New Nikon: Buying for Photo AND Video

<p>I started my SLR life in 2001 with an N80. Since then, I have used the D70 (2004-2008) and the D90 (2009-now). We have a somewhat old-school Sony videocamera that uses the Mini-DV tapes. We'd like to consolidate our efforts and sometime in the next 6-8 months, buy a new Nikon DSLR that succeeds at both photography and video. I'm wondering if you have recommendations.<br>

I was recently on the Nikon site to explore my options. Photography is more my forte and interest, but being w/ have several kids, it seems it would make things easier to use one unit that could accommodate both photographic and video needs. There will likely be events where we need to simultaneously photograph & video. So in that case, perhaps my D90 could do one or the other, and a new DSLR could do the other job.<br>

Thoughts on options & ideas?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>D3200.</p>

<p>D3200 should suit you well. But I think DSLR HD video recording is not as comfortable as camcorder... although changing lens may feel good which makes it versatile.</p>

<p>I would get a real video camcorder for family-style video. I have found that shooting video with a DSLR is so clunky in those places it's just not worthwhile. Now, if you're setting up a real shooting rig like they use with movies and TV, that's another thing, but that's not likely what you are talking about here.</p>

<p>If I were to just go forth w/ a new Nikon DSLR for the purpose of taking my (mostly outdoor portraiture & spontaneous photographs of people) photos, and not worrying about video, which Nikon which you recommend? I'm ready to step up from the D90 level.<br>

And, if we were to get another unit, which was JUST a video camcorder, any recommendations?<br>

@Leon Chen . . . what do you mean by a DSLR HD video recording being "not as comfortable?"<br>

Thanks all.</p>

<p>I personally find recording video with the iPhone much more rewarding than my D800/D7000... :) To be honest, other than trying it out when I first got the cameras, I have not used it. I am sure video quality can be superb, but schlepping it around..... getting steady shots hand held nay not be the easiest thing to do, the zoom lenses are not really made for video and then your are into accessories etc etc.<br>

The logical step up from the D90 would be the D7000, which does video (though I think the sound is not that great). For portraits, a minty used D700 may just suit you fine.</p>

<p>I think it so, too. Video recording with a DSLR is quite different to shooting stills.<br /> <br /> The viewfinder doesn`t work, so you have to check the image at the rear screen. It`s difficult to follow the action unless you have an special shade to avoid reflections and to make your eye/s to the screen/ambient brightness.<br /> I was not able of finding the right way to focus... no way. With a little more experience, maybe.<br /> It`s difficult to walk and hold the camera if your subject moves; I`d have liked to have any kind of aid to hold it steady.<br /> The video image quality was impressive to me (D800) but it`s not as easy as with a MiniDV camcorder, where all is in focus, you can move with an eye stucked to the camera, etc. Best of all, you can use your lenses on it (I used a 50/1.4 at different apertures; great). You can download and edit the images from your card, way more easier than with the MiniDV.<br /> <br /> I liked the experience, but for quality videos, a proper training and a few extra accessories are a must. It`s worth a try.</p>

<p>I may be full of it but you might want to try the V1 and the 10-100mm zoom.</p>

<p>A flip out screen is very important for video (and for still for many) so I would go with the D5100, which is now about $550 body only. One caveat is that it does not AF with older Nikon lenses and you may need to use a good IS/VR/OS lens to stabilize the images when there is no support for shooting video. </p>

<p>I haven't tried the video on the D800 or D4, but I have used the function on all the other Nikon models.</p>

<p>If you need professional-quality video, I wouldn't buy another Nikon. I can't speak for the newer models, but ALL the other models I've used (aside from the 1 series) have autofocus that is mediocre at best while recording video, and have some pretty serious jitter when panning.</p>

<p>The 1 series video is great, but nobody will take you seriously if you bring that to a commercial filming. I would strongly recommend buying a Sony A57 if it's going to be doing almost all video, or switching to a 7D or better Canon if you want it to do both. The Sony A65 and A77 are phenominal cameras as well, and strongly recommended over the D7000 or 60D if you'll be shooting outside, with lights, or anytime high ISO is not needed.</p>

<p>The moral of the story is that if you need really good video, and you don't have $3000+ to spend on a new body, you're pretty much looking at a camera with a different mount.</p>

<p>Jenna, sorry I was not clear. I think other's replies have explained it. I mean the operation is not comfortable compared with camcorder. The handling, the view finder, although the video quality is good.</p>

<p>Actually, it is all the personal experience. Example: someone never used camcorder, and DSLR was the only video recording device on the planet, I believe he would not complain a lot. My suggestion is that you should try both, and make the decision.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>Focus issues and the strobing effect make DSLR video not the best. I have better success with a real video camera. But if you take static shots and really slow pans with DSLRs, the video can be rewarding.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>the strobing effect make DSLR video</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The strobing can be eliminated by matching the shutter speed with the frame rate of the video. For example, if you are shooting in 30p, use 1/60 or 1/30 sec, higher shutter speeds will cause strobing if filming objects that move rapidly. Under bright day light, a ND filter is needed to get the shutter speed low enough.</p>

<p>While a camcorder is easier to shoot, it does poorly in low light and it cannot generate the shallow DOF effects, and you have to carry two devices. I will never buy a camcorder again.</p>

<p>One cannot judge the video performance using a typical Nikon dSLRs. Many mirror-less cameras are much better integrated as a hydrid cam. So if the OP is willing to consider a different mount, my personal favorite is the m4/3 system, which has now a very good collection of high quality and very small and light lenses, perfect for traveling light. The noise and DR performance of a Nikon dSLR will still beat the best of m4/3 but the m4/3 is much easier to use, when you need to shoot both stills and videos.</p>

<p>The various mirrorless cameras also have the advantage of metering with manual lenses.</p>