sensor. I don't know why Nikon still uses CCD's to be honest. Canon ditched them a while ago.

We can ask as many questions about why does Canon still do the stupid things it does as well, but that is off topic and not helpful to the OP. I didn't realize this was a bash Nikon thread or a brand wars thread. I understand both of your negative comments were probably meant lightheartedly but they start to have a partisan edge to them and are not beneficial to the topic. Or maybe it's just me and a decided lack of sleep.
 
Also which is the better package to get within the $700 range?
 
We can ask as many questions about why does Canon still do the stupid things it does as well, but that is off topic and not helpful to the OP. I didn't realize this was a bash Nikon thread or a brand wars thread. I understand both of your negative comments were probably meant lightheartedly but they start to have a partisan edge to them and are not beneficial to the topic. Or maybe it's just me and a decided lack of sleep.


Uh oh, now John's pissed off... :mrgreen: Off topic, but some people are meeting at the Krohn tomorrow around 10:30 if you're interested.
 
Again, I can see average to newbie users have a problem with the HD Video and simply writing it off as a fad; the fact remains that it has untapped (and tapped - youre not looking hard enough) potential. Is it better than a pro level camcorder - of course not, and it never was meant to be so such an argument is fallacious at best.
Never said it was a fad, to the contrary I said it's just not ready for prime time and eventually it will be a standard feature that will rock. It's not there yet.

By the time I found the potential in the current generation of cameras, gen 2 will be out and it will likely be far more useful to me.

Do you think it is as functional as a $600 Best Buy HD camcorder in terms of features and usefulness?
 
Just did a google search on them. It seems that it's that same BS company out of Brooklyn NY. Don't buy anything from them. Ever...
 
The 5D is a professional camera and it has the video feature too. The technology isn't thoroughly baked yet. It's a neat gimmick for some, useless for most outside of some screwing around, and I'm sure will be quite useful in later iterations. It's just not there yet.

Can you find one review that says "WOW! The video feature on this camera ROCKS!"? Or one review that says, "This will replace the camcorder"? Or one that says, "Perfect for family functions or weddings"?

Right now it's added probably because of the intense market rivalry for features and for brands trying to set themselves apart from the competition.

straw man. It's not useless to me, because I've used it at least once. Ergo, it's not USELESS. :mrgreen:
Are you gonna be happy with my answer or are you going to try once again to justify your recent Cannon purchase by trashing Nikon in yet another thread ?
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top