1080P HDMI from the new Nikon d300

Rolfe Klement · December 2, 2007

Anyone thought about using the new HDMI liveview option that comes with the Nikon D300

Could be the cheapest HD camera block around?

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond300/page9.asp

Check the videos near the bottom of this page for some of the stuff done with it

thanks

Rolfe

Phil Rhodes · December 2, 2007

I wandered into Camera World today and was told that the HDMI isn't active during Liveview.

Something about the way they said it suggested they didn't know or care and were bored talking to me. This is not, therefore, reliable information.

I'd be surprised if it was at a high enough frame rate, either way.

Phil

Andy_Alderslade · December 2, 2007

I wandered into Camera World today and was told that the HDMI isn't active during Liveview.

Something about the way they said it suggested they didn't know or care and were bored talking to me. This is not, therefore, reliable information.

I'd be surprised if it was at a high enough frame rate, either way.

Phil

This a little unrelated but I was told a few weeks ago that Aardman has been using digital stills cameras for work on their television work for a little while now. They have the camera hooked up to a computer for immediate capture.

Interesting, I wonder how many 16mm and 35mm animation cameras have been made redundant.

Timo Klages · December 5, 2007

This a little unrelated but I was told a few weeks ago that Aardman has been using digital stills cameras for work on their television work for a little while now. They have the camera hooked up to a computer for immediate capture.

Interesting, I wonder how many 16mm and 35mm animation cameras have been made redundant.

isn´t that quite obvious? we made a stop-motion short movie at university early this year and used a nikon D1 markII. since this model doesn´t have a live view (that is really important when shooting stop motion if you don´t want to take a picture for every little move you make) we used a Zig-View (i think that is the name), a littel camera that you mount at viewfinder for a live-picture. and then you start shooting, directly to the pc with immediate control of what you just did (and of course the RAW-files). pretty straight forward if you ask me, (although we had to programm the software for preview and animation-preview ourselves).

and you have a very nice resolution in the end when you use a high-end digital SLR-camera.

greets,

timo

monday sunnlinn · December 5, 2007

if you did anything besides stop motion, what was the maximum sustained framerate you got out of it? and what interface did you use to hook the camera up to the pc with?

i downloaded those movies a few days ago and the framerate was a strange 26.79 or something like that, it played back kinda choppy...

Walter Graff · December 5, 2007

Great for stop motion techniques but not for real motion. There is far more to an HD camera other than a chip. This camera does not had those needs.

monday sunnlinn · December 5, 2007

have you actually tried it?

Walter Graff · December 5, 2007

have you actually tried it?

If you are talking to me, yes I have taken hi rez images off still cameras and animated them. You need something that processes motion, and does it well to make it video. That's why they call it a still camera. And the reason why these cameras don't output a signal while they take a picture. Too much info for circuitry designed to take one good picture of great static resolution quality over. Easier just to buy a video camera than once again trying to find the non existent holy grail of making a HD video picture with all these Rube Goldberg-type set ups. Make good content and no one will care if you used a 10k camera or a VHS camera.

Will Montgomery · December 5, 2007

Interesting, I wonder how many 16mm and 35mm animation cameras have been made redundant.

Wouldn't the shutter life become a factor if doing animation with these?

I've done sunrise intervolometer shots with my Nikon D200 and created full 1080P HD movies from it that looked truely amazing... just not sure how many shutter clicks these cameras can make though.

You could make 4k+ animations with these if you wanted to... and with Rudolph the Red Nosed Raindeer stop motion on every other night these days it's made me wonder what it would look like to do some of that these days. (I guess it would look like the Tim Burton stuff)

Leo Anthony Vale · December 5, 2007

You could make 4k+ animations with these if you wanted to... and with Rudolph the Red Nosed Raindeer stop motion on every other night these days it's made me wonder what it would look like to do some of that these days. (I guess it would look like the Tim Burton stuff)

'Robot Chicken' on the Cartoon Network for stop motion of action figures doing sketch comedy.

monday sunnlinn · December 6, 2007

If you are talking to me, yes I have taken hi rez images off still cameras and animated them. You need something that processes motion, and does it well to make it video. That's why they call it a still camera. And the reason why these cameras don't output a signal while they take a picture. Too much info for circuitry designed to take one good picture of great static resolution quality over. Easier just to buy a video camera than once again trying to find the non existent holy grail of making a HD video picture with all these Rube Goldberg-type set ups. Make good content and no one will care if you used a 10k camera or a VHS camera.

what kind of camera was it? was it an HDMI out? what software did you use? you seem to be very absolute about all this, yet technology is changing the game every 6 months, so forgive me for still persuing detailed specific knowledge about this from people who have tried similar things. have you considered that some people like myself have a special purpose in mind? that some people actually -like- the challenge of doing something new? maybe making something that is/has a unique look or feel or style. if nobody tried pushing the bounds of what exists into what is new, we wouldn't have video or film cameras at all...

:)

Walter Graff · December 6, 2007

what kind of camera was it? was it an HDMI out? what software did you use? you seem to be very absolute about all this, yet technology is changing the game every 6 months, so forgive me for still persuing detailed specific knowledge about this from people who have tried similar things. have you considered that some people like myself have a special purpose in mind? that some people actually -like- the challenge of doing something new? maybe making something that is/has a unique look or feel or style. if nobody tried pushing the bounds of what exists into what is new, we wouldn't have video or film cameras at all...
:)

D300. I imported the stills into a MAC and assebmled them with FCP. My point was that for $5000 you can buy a still camera designed ot take static images or for about the same a video camera dedicated to motion. I don't know your purpose, nor care, just telling you that if it's practical uses of such a set up, I don't see any. If it's to experiment, then by all means have fun.