Andrew Reid

Then don't watch this...     Shot on GoPro :)

Review now published - '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>   Please post further discussion on that thread.   Cheers

Original music by Berlin electronic act Herdwhite - see more on iTunes 9b1ac465df855a9bc029756b08a6a8ff >Join EOSHD on Facebook - we broke 10,000 likes and counting yesterday - thank you everyone I’ll start this review with a parable. It is a parable about an old man, who fell asleep... Read the full article here

I felt the same way you do about the D5300, when the GH2 came out, so I understand where you're coming from. The D5300 does have an attractive price and it gets the job done. But seriously, think about the future and where things are heading. Wouldn't it be far better to wait until after NAB and to see what else is on offer? Even if you end up having to push towards the $1999 range or get the GH4, it would be money well spent in my book.   Want Super 35mm, 1080/60p, good low light? Consider GX7 with Nikon Speed Booster or a used Sony FS100.   Also I'd question why so much importance is placed on Super 35mm sized sensors, 1080/60p. Good low light I can appreciate more and the D5300 certainly has that.   I think when people see the review, it might be divisive and start a few arguments... Remember it is just my opinion and what works best for me might not necessarily be right for you, so consider your own views ahead of mine.

Great stills, indeed. It has a superb sensor for that.   But taken purely from the perspective of video, it's all very 2010.   The $799 doesn't really excuse it from being so low on innovation either. For this you can almost get a Pocket Cinema Camera and a much more cinematic image. Or you can get a more video optimised mirrorless camera with more features.   The D5300 does not even enable me to properly mask off the LCD to 16:9, that's how little thought Nikon have put into it for video.   OK say you have $1999 to spend in total. If you're not too serious about video you might be happy enough spending $799 on the Nikon and spend the rest on lenses. But in light of the upcoming GH4 it makes no sense to invest in the D5300. I understand well that $799 might be the budget and nothing more. In that case, get the older D5200 for $400 and spend the rest on a lens.

I am still quite unenthusiastic about it to be honest.   It's all a bit 3 years ago.   Why aren't you guys putting your $799 towards a Blackmagic Pocket Camera or GH2 instead?

Review is coming tomorrow!

  Yeah I prefer the 2x anamorphic bokeh too. Way more dramatic. At the beginning I tried pushing SLR Magic this way, to give us the full 2x, but they wanted to do the 2.39:1 thing. Understandable really, as 3.55:1 is quite extreme.

Not sure about royalties. They already have AVC H.264 MP4 in the camera, and H.264 already forms the basis of AVCHD, a Sony & Panasonic standard.   Unless you mean they have to license the Quicktime MOV wrapper from Apple? Maybe they have to pay a small fee for that but there's nothing stopping them from using MP4 as now at a higher resolution and bitrate than 1440x1080 / 12Mbit.

So if Nikon site PR says it does good movies, it does good movies. What do you need EOSHD for max??!

No plans for a Nikon guide at the moment, sorry!

Added bulk of Speed Booster? The SB is smaller than the standard Nikon adapter. The Nikon 50mm F1.4 is similar size to Nokton 25mm F0.95 when paired with Speed Boooster on the GH3.

Honestly guys this percentage breakdown thing is ridiculous. If you're a shit shooter accounting for 20% of the overall look, your overall look is going to be zero percent good not 80% good thanks to a camera and set of lights.   And if your camera and lens looks horrible and can't deal with the scene or the light, then even a good shooter will struggle.   Back to the original question of why some cameras are more filmic than others...   It's a combination of some key things but not exclusive to this list only -   Motion cadence, 24p Dynamic range Colour Compression and codec and the effect that has overall especially on grain texture Lens   If your right brain loves the D600 then it's probably due in part to the footage and the way it's shot, also the sensor size and lens used. Because nothing else in terms of the D600's image is more filmic than the GH3. It has more compression, more weird digital artefacts, more moire and aliasing. It's just easier to make full frame look like film because of the lovely rendering of optics at that sensor size. GH3 needs fast optics to really shine.

If the Anamorphot looks too clinical, pair it with a taking lens that has some soul like the Trumps. Edwin's footage looked pretty good on full frame with the Zeiss. Also bear in mind it's a $899 anamorphic not a $3000 Iscorama. And the flare heavily depends on the light you're using to flare it with. A lot of LED lights are actually multiple bulbs and they don't create a nice flare at all.   Everyone is entitled to their opinion :)

  Ignore! That screen shot is compressed and over sharpened to hell - just look at the 4K motive, icon (not from the camera) in the top right.

It's actually 100% the shooter, 100% the editor and 100% the camera :)

Sony have taken their Alpha re-think to the NEX 6. For video it looks like an interesting alternative to the ageing NEX 7, adding a 16:9 screen, zebra, dedicated movie mode, new sensor and uncompressed HDMI output. It also points to some of the new features we're sure to see on the NEX 7's actual successor, the A7000. Read the full article here

The price hasn't been set yet. These sites are having a guesstimate to generate some early orders.   I've seen the GH4 body price vary by as much as $500!

4K is very disruptive. How many of you are still shooting in 720x480?   1080p is yesterday's news I'm afraid, at least as far as the market is concerned.

The EOSHD GH2 Shooter's Guide - now just $19.99 [more info] Since launching my series of books a couple of years ago, the titles have together sold over 7000 copies. To celebrate for the first time I'm reducing one of the titles from $29.99 to $19.99. Even if you just want a taster of what these guides are like or have a passing interest in the GH2 this is the time to get one! Read the full article here

Can't see a Canon sensor doing 24fps+ bursts at full res, can you?

The media presentation for the GH4 by Panasonic mentions a "Canon 7D successor" along with detailed specs. 20MP sensor ISO 100-12,800 (25600 extended) 1/8000 shutter Quiet shutter mode Phase detect AF, 19 area 8fps continuous shooting Buffer size - 15 raw, 126 JPEG 3.0" 1040k dot LCD (touch screen) - not articulated Weather sealed (as original 7D) 910g weight Oddly the camera is mentioned as needing an optional transmitter for WiFi. That's something I'm expecting Canon to build into the 7D Mark II itself like on the 6D. To have the document mention specifics like weight and dimensions is quite interesting. Where did they get the info from? Read the full article here

Weird binary view of it, I am not anti-8bit at all. For me it doesn't matter what the number is on the specs sheet. What matters is the final end result and the look of the image.   Raw is a huge step up from 8bit compressed on the 5D Mark III.   4K on the GH4 is a huge step up from 1080p on the GH3.   8bit or whatever it looks amazing.

  It still has significant unique selling points. Very impressive colour and a film like image. CCD sensor looks different to CMOS. Given choice, in good light I think I'd shoot Digital Bolex. They have better audio than Blackmagic. XLR onboard. Global shutter but with same dynamic range as the BMCC rather than the more limited dynamic range on the BMPC. I was also impressed by their crank handle follow focus though not sure how well it works in reality as not shot with one yet.

2.5K model has already had a price drop.