Nikon D90 ... Thoughts?

swolff13

swolff13

Hey all -

Through an interesting series of events, I've been given an option - continue using a Canon Vixia, or switch over to the Nikon D90 with no extra cost.

Both are HD, 24p, all that, but when I looked at some D90 samples, they had the jello-like effect going on. However, as I already use a Nikon for photography purposes, I would have a wide range of lenses and experience with the Nikon format / DSLRs in general. It's understandably not the best camera to be shooting with, but seeing as I could switch from a Vixia to it at little effort, the opportunity for an easy upgrade is tempting.

I plan on shooting short film / documentary, nothing intensive that would require extreme abilities. No heavy action sequences or anything of that sort.

Audio wise, I'd use an external setup, so that doesn't play a factor. (should it?)

Shooting wise, I'm seeing a good amount of night shots in the future, which I feel the D90 would out-perform the Vixia on. Also, it has the wide range of focus that any normal DSLR has, along with greater flexibility in aperture and ISO. However, the jello-effect is what scares me most. I would be shooting the majority of the shots with a tripod, which I hope would cancel out some of the wobble. HOWEVER - The Nikon is a Nikon, so the recording format can be sketchy and the battery life would be hard to cope with, along with the aforementioned wobble.

So, has anybody had any experience with the D90? Can the jello effect be solved, or is it overbearing? What are there other issues I should take into account?

In essence, would this actually be an upgrade, or am I better off keeping to the camcorder?

Treat me like a noob. I am a noob.

Any help is much appreciated
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I recently sold my D90 to a still photographer and upgraded to a D7000.

What I know about the D90:

- No manual control

- 5 Minute record limit. It also has a problem with over heating(movie mode)

- It shoots at 24fps not 23.98 (720p MJPEG) so when you drop it in a 23.98 timeline you may have audio sync problems with your externally captured audio. I believe you have shrink the audio by 1%.

- it line skips to during resizing in movie mode. which causes stair stepping in the movie image. There is a plug-in that can correct that problem.

- MJPEG compression is low resulting in a soft image (movie mode) but nice color.

- Yes there is jello. It was the first DSLR with a movie mode and has a lot of jello. You need to stabilize the camera. There are plug-ins for jello correction and FCPX has jello correction built in.

I can't say if this is an upgrade but if you like the soft look IMO the D90 is somewhat similar to 16mm film. The D90 is a great still camera. I would suggest you look at the D7000 if you want to use your Nikon equipment. Full 1920 by 1080p movie mode and manual controls.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
As the D90 was one of the first DSLRs with video capabilities, it wasn't great for that. Only 720p, and the "jello" effect is really pronounced compared to more recent cameras. It also has a time limit of five minutes, and no manual control (I'm not sure the extent of this), which would be a deal-breaker for me. If you already have Nikon glass to use, I'd recommend a Panasonic GH1 (around $400 these days) or GH2 (about a grand). Both can use cheap (~$25) adapters and mount Nikon lenses (or pretty much any lens you can dig up). They will work better than the D90 for video, but you can still retain your Nikon lenses you already have. The GH1 and GH2 have full manual everything available in their movie mode, which gives you complete control. They also don't skip lines like a D90; they scale down the video in a much better way. The "jello" effect on my GH1 is obvious if you wave the camera around like a maniac, but in general use with reasonable pans it is not an issue. The thing on a GH1/2 that you have to worry about though is the crop factor (2x) when using lenses designed for full-frame 35mm film. Wides are hard to come by, and fast wides are even harder to find. On my GH1 I use mostly old Canon FD-mount lenses. I have a 50mm f/1.4 and a 35-105mm f/3.5. The 50 is really useful, and fantastic optically, but the field of view at that focal length (100mm equiv.) on a GH1 can be limiting, especially indoors. For wide shots, I have my 12-24mm f/4 Tokina Nikon-mount lens that works great. If you already have something similar (or wouldn't mind picking one up), I would heartily recommend a GH1 or GH2. If you do, I also completely recommend hacking it for higher bitrate video. It's really easy to do, and (especially on the GH1) transforms it into a whole new camera. Compression artifacts are almost completely absent, and detail in shadows is restored. With the hack, GH1 footage can compete with cameras well above its price.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top