Nikon D90 revolutioary to me!

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Frank Arthur, Aug 27, 2008.

  1. Frank Arthur

    Frank Arthur Guest

    The new Nikon D90, retailing for approx. $1000 in the USA, can also
    do movies with sound. This means you can use your Nikon lenses from
    Micro to Telephoto and shoot digital videos as well as still images.
     
    Frank Arthur, Aug 27, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Frank Arthur

    That80sGuy Guest

    In message news:, Alan Browne
    <> done wrote:

    > And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    > Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.


    Why did you buy a monitor that's not compliant with a 12mp camera? Do you
    enjoy seeing only 17% of the pixels your camera captured? Or do you enjoy
    scrolling back and forth to see each sixth of your pictures at full
    resolution?
     
    That80sGuy, Aug 27, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Frank Arthur

    trouble Guest

    Alan Browne may be naïve about what he is actually seeing on his hi
    definition television, regardless of whether or not it is rated at 1080p,
    unless he only watches Bluray connected through HDMI. However if he has any
    kind of LCD panel he is not seeing what he thinks he is seeing, regardless
    of specs.
    The 790p video format in the D90 is a logical evolution for any cameras with
    live view.
    Alan Brown is lucky if anything he sees on his hi def television even
    approaches the potential of the quality of the video images the D90 should
    easily be capable of rendering.
    In fact most tests show that viewers cannot distinguish a 1080 from a 720
    resolution image at normal viewing distances. This is why, apart from cost,
    Bluray has been a market dud to date.
    I swore I would sit out at least two generations more of Nikon dSLRs but the
    announced specs of the D90 have definitely gotten my attention.
    If initial reviews of production D90s support Nikon's first published
    descriptions I may not be able to resist.
     
    trouble, Aug 27, 2008
    #3
  4. Frank Arthur

    Frank Arthur Guest

    "Jake" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Frank Arthur" <> wrote in message
    > news:pejtk.17738$...
    >> The new Nikon D90, retailing for approx. $1000 in the USA, can also
    >> do movies with sound. This means you can use your Nikon lenses from
    >> Micro to Telephoto and shoot digital videos as well as still
    >> images.

    >
    >
    > Maybe I should buy this to fix my car then:
    > http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leatherman-...sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=sports&qid=1219871158&sr=1-1
    >
    > I can see where Nikon are coming from though. I can just imagine
    > the shop assistant saying that "It also shoots video".
    >
    > Come-on though! Nikon have been putting out some good spec bodies,
    > but this type of rubbish is giving a negative image to Nikon DSLR's.

    Some people find joy, pleasure and happiness. Others find rubbish,
    misery and unhappiness. Unfortunately too many of the latter post
    here.
     
    Frank Arthur, Aug 28, 2008
    #4
  5. Frank Arthur

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:18:17 -0400, Alan Browne rushed:

    > What a laugh! Thanks.
    >

    . . .

    >> The 790p video format in the D90 is a logical evolution for any cameras

    >
    > That's "720", but I guess you were just drooling to get your little
    > missive out and couldn't type patiently.
    >
    > You should be careful though about selecting Plasma over LCD if
    > the viewing room is brightly lit (naturally or otherwise) in the area
    > behing the viewer


    "behing"? That's "behind", but I guess you were just drooling to
    get your little missive out and couldn't type patiently.

    What a laugh! Thanks, eh?. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #5
  6. Frank Arthur

    That80sGuy Guest

    In message news:, Alan
    Browne <> done wrote:

    > That80sGuy wrote:
    >> In message news:, Alan
    >> Browne <> done wrote:
    >>
    >>> And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    >>> Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.

    >>
    >> Why did you buy a monitor that's not compliant with a 12mp camera? Do
    >> you enjoy seeing only 17% of the pixels your camera captured? Or do
    >> you enjoy scrolling back and forth to see each sixth of your pictures
    >> at full resolution?

    >
    > Nice try, but misses the point quite entirely.
    >
    > 12 mpix cameras produce lovely prints at 15" x 10" or so, higher with a
    > little care. That is the point of a 12 Mpix camera.
    >
    > OTOH, the point of a consumer video camera is to fill a consumers
    > television set ... which today is 1080p at the upper end.


    "Consumers" != "Upper End." BD and 1080p displays are still in "early
    adopter gearhead" mode years after introduction. The market for the D90
    isn't going to care about 1080p video, because that market doesn't have
    1080p televisions.
     
    That80sGuy, Aug 28, 2008
    #6
  7. Frank Arthur

    That80sGuy Guest

    In message news:, Alan Browne
    <> done wrote:

    > the two videostores I
    > use have most titles available in blu-ray as well as DVD.


    "Most titles"? You must believe moviemaking started in 2003.
     
    That80sGuy, Aug 28, 2008
    #7
  8. Richard wrote:

    > And here I thought the primary goal was to snare soccer moms with that movie
    > feature.


    Hmmmmm. The acronym "smilf" just entered my head. Not that I've ever
    seen that variant (of the term) before...... :)


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 28, 2008
    #8
  9. Frank Arthur

    Paul Furman Guest

    Alan Browne wrote:
    > That80sGuy wrote:
    >> In message news:, Alan
    >> Browne <> done wrote:
    >>> That80sGuy wrote:
    >>>> In message news:, Alan
    >>>> Browne <> done wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    >>>>> Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.
    >>>> Why did you buy a monitor that's not compliant with a 12mp camera? Do
    >>>> you enjoy seeing only 17% of the pixels your camera captured? Or do
    >>>> you enjoy scrolling back and forth to see each sixth of your pictures
    >>>> at full resolution?
    >>> Nice try, but misses the point quite entirely.
    >>>
    >>> 12 mpix cameras produce lovely prints at 15" x 10" or so, higher with a
    >>> little care. That is the point of a 12 Mpix camera.
    >>>
    >>> OTOH, the point of a consumer video camera is to fill a consumers
    >>> television set ... which today is 1080p at the upper end.

    >>
    >> "Consumers" != "Upper End." BD and 1080p displays are still in "early
    >> adopter gearhead" mode years after introduction. The market for the
    >> D90 isn't going to care about 1080p video, because that market doesn't
    >> have 1080p televisions.

    >
    > a) The first place you missed the point and fell off the cliff was your
    > somewhat lame issue on monitors not compliant with 12 mpix cameras.
    >
    > b) 1080p is indeed the upper end of _consumer_ televisions. Your self
    > satisfying equation is not, in fact, reality.
    >
    > c) 1080p Consumer "camcorders" have been available for a year or so at
    > the $1000 level. 10 years ago, "consumers" were paying twice that (and
    > more) for VHS camcorders ... in then year dollars at that.
    >
    > d) I hardly know anyone who has a 720 HD television. It's all 1080p.
    > One fellow I do know is looking to step up. You don't need to be rich
    > to have a 42" or so 1080p + blu-ray player.
    >
    > Clear 'nuff?
    >
    > Oh. Look, 2160 [aka 4K] (not sure if "p" or "i") is already poking its
    > head up: (4096 x 2160)
    > http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20061004/121902/
    >
    > Now that will be for high end consumers! ... for a while, anyway. Then
    > everyone will get it...


    I'll bet the movies for that cost $5,000 each
    Or for $17,000 you can make your own:
    http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/magazine/16-09/ff_redcamera?currentPage=all
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UHDV.svg
    And use your old SLR lenses.


    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 28, 2008
    #9
  10. Frank Arthur

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:45:45 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

    >>>> The 790p video format in the D90 is a logical evolution for any cameras
    >>>
    >>> That's "720", but I guess you were just drooling to get your little
    >>> missive out and couldn't type patiently.
    >>>
    >>> You should be careful though about selecting Plasma over LCD if
    >>> the viewing room is brightly lit (naturally or otherwise) in the area
    >>> behing the viewer

    >>
    >> "behing"? That's "behind", but I guess you were just drooling to
    >> get your little missive out and couldn't type patiently.
    >>
    >> What a laugh! Thanks, eh?. :)

    >
    > You're welcome. I put that in there for Mr. Trouble for some face
    > saving rebuttal. You ruined it for him.
    >
    > But glad you enjoyed.


    Your credibility drops another notch, Mr. Mendacity. There's no
    way that you can convince anyone that you were trying to help Mr.
    Trouble save face. Just the opposite, you were trying to insult and
    bait him. You didn't appreciate being told that you were naïve,
    responding with this :

    >> Alan Browne may be naïve about what he is actually seeing on his hi
    >> definition television, regardless of whether or not it is rated at
    >> 1080p, unless he only watches Bluray connected through HDMI.

    >
    > What a laugh! Thanks.


    Not a laugh of happiness, I'd say. Rather your usual smug,
    supercilious reply intended to imply that you know better. Then :

    >> The 790p video format in the D90 is a logical evolution for any cameras

    >
    > That's "720", but I guess you were just drooling to get your little
    > missive out and couldn't type patiently.


    Do you think anyone is really gullible enough to think that this
    wasn't more of the same? Nope, only someone with a real nasty
    streak would point out a typo this way. Most people would consider
    that to be such an obvious typo as to not be worthy of comment.

    Then your closing comment, complete with disingenuous smiley.

    > Anyway, please do entertain us with you talent and submit some photos to
    > the shootin.
    >
    > ;-)


    Yep. That "proves" that you're just being Mr. Nice Guy, doesn't
    it? If you were a nicer guy and had a better attitude, perhaps
    your shootin would be more popular. After all of the insults, this
    would hardly be expected to entice 'trouble' into joining your
    shootin.

    But I do hope it's a resounding success. :)

    [see how that works?]
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #10
  11. Frank Arthur

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:30:55 -0400, Alan Browne got some kicks in
    when he wrote:

    >>> the two videostores I
    >>> use have most titles available in blu-ray as well as DVD.

    >>
    >> "Most titles"? You must believe moviemaking started in 2003.

    >
    > I meant to say "new titles", obviously. Glad you got you kicks though.


    I'm glad that nobody spoiled this for you, and that you were able
    to respond in a face-saving manner when That80sGuy graciously
    pointed out your mistake, one which wasn't even a simple typo. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #11
  12. Frank Arthur

    Ray Fischer Guest

    That80sGuy <> wrote:
    >In message news:, Alan Browne
    ><> done wrote:
    >
    >> And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    >> Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.

    >
    >Why did you buy a monitor that's not compliant with a 12mp camera?


    Do you know of any 12MP monitors?

    --
    Ray Fischer
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 28, 2008
    #12
  13. Frank Arthur

    Paul Furman Guest

    Alan Browne wrote:
    > Paul Furman wrote:
    >> Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    >>> Oh. Look, 2160 [aka 4K] (not sure if "p" or "i") is already poking
    >>> its head up: (4096 x 2160)
    >>> http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20061004/121902/
    >>>
    >>> Now that will be for high end consumers! ... for a while, anyway.
    >>> Then everyone will get it...

    >>
    >> I'll bet the movies for that cost $5,000 each
    >> Or for $17,000 you can make your own:
    >> http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/magazine/16-09/ff_redcamera?currentPage=all

    >
    > Watched part of that skate video in HD... wow!!! Very sharp and clean
    > image...


    I just measured that at 646 x 1278 (maximized, turned off scaling, did a
    screen cap, cropped in irfanview). About the same as D90 output.


    > Hmm, maybe we need a video shootin ...


    I haven't hardly bothered compiling my DSLR time lapse videos bigger
    than 720 wide because it's so demanding to process & play (and because I
    barely have a clue how to work with video :) but I shoot them on a D200
    with the built in timer at 'small' 1936 x 1296 which I thought was
    preposterously too large but I guess not, it's just a tad larger than
    blu ray. I suppose some live video would be fun to include with those
    now that I think of it but it really is tough working with video.


    > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UHDV.svg
    > > And use your old SLR lenses.

    >
    > Ah, thanks... didn't realize it went to 7680x4320 ... that's ... rich.
    >
    > And aimed at "broadcast by 2015" !!!
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_High_Definition_Video
    >
    > Never ends.



    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 28, 2008
    #13
  14. Frank Arthur

    Maat Guest

    Alan Browne <> wrote in news:MP-
    :

    > And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    > Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.


    Most common monitor bought these days are 22" LCD which are 1680x1050.
     
    Maat, Aug 28, 2008
    #14
  15. Frank Arthur

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:24:53 -0400, Hodaddy Browne wrote:

    >> Your credibility drops another notch, Mr. Mendacity. There's no
    >> way that you can convince anyone that you were trying to help Mr.
    >> Trouble save face. Just the opposite, you were trying to insult and
    >> bait him. You didn't appreciate being told that you were naïve,
    >> responding with this :

    >
    > dude, let it go. You're turning into an obsessed little teenager.


    Nope. It's *you* suffering from an obsession. I notice that
    after making that ridiculous claim about S.I. photographers not
    being good enough to produce a single great shot from 15,000 taken
    at the Super Bowl, you thought it best to hide and not reply when it
    was shown that you took that claim out of context, probably not
    understanding that the article demonstrated the exact opposite. The
    quote above happens to be 100% accurate, and just states the facts.
    Your M.O. is to slyly insult with *really* faint praise. That way
    you can satisfy your nasty streak while pretending to be oh so nice.
    And you don't improve your image by saying "dude", dude. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #15
  16. Frank Arthur

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:27:37 -0400, Alan Browne whined:

    >>>>> the two videostores I
    >>>>> use have most titles available in blu-ray as well as DVD.
    >>>> "Most titles"? You must believe moviemaking started in 2003.
    >>> I meant to say "new titles", obviously. Glad you got you kicks though.

    >>
    >> I'm glad that nobody spoiled this for you, and that you were able
    >> to respond in a face-saving manner when That80sGuy graciously
    >> pointed out your mistake, one which wasn't even a simple typo. :)

    >
    > Oh Goody. I've got my own little conscience troll following me around.


    Well, it's good that you recognize that your conscience isn't
    quite up to snuff, but I was only providing an apt hypocrisy alert.
    I rarely point out typos that I notice, but when I do it's almost
    always when I find some humor in it that's worth mentioning. You,
    on the other hand, used the typo to launch more of your insults, so
    it was fitting that you almost immediately made a mistake of your
    own, and it wasn't even a simple, careless typo. Karma calling?
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #16
  17. Frank Arthur

    Mike Guest

    On 28 Aug, 02:14, Alan Browne <>
    wrote:
    > That80sGuy wrote:
    > > In messagenews:, Alan
    > > Browne <> done wrote:

    >
    > >> That80sGuy wrote:
    > >>> In messagenews:, Alan
    > >>> Browne <> done wrote:

    >
    > >>>> And the movies aren't 1080p compliant  ...  so what's the point?
    > >>>> Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.
    > >>> Why did you buy a monitor that's not compliant with a 12mp camera?  Do
    > >>> you enjoy seeing only 17% of the pixels your camera captured?  Or do
    > >>> you enjoy scrolling back and forth to see each sixth of your pictures
    > >>> at full resolution?
    > >> Nice try, but misses the point quite entirely.

    >
    > >> 12 mpix cameras produce lovely prints at 15" x 10" or so, higher with a
    > >> little care.  That is the point of a 12 Mpix camera.

    >
    > >> OTOH, the point of a consumer video camera is to fill a consumers
    > >> television set ... which today is 1080p at the upper end.

    >
    > > "Consumers" != "Upper End."  BD and 1080p displays are still in "early
    > > adopter gearhead" mode years after introduction.  The market for the D90
    > > isn't going to care about 1080p video, because that market doesn't have
    > > 1080p televisions.

    >
    > a) The first place you missed the point and fell off the cliff was your
    > somewhat lame issue on monitors not compliant with 12 mpix cameras.
    >
    > b) 1080p is indeed the upper end of _consumer_ televisions.   Your self
    > satisfying equation is not, in fact, reality.
    >
    > c) 1080p Consumer "camcorders" have been available for a year or so at
    > the $1000 level.  10 years ago, "consumers" were paying twice that (and
    > more) for VHS camcorders ... in then year dollars at that.
    >
    > d) I hardly know anyone who has a 720 HD television.  It's all 1080p.
    > One fellow I do know is looking to step up.  You don't need to be rich
    > to have a 42" or so 1080p + blu-ray player.
    >
    > Clear 'nuff?


    Not entirely true. 1080p TVs are only really just taking off, most (my
    plasma 42" included) run 1024x768 or 1366x768. NOT 1080P. Granted
    there ARE 1080p TVs available and they are falling in price all the
    time but check your facts of the HD ready TVs against the Full HD
    (1080p) compliant TVs.
     
    Mike, Aug 28, 2008
    #17
  18. Frank Arthur

    D-Mac Guest

    Maat wrote:
    > Alan Browne <> wrote in news:MP-
    > :
    >
    >> And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    >> Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.

    >
    > Most common monitor bought these days are 22" LCD which are 1680x1050.


    Don't let statistics interfere with Alan's navel gazing research. Canada
    is after all the centre of the universe.
     
    D-Mac, Aug 28, 2008
    #18
  19. Frank Arthur

    D-Mac Guest

    ASAAR wrote:
    > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:24:53 -0400, Hodaddy Browne wrote:
    >
    >>> Your credibility drops another notch, Mr. Mendacity. There's no
    >>> way that you can convince anyone that you were trying to help Mr.
    >>> Trouble save face. Just the opposite, you were trying to insult and
    >>> bait him. You didn't appreciate being told that you were naïve,
    >>> responding with this :

    >> dude, let it go. You're turning into an obsessed little teenager.

    >
    > Nope. It's *you* suffering from an obsession. I notice that
    > after making that ridiculous claim about S.I. photographers not
    > being good enough to produce a single great shot from 15,000 taken
    > at the Super Bowl, you thought it best to hide and not reply when it
    > was shown that you took that claim out of context, probably not
    > understanding that the article demonstrated the exact opposite. The
    > quote above happens to be 100% accurate, and just states the facts.
    > Your M.O. is to slyly insult with *really* faint praise. That way
    > you can satisfy your nasty streak while pretending to be oh so nice.
    > And you don't improve your image by saying "dude", dude. :)
    >


    The penny drops.
     
    D-Mac, Aug 28, 2008
    #19
  20. Frank Arthur

    That80sGuy Guest

    In message news:48b60a8b$0$17234$,
    (Ray Fischer) done wrote:

    > That80sGuy <> wrote:
    >>In message news:, Alan
    >>Browne <> done wrote:
    >>
    >>> And the movies aren't 1080p compliant ... so what's the point?
    >>> Computer monitors are mostly in the 1920 x 1200 range as well.

    >>
    >>Why did you buy a monitor that's not compliant with a 12mp camera?

    >
    > Do you know of any 12MP monitors?


    I was pointing out the stupidity of Alan's post.

    I can do the same for you, though you seem to be handling it well without
    my assistance.
     
    That80sGuy, Aug 28, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Walt Hanks
    Replies:
    60
    Views:
    1,116
    Roxy d'Urban
    Apr 12, 2005
  2. gpaleo

    Nikon D90

    gpaleo, Sep 28, 2007, in forum: Nikon
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,363
    Alexander Arnakis
    Sep 29, 2007
  3. Bruce
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    239
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Sep 27, 2010
  4. Bruce
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    256
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Sep 15, 2010
  5. akinyo22

    Nikon D300s Vs Nikon D90 drop price...

    akinyo22, Sep 30, 2010, in forum: Photography Equipment
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    901
    Norrell
    Mar 13, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page