Comments

astar wrote on 10/4/2015, 2:18 PM
Do you need the still abilities of the Nikon? Something like the Ursa mini-EF would give you better video over the Nikon's AVC. Also the Ursa is pretty much shooting the Nikon in still mode continuously at 30fps, so you could just use single frame stills when you need them. The bitrate ranges from 2.5Gbs-4K down to 44Mbs HD. At the lowest setting the Ursa records at 2x the HD bitrate of the Nikon AVCHD.
GeeBax wrote on 10/4/2015, 5:47 PM
I would agree, but there is a significant price difference between the D810 and the Ursa Mini.
Barry W. Hull wrote on 10/4/2015, 6:35 PM
Thanks for those suggestions. I already have a Nikon and several lenses and was considering an upgrade.

I took a look at the Ursa mini, didn't know anything about it, and besides the added price of it, beyond my range, I'm looking for something smaller, easier to toss in a bag, carry around, a Nikon upgrade makes sense. The Ursa is probably more camera than I need.

Of course, if I wait, maybe next year Nikon will roll out a 4k DSLR.
mdindestin wrote on 10/5/2015, 11:51 AM
Canon guy here, but bro in law has the 800. It is a fine video camera. I prefer his standard picture style to my Canon DSLRs version.
Geoff_Wood wrote on 10/5/2015, 10:14 PM
I have a D800 and it's great. Not primarily shooting video with it, need easy 'UI' access to photo-related controls, have significant cabinet of Nikkor lenses, and would hate to be using a video form-factor camera for my (majority) outdoor stills.

Not to say the BM isn't a wonderful device for it's purpose ;-) !

geoff