Nocturne:- a Canon 1D Mark IV Video by Laforet

Vincent LaForet's Nocturne has been finally approved by Canon. Originally asked by Canon to remove it from his website, it has now been approved by Canon to be shown again. Since Reverie (which was a really bad film by Laforet with no storyline even!) was a visual showcase for the Canon 5DMark II and a runaway marketing success for the camera, Vince followed up with his few days with a prototype 1DMark IV, shooting at 3200 and 6400ISO with Zeiss and Canon lenses.

It was originally shot in October in Los Angeles.

The lowlight ability is self evident since it was shot in available light. I'll just embed the Vimeo HD version and pop the link for the full 1080p version here so you can see for yourself:

SMUGMUG 1080p version

The lowlight ability is self evident as well as the mistakes (for instance, the driver position) in this short film.

Well, continuity is the problem of the editor... although I suspect they did not have a medium shot of the car going that way so they reversed it and made several quick cuts to mask the problem.

Nice video but no more impressive than the bear video done with the D3s that was done with no artificial illumination at all. What I do not like about the Nikon video are the stills within it, but that is more a matter of style.

Here is a link to it:

Sorry Tom, but 720p is NOT 1080p resolution. And that's where the powers of the Canon series come in. Higher resolution with that sort of noise free shadows is just a league ahead of Nikon's 720/24p... not to mention FULL manual control over the camera. And whassup with that 5 minute limit on the Nikon? Even if the noise is similar, that's like comparing a 480p to 720p. NOBODY is going to buy Nikon for the video functions.

Sorry Tom, but 720p is NOT 1080p resolution. And that's where the powers of the Canon series come in. Higher resolution with that sort of noise free shadows is just a league ahead of Nikon's 720/24p... not to mention FULL manual control over the camera. And whassup with that 5 minute limit on the Nikon? Even if the noise is similar, that's like comparing a 480p to 720p. NOBODY is going to buy Nikon for the video functions.

That is right correct, one buys a Nikon to take photographs!

Merry Christmas!

Well, continuity is the problem of the editor... although I suspect they did not have a medium shot of the car going that way so they reversed it and made several quick cuts to mask the problem.

Ok, maybe they also reversed the old man from the back seat to the front seat...

That is right correct, one buys a Nikon to take photographs!

Merry Christmas!

Well that's one way of looking at it. To me it's a limited view but everyone has their priorities. But that's why I think Canon is the better camera. Higher resolution, better weather protection (lens and camera body), better video capabilities and better choice of fast (f1+) lenses. That's why Canon ViDSLR are all the rage now, because they give options

Ok, maybe they also reversed the old man from the back seat to the front seat...

No, they used whatever shot they had. Anyhow, nitpicking is always fun but all filmmakers use that famous line... suspension of disbelief!

better weather protection (lens and camera body),

I was under the impression that Nikon excelled here; I seem to recall that the 5DII is not too good in this dept. With Nikon I believe one must get a G lens to get lens sealing. I do not have ALL the G lenses to verify but the ones I have all do. Rear sealing is the what is critical IMHO as it is VERY easy to get water drops on the camera back when the housing is open. Never a worry with my D2X!

No, they used whatever shot they had. Anyhow, nitpicking is always fun but all filmmakers use that famous line... suspension of disbelief!

The only problem is that the nits are very large. Even the most distracted person notice them. My guess is that the director was sleepy. But, I close my case.

The director is a professional sport photographer and budding filmmaker. He's either making mistakes every 1st year film school student makes, or he's choosing not to let such details bug him. It's an issue but the majority of viewers are more impressed with the 1D4 being so clean in streetlight lit scenes than the editor's mistakes.

That's the power of ViDSLR. Still photographers are now using the tool to explore new areas. Chris Morris, Vince and many others. I think it'll open up many new areas for photographers.

Tom, the Nikon lenses DO NOT have the same environmental sealing that canon L lenses have had since 99. Only lately with the 14-24 and 70-200II have they made better efforts to weather seal the focus rings and switches. Canon 1D series and L lenses are rated up to 10" per hour of rain. Nikon's entire line is rated at 1" per hour. The new Nikkor lenses have no stats yet.

Drew, where do you find the lens and camera seal stats you refer to? Are they independent evaluations or manufacturer supplied stats? I'd like to see how the cameras and lenses stack up in practical real use tests if you know of any? (Not arguing, just asking)

Canon 1D series and L lenses are rated up to 10" per hour of rain.

 

You nearly don't need a housing!

Jonny... trust me... you absolutely still do need the housing.

Jeff, the Canon stats were released by Canon themselves. The Nikon stat was given to me either by Nikon or Thom Hogan via Nikon, I can't remember now as it was at least a couple of years ago. Then there was also my own D2H drowned from rain. Not having a rubber ring around the battery for a better seal, a couple of drops made it in and killed the thing. The Canon NP-E3 (and now E4) batteries have them. The D3 series has them now but they are not completely sealing as it's 2 pieces of rubber seals. Go check it out.

Now note that stat doesn't mean you can go out and trash Canon products. But it does give limited insurance against water damage. I've had the 1D2 and 70-200 IS submerged for at least 1 sec in river water when I fell and it kept on shooting. Might've been the angle it went it where the air pockets protected it but there were drops of water in the memory card area and the LCD fogged up. I've also sprinkled water on the same setup to wash off the salt water. My annual CPS inspections don't reveal any corrosion damage on the chip boards.

Marketing aside, it doesn't take much to find out how much sealing there is on any camera. Just check the camera's 2 weakess pts, the battery and card compartments. I know the 7D is better than the 5D2 (which is rated at 10mm for 3 mins) because there are 2 sealing measures vs 1 in the 5D2 in the card and battery compartments. Neither can match the 1D series sealing. Canon releases diagrams of the sealing areas for every camera, Nikon use to up to the D2 series but they've since stopped. Sure it's marketing but it does show commitment in the area. If they test to 10" per hour or 10mm for 3 mins, then I appreciate those stats. But I still check the seals for basic design criteria and go from there.

Jonny... trust me... you absolutely still do need the housing.

 

Jeff, the Canon stats were released by Canon themselves. The Nikon stat was given to me either by Nikon or Thom Hogan via Nikon, I can't remember now as it was at least a couple of years ago. Then there was also my own D2H drowned from rain. Not having a rubber ring around the battery for a better seal, a couple of drops made it in and killed the thing. The Canon NP-E3 (and now E4) batteries have them. The D3 series has them now but they are not completely sealing as it's 2 pieces of rubber seals. Go check it out.

Now note that stat doesn't mean you can go out and trash Canon products. But it does give limited insurance against water damage. I've had the 1D2 and 70-200 IS submerged for at least 1 sec in river water when I fell and it kept on shooting. Might've been the angle it went it where the air pockets protected it but there were drops of water in the memory card area and the LCD fogged up. I've also sprinkled water on the same setup to wash off the salt water. My annual CPS inspections don't reveal any corrosion damage on the chip boards.

Marketing aside, it doesn't take much to find out how much sealing there is on any camera. Just check the camera's 2 weakess pts, the battery and card compartments. I know the 7D is better than the 5D2 (which is rated at 10mm for 3 mins) because there are 2 sealing measures vs 1 in the 5D2 in the card and battery compartments. Neither can match the 1D series sealing. Canon releases diagrams of the sealing areas for every camera, Nikon use to up to the D2 series but they've since stopped. Sure it's marketing but it does show commitment in the area. If they test to 10" per hour or 10mm for 3 mins, then I appreciate those stats. But I still check the seals for basic design criteria and go from there.

10 inches per hour sounds rather biblical! I live by a rainforest. The one that extends from N. Cal. to Kodiak Is. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...nforest_map.png. Locally we get 5 meters or so of ppt per year and when it rained 3" in one day it resulted in a 50 year flood. I was in Lahaina when it rained rather hard. I seem to recall from the TV report that it was 12" in 3 hours on Oahu and resulted in road washouts and power outages. The diving for the rest of that week was canceled as the water around Maui was brown.

FWIW my Nikon D2X has survived a housing flood, though fresh water, unscathed. I have used Nikons for decades in the rain with no ill effects. Granted I was using F and F2 cameras for most of this time. The old lenses have no electronics in them. I still consider these old lens as beaters to use out in the elements. The new G type lenses are sealed. Even the cheapos, e.g., the D70 kit lens. No need for concern.

Also, there are anecdotes of folks with 1D series cameras that have become toast from water. One should always be as precautionary as possible when working in and around water with camera gear regardless of how well it might be sealed, housings included.

Here is a good read: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/a...09-worked.shtml

Canons are FAR from waterproof!

Another thread getting sidetracked, but never mind. From all my anecdotal research on the web, I think there is a general satisfaction with the weather resistance of mid and upper range Nikon gear, as there is till now with the higher end Canon gear. It seems the mid-range Canon gear has lacked until more recently, where the 7D has apparently been significantly improved.

Both systems seem to be pretty resistant to problems with a moderate amount of rain, ice, snow, mud. Personally I put my camera in a raincoat if I am shooting out in the rain - and more than camera failure I worry about junk on the lens ruining the shot.

Once a camera is truly dunked, I think all bets are off for both systems as there are so many places water can get in from doors to dials to knobs.

Anyway if you want to see confidence in a camera's water resistance, check this out:

http://www.thaidphoto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127129

Well Tom. It's RATED at 10" per hour, that means it can take up to that. It is not rated by JIS's system but I'd put it in the 2-3 level since I spray down my 1D series with 70-200 with a hose to get the sea salt off.

Apart from anecdotes, I can see the design differences and strengths of each product. For me it's pretty simple. If there's a rubber seal in a good design, it's better protected than one that does not have one or uses crappy foam or has gaps in them. To argue the lack of a rubber seal is as good or better than having one is, well, illogical. Same for the battery compartment. So as always, don't believe what you read on the internet and go out and look at what you are buying.

and look at what you are buying.

I have not had this luxury since I live in the boondocks. I have bought almost all my new camera gear for years without seeing it till I had it in my hands. The exception was the D2H as a friend had one. I therefore rely on whatever technical descriptions are provided, and these are generally wanting. What is omitted in something is almost never stated. Fancy brochures full of pictures taken with a new camera are not compelling to me.

The quickest I have ever ordered anything new was when the 14-24 Nikkor came out. This was based on seeing the MTF figure on the Nikon homepage. I e-mailed one of my suppliers within 1 hour of its posting in order to get near the top of the waiting list. The Alaska timezone was useful in this case. Generally I wait a bit and see what is wrong as this happens all to frequently. I bought the Leica M8 before finding out about its problems, so have been more cautious since.

I do rely on so-called tests, reviews, etc. Often they come too late. Those that are more timely such as DPR, however, focus on certain aspects such as imaging performance. AF performance is almost all anecdotal. Even the imaging performance evaluation is done mainly by comparing contemporaneous models. These tests provide little evaluation for those thinking of upgrading from earlier models. For example, camera brand X vs brand Y comparisons do not tell me how much better camera X is relative to what I have. I really don't give a hoot how much a new Nikon is better than a new Canon. Rather how much better is this new Nikon relative to my old D2X etc. I have not found a compelling reason to upgrade as a result.

I have not seen tests on water resistance. It would relatively easy to rig up something that would enable a quick dunking of a camera into a tank of water - the test would be whether it would turn on or not afterwards. A pass-fail test, with most cameras failing, therefore making it a rigorous test.

I'm just amazed at how both Tom and Jeff are scouring the internet looking for evidence of Nikon's resilience.

I'm just amazed at how both Tom and Jeff are scouring the internet looking for evidence of Nikon's resilience.

Do you know what scholarship is?

Is there a link to the 10 inch thing or did you just make it up?