Thom Hogan is feeling pretty confident on his information and has posted what are believed to be the actual specs of the new Nikon D90, which is expected to be announced shortly.
The Nikon D90 will feature the following specs:
- 12 megapixels
- 4.5 frames per second
- Live View with VIDEO (and audio) CAPTURE – yes, you read that right
- HDMI connection
- GPS connection
- Kit lens is an 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR (28-150mm equivalent on 35mm)
Clearly, Nikon is aiming to one-up the previous generation DSLRs with specs like these. The video capture will surely be a big selling point in the consumer market.
I’ll withhold my thoughts for know, but I want to know: What do you think about video capture in the Nikon D80 replacement?
Video on a DSLR seems kinda lame. I was expecting some kind of prosumer stepup from the d40/d60 not a swissarmy-toy.
Video is what i m waiting for. No to be use as a regular video camera but for graphic shots to be editing in After effect. A quality picture is always need in some advertising / demo / trailer / generic and so on.
For a low price you can have a good video shot if you have already invest in good (chapness / low aperture) lens.
Not done for action or feature, it won’t have the design usability for it, but will find it’s market place.
Wow, all this sounds really good, but what about the price. This is a pro level camera, tell me why any real photographer will use video capture. I think this is Nikon’s plan to reach even deeper into our pockets. I love the whole idea of an upgrade, but the price’s just destroy my excitement.
PS. I really love the D80
I’m in the market for my first DSLR and travel internationally often. I can’t express how excited I am about being able to snap a picture and a short video with the same camera.
If this is true the D90 will be the must have travel gadget.
kit lens is the same. 105 is actually for 1005 pixel 3d matrix metering.
As to the new Video capability, I think the devil will be in the details. First, so many cameras screw up the specs. It would need to conform to a standard 720 or 1080i or 1080p resolution AND frame rate. Moreover, one would hope they use a standard high quality codec, preferably using QuickTime. Even Panasonic, who make Pro Video gear, only recently got their act together on this front for their still cameras.
Then there is the microphone issues. Don’t get me started.
Why can’t we all get one device that does stills and videos great? Is that so wrong?
I waiting for these type of specs from DSLR camera for sometime. The other thing I’m waiting for is the compact camera to have a bigger sensor size close to DSLR, but DSLR with Video capability happened first. So, I will go with this one. For the people who asked why DSLR need video capability, not sure about other but for me, I like to shoot the events that have sexy women and many times still pictures can’t do justice ;-)
Dear Nikon, don’t let it go video! Pleeeease! If you packed it into Mg alloy instead…
SD cards welcome. CF not welcome!
I was waiting ages for the D90 so ended up going for the D300. I didn’t want video on it, i do like the idea of having video capture, but i didn’t want the image quality sacrifice that usually comes with adding video.
I’d rather use a separate device for video related things, what’s the point of getting a dSLR otherwise if adding video will degrade it closer to compact image quality.
Unless you are using a tripod or a really compact lens (e.g. 50mm f/1.8) it will be pretty difficult to hold a DSLR + lens to shoot a movie. Don’t get me wrong I’m not against new features and I don’t get some comments about the “adding video will degrade pic quality” complaint. I just don’t thing a DSLR has good ergonomics for taking movie.
To be honest I’d rather have AiS lens compatibility and bigger view finder than video capture. I guess those are reserved for Dx00 and Dx series. Most people, including me, who bought a DSLR for taking pictures, not for taking video/movie. This feature does not add any value for me.