A bit more on this:

1/ Really fast shutter speeds make stabilization programs like Mercalli work better.
2/ Really fast shutter speeds make fast pans and zooms look jerky.

This is information that you can use. For instance, If you are shooting outside and zoom in a bit with a little extra room around what would be good framing, you can get a very nice static shot (with movement within the shot) you can get very nice looking handheld shots.

Moving around quickly with the camera is going to look jerky though.

Here is another thing that I am noticing but haven't quite flushed out. Moire and aliasing seem to be worse outside. I think that this is because the shutter speed goes very fast and that means that on something like a tile roof or bricks, that a given part of the pattern will be all that is sampled, whereas if the shutter was open a little longer, a bit of camera shake would mean that slightly different parts of the pattern instead of one exact bit, and the moire would be lessoned quite a bit. Can anyone confirm this logic?

OK, I just did some experiments and learned a few things.

1/ The way I thought I was adjusting shutter speed on my Nikon D5100 (by adjusting minimum automatic shutter speed) was only affecting the shutterspeed reading in my display. It affected stills but not video. I thought I was controlling it but in fact I was not. I was trusting the reading in the display and not the actual video being shot. I feel like such an idiot!

2/ By shooting outside with a small aperture (thereby increasing the amount of time the shutter is open on each frame) it does minimize moire considerably. I lose the shallow depth of field, but that is worth the tradeoff of minimizing moire.

3/ On a camera such as mine or yours that automatically is going to select very short shutter speeds when the light is bright, I can adjust the shutter as a byproduct of changing the aperture only. That means I am probably best off giving up on wide apertures and maybe using a variable ND or polarizing filter when outside.

4/ Much of the moire problems I have been having can be minimized by giving up on shallow depth of field for outdoor shots and closing the aperture way down.

"1/ Really fast shutter speeds make stabilization programs like Mercalli work better.Ha! I love shooting in 1920x1080 60p.

I haven't noticed any moiré issues with my Panasonic TM700. Maybe I'll look around for a herringbone coat to test with [chuckle]

...Jerry

The moire and aliasing are only a problem with high resolution sensors that are throwing away pixels to downrez. Your TM700 should be fine with that herringbone coat.

The positive side of the large sensor is of course being able to take high rez stills with the camera that is already in your hand...

A test later and I can say that it isn't so much that the smaller aperture (and hence the longer shutter speed) fixes the moire problem as it is that it sort of locks the moire to the image so that it doesn't shimmer in a pattern totally separate from the object being shot. Definitely better though. I really wish I had bought a GH2 instead of this Nikon!

"I find myself wondering if Sony didn't bother making it possible for the NX70U to shoot at say 1/48s at 24p in daylight because digital just isn't equivalent to shooting and projecting film."

Wrong.
The issue is that there's only two ways that camera can control the amount of light and hence get correct exposure.

1) Iris. This is the primary way the auto exposure system will use. If there's enough light and there is in anything like full sun, the camera will not be able to close the iris to a small enough hole without affecting resolution due to diffraction.

2) Shutter speed. Once the AE system gets to the diffraction limit is increases shutter speed.

On prosummer and professional cameras there's a third way, ND filters. The AE system will blink warnings in the viewfinder telling you to adjust the ND filter. ND filters add to the cost of the camera hence you don't get them built into cheap cameras. You can add them onto the front of the lens yourself to keep shutter speeds sensible outdoors.
Very high end cameras rarely include ND filters because users want very fine control of shutter speed and aperature and will use a range of ND filters in a matte box to achieve that goal.

"Maybe chasing the film look is a fool's game from the start with digital--not even taking into account the fact that viewers are increasingly used only to digital."

Not really and certainly the much objected to "video look" comes from cheap cameras that don't let you control shutter speed.
The effect of shutter speed depends on frame rate. At 24/25fps it makes a considerable difference. Shooting and projecting 60p the difference is less apparent, at over 60fps only someone who was really looking would notices.

The general shutter speed is 1 div (2 x fps) or a 180deg shutter, same answer, just looking at it differently.

Shutter speed will also have an influence on moire if anything is in motion, the motion blur can mask out problems.

The other thing that makes cheap video cameras produce images that look like video is the amount of digitial edge enhancement added to the image to make it look "sharp". That also can introduce a number of artifacts that will be more pronounced at fast shutter speed when things are moving.

Bob.

Well my Z7 cost me around 8$K and my Nikon D5100 cost me $850. Aside from when I experience the moire problem, I like the image from the cheaper camera a whole lot better.

Bob, you misunderstood what I meant -- I understand that in terms of exposure, film and digital are essentially equivalent. I meant that in terms of motion blur, the two may be very different.

Consider all the ways that digital is introducing pseudo-motion blur. For example, just shooting to a codec that compresses data between frames, as mp4 and mpeg do. The analog (film) equivalent is uncompressed from frame to frame -- each frame 'perfectly' reproduces the scene at that moment, with no borrowing of imperfect data from adjacent frames.

I'm guessing (but not certain) that an electronic shutter is similarly not quite equivalent to a physical shutter when it comes to motion blur.

And I'm certain that digital projection -- playing a file on an LCD screen, with its inherent ghosting and lag times -- introduces yet another layer of blur when reproducing motion.

So the gist of my ponderings is, do all these inherent differences add up to quite a lot more tolerance where higher shutter speeds are concerned?

1/250s shutters in 24p film projected using a film projector may look a WHOLE LOT different than my NX70U shooting 1/250s at 24 and then viewed on a standard computer screen, or even digital projector.

What do you think??

Laurence,

I'm with you on the D5100's video limitations. But it's still a great sensor for still work. :)

I really am getting good video results on my D5100 in spite of the limitations. I just did a shoot where I used both the D5100 and my Sony HVR Z7U (I brought the Z7 because I didn't know what the people giving testimonials were going to wear and I didn't want to take a chance on moire on the clothes). In this video, all the talking heads are Z7 and all the b-roll is Nikon D5100. The second guy wore a striped shirt so it was a good call. The very first shot is a still since a shingle roof that wide will moire like heII. For the most part I like the D5100 footage better, and that's why I use it:

http://vimeo.com/35210411

Actually you can also use ISO to adjust exposure in addition to aperture and shutter speed. On the Canon 5D Mark II, it is best to use multiples of 160, e.g., 80, 160, 320, 640.

HTH,

< ")%%%><<(