Danyyyel

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D5500/ Cameralab has sample of the D5500. My only gripe is how Nikon did not put peaking. I mean until they implement some good to very good autofocus it is logical that the first thing to put is some sort of focusing aid. But it seems to be quite sharp out of the box.

One other thing is that Nikon has been using pixel binning which has cired aliasing and moirer to a great extend which is not what I heard of a lot of the other Sony cameras and the gh3. In fact what they have produce is camera that are very well rounded. That is in most case it is at least good, it does not exel on one side and has big flaws in others, at least flaws that cannot be fixed like aperture ring lens or external monitor in case of peaking. About lens, the best choice would be get a set of full frame Nikon primes from let say the AFD era. It is an investment that will last much longer than all those camera bodies and also brands, because those lens will mount on about everything.

Have you considered the Nikon apsc cameras like the Nikon D5300 that can be had for about $ 500. Very good colour, dynamic range, low light, 60p and good rolling shutter. You can even pair it Ninja afterward to get higher bitrate content. Disadvantage is lack of peaking, not the highest resolution and no aperture change while filming. But with the remaining money you could buy yourself a nice set of primes with aperture rings that will long outlast the camera or a Ninja that will give you peaking, exposure measuring and highbitrate in still a very compact package. Nikon has also launched the d5500 which seems to be quite sharp out of camera and has a touch screen for about $ 800 (for now). It also has the new flat cinema profile and zebras for overexposure. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFPe1RelKYY There is some sample of the D5500 in the review below http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D5500/

Guess rolling shutter for once compared to the Samsung NX1 Jello cam. From test I have seen, the NX1 is worst than the Sony A7s which itself is average in DX and quite bad in FX. When you look at behind the scene video they did not have some advance stabilising equipment with them. So imagine those shots on the bike etc with A7s or worst the NX1. I don't want to be look like a Nikon Fanboy, but sometime the treatment they are getting is ridiculous. There are things that really bothers me like no internal peaking or even no aperture change on the D7200. But the D7100 for those that have used it is already a very solid video camera, to get no banding, 60 p (hopefully not only 1.3x), flatter picture profile better meterring control and supposed better low light makes it a very solid camera, with some flaws that can be remedied. And last but not lease you get the best APSc photo camera in the business with what seems to be the same AF module in the D750 which has been praised, praised and praised as being exceptional and which goes to -3ev which is the limit of human vision (moonlight) I am sometime surprised by people on supposed specialised forum that react like basic consumer people. Oh yes it has 4k, oh yes it can shoot clean at 12 800 iso etc but forgetting some big intangible flaws like colour science or rolling shutter. I mean I am a professional photographer and been doing video for myself for some years and I can't comprehend how many on these site just are mesuberators. Don't people see the colors, motion cadence, highlight or shadow details etc or it is just numbers that are ussually coming from manufactuers, oh yes the 15 stop DR of the Sony A7s, a camera measured at about 13 stop in Raw.

Nikon moves at a certain pace, in general they will upgrade their flagship pro camera every 4 years, which will be in 2016. In 2016 they will have a new expeed processor that will do 4 k, for the simple reason that cell phone will be doing 4k. Sometime the innovation comes from a low model to test the design etc. like the d5200 was the first pixel binning alias moire free and very good low light camera in the line.

Looks to be very sharp for a youtube compress video. Beyond the spec sheet the Nikons are some of the best image quality if you are not 4k frenzy ( yes all the oscar film where mastered in 1080p). My only concern is if they you still need to change aperture while filming or not and peaking. People can say what they want the Nikon imaging factoring not quantifiable element like colour science are some of the best, I would say only blackmagic and Canon can compete. But where I will be critical is no aperture change if it is verified and peaking, this is bad. The rest is gorgeous colours, feel, motion cadence, DR, low light and good resolution (I think jello is also very good). The last thing is 1080 60fps at 1.3 crop... is it a typing error or what. The d5300,d5500 and D3300 have 60fps at full DX size.

​I guess you can more or less say the same thing from every form of art. everything is just a repetition, where do you see true innovation in music, fashion, painting etc. It seems that every corner has been covered and artist just create around those lines. For film for example, the last boundary has been reached since 3D/digital effects has become so realistic that every thing is possible. But if your thoughts are about gallery work etc it is as much about who is taking the photo (history of work) as much as the photo itself. By that I mean that the value of the work of the artist, his history/research/sensibility count as much for the photo than just some lucky snapshot out of hundreds or thousand of photos of someone on instagram.

One little advise somehow is to really cautious of who you are shooting, I am used shooting people for wedding/commercial/fashion photography. I am always softening the skin if my client is on the shot, if you had for example the manager of the company in these shot more so if it is a woman, that type of sharpness would spell trouble. For me there is difference between detail and sharpness. The Canon dslr with there bitrate and muddiness have really skewed what is the difference between both detail and sharpness. At least I would recommend to have good make-up to hide skin flaws. For example the little boy that must be like 10/12 and have very good skin, he has white speckles and dead pealing skin on his lips. Me I am more in line with DP like Rodney Charters, but that is my belief and you might have your own and I respect that.

I don't want to be controversial but I think this video is the reason I am not a big fan of shooting human faces in 4k, if I was you I would either blur the faces in post or next time use softening filters. Seing every pores or more importantly every pimple is not very flattering. For the grading in certain case I would say it goes a bit too much for my taste (again more on the human being) but it is an artistic choice and I don't know if it is not the extreme sharpness that it is making me think it it is a bit too much. That is just my humble ideas it does not mean that I am right.

This video is the perfect example of colour science, when the author posted it he said A7s and D5200 and most where saying how nice it looked, how did he grade the A7s like that. In fact it is only the first shot of the girl in the mirror (that I did not like, too green for my taste) that was from the A7s, everything else was from the Nikon D5200. It does not mean that you can't grade a look to the image, but it is always better to start from a good natural colours. I just saw the video below that I find fabulous out of the D5300

One thing that many people don't put enough emphasis is colour or what most of us call colour science now. Look at all the Sony endless thread (mainly A7s because of its popularity) here and on other website because the Sony colours are not that good ( On my part it is just horrible). Look at all the talk about getting not good but descent colours out of it. It is like going to a science class with all type of settings and recommendation etc etc. What all these people don't tell you is that grading takes time, a lot of time when you have to correct most shot to at least get a decent image. I have experiment this bitter pill lately as I have had my cousin shooting video to make some highlight reel for beach wedding as I had some Tiffen ND that brought a green cast to the image. I got to grade it quite well getting rid of the cast but it soon turn out to be a real pain having grade nearly all the shots except the ones that did not have the ND. Believe me the first thing I have done is buy some Hoya proNd filters because it was so annoying to do. Colour is one of the least talk about characteristic but believe me having nice skin tone is much more important than 1 stop more DR or 4k.

Form what I have learned since the Expeed 4 processing engine Nikon use programmable ARM processor, which mean that they can program much more functionality or features. That is why I think they are implementing this program as the features are much less set in stone at hardware level. For example I think the video pipeline is the same as the Jpeg/Tiff one where the raw data coming from the sensor is debayer and then compressed at different setting in term of bitrate colour profile and depth etc. With those programmable processor I think it would be just a question of putting 10 or 12 in place of 8 in a line of code. Now perhaps I am completely wrong but I think it is a possibility.

http://petapixel.com/2015/01/08/leaked-nikon-press-release-reveals-new-program-advanced-dslr-firmware-updates/ Nikon is puting in place an advance firmware update program called I Am Advancing. For those who did not follow Nikon has been producing very good video dslr since the D5200. The latest model like the D810 and D750 produce some of the best all round image with very good 1080p resolution, low light, DR, rolling shutter no apparent moire/aliasing and for me the best colours out of camera. But unfortunately they did lack some things like peaking, 4k (for some important) and quirks like not being able to change aperture while filming (while they have address the latter in the D750, D810 and rumoured D7200). Now with the new firmware program I would not mind even paying for some advance filmakers firware package that would get things like 10 bit, higher internal bitrate, waveform monitor and why not Raw like Magic lantern. I think things like peaking is a big omission and should be free at least until they have some super AF in liveview and should be provided free. Taking the example of Magic lantern I am sure that the hardware is capable of additional functionality like peaking additional exposure monitoring. A 60 mbit is already possible with hack on cameras like the D800, so a 10 bit 60/100 mbit, 10 bit and log mode should be more than feasible at 1080p. Raw output using hdmi output might be a bit of a dream but the the one I listed before should be easily implemented.

Nikon is a bit strange in terms of what you get of the same sensor like for example of the D7100/D5200. They are supposed to share the same sensor (with the banding issue) but in terms of video sharpness they are quite different. The D5200 is considered a little bit soft (not canon soft) while as you can see of my test here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness the D7100 is nearly Gh2 level in this blind test where it was so close that not a lot got it right or wanted to commit. I don't know if it is intentional by Nikon but we will have to test each camera out to be sure. The touch screen is interesting overall as it is a welcome addition for a less pro body with less physical button. For video Nikon specified that they had enhance the liveview performance, perhaps the touch screen might be and improvement for focusing for video. As for the D7200 it might be a very compelling video slr as rumour site are saying that it will be possible to change aperture in video mode. If it is as sharp, moire/alias free and banding free it might become a very compelling video slr for about $ 1000... except for peaking!!!!!!!!!! That comes to the latest subject about Nikon Firmware program. Perhaps we should petition them so that they implement features like peaking and even some more highend features like 10 bit, higher internal bitrate, waveform monitoring or even raw etc even for paid update.

Whoaw, I don't know which light they use but it is A7s green bias in full swing. If I was the guy filming it with the supposed better gradability of the prores I would have tried to get a better grade out of it.

Can someone tell me how to post photos in 1080p on this forum. Everytime I try it tells me than the photo should not be higher than something like 70 kb which is too low and I have seen others posting images at 1080p and much more KB.

If you take history of SD to HD after like 15 years most people of the world are still watching SD and 720p TV. Online system like youtube at 1080p is in truth more like 720p with the very low bitrate etc. 4k tv will be with all of us within the next 3/5 years because TV manufacturers have only this to sell there TV because 1080p is already good enough for 99% of human beings. It will go the same way as 3D. As soon as oled TV prices comes closer to mass market prices, you will see how they will all jump at how deep the shadows are and very high contrast ratio (Since the denial of plasma TV, at least this will be a big advancement in image quality compared to the move between 1080p and 4k). They are just desperate to keep selling because we are so close to the limit of human perception that people won't just care as they won't be able to discern any difference and won't feel any need to upgrade. But for distribution, people will still be watching 720p/1080i broadcast for a long long time. As for online with the actual infrastructure it will take a long long time to get the bandwidth and if they do it, it will be like youtube with very low bitrate content that won't be real 4k at all. It will just be for marketing sake. Now if you have the equipment to do it in 4k and that it does not demand too much more effort and man hour to do, just do it. But one thing I have learn with experience is that you have to be very careful about long project. Because everything accumulates, 1 minutes here, 5 minutes there and you find yourself working twice the number of hours you have thought and quoted at the start. Another thing to consider is that very good HD scales very well to Uhd. You can do some test just film something in 4k and with a very good HD camera and then project them on one of these 4k tv and look at normal viewing distance if it makes a difference. You can even do some blind test with some of your friends who bought 4k tVs.

One thing I would ask you, if it is possible to make at least one example where you put the D750 a little closer to the scene so as to have same field of view than the crop D810. It is very difficult to match sharpness when the two subject are different size. Thanks again for the test.

Exactly, colour and how it relates to skin tone is the most important if you are a film maker because your main subject will be human beings and the audience. The audience will also be much more sensible to colour and contrast of the scene (DR) than resolution beyond 1080p. Everything has a threshold and we have achieved it with proper 2k (not Canon dslr false 1080p). How many people did you see complain about resolution on the big screen after a film shot on the Alexa or even C300. Shane does have a bias toward Canon, but if you follow his reasoning and test it is much more important for the true film maker than some resolution chart and spec sheet. It is not by luck that he is what he is shooting film on the biggest stage and many would benefit from learning from him what is really important.

So will it be at 6400+ ISO with contrasty scene and with lots of motion? Because if it is at less than 1000 ISO shot in low contrast scene like golden hour and static scene then I am sure that most camera can do it.

If you already have a Nikon glass and is used with the workflow, why don't you use the D750 with the Ninja. Don't think that because the D600 is not good in low light that it is the same with other Nikon camera. Since the launch of the D5200 two years ago Nikon has been using pixel binning, that is sampling much more pixel from the sensor and down scaling them. Since then no more moire/aliasing and very very good lowlight. The D5200/d5300 where about equal to the 5dmark3 and now the latest D750 beat it. In widely available camera it is only beaten by the C100/C300 and the A7s. Note that the A7s and most Sony camera exibit some strange blowout/colour shift on strong blue light like led stage light, I don't know if it is of any concern to you, but I think it is good to know. You have some example of D750 high Iso here '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>> or http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D750/

The problem with your comparison is that you are comparing the C100 against 4 other camera. Compared to all these cameras that have one or more down side the C100 mark 2 is good to very good in every domain. factor in that it has features like internal ND and MIC/xlr imput that would need addons like external sound recorders and ND screw on or Variable (less quality) or even matte box. I am a Nikon shooter so I have no bias toward Canon cameras. But this is a solid product with the added 60p which was the main problem in the mark1. There are non in the cameras you listed that have as good Low light, resolution, DR, rolling shutter, colour science in one body. As for full frames lens being a waste on Apsc camera it is the exact contrary as it uses the center which is the best part of the lens. This camera will be huge success and I am sure that it will be a mainstay for many years and will have a huge following in the used market. I can see it selling tons to people in the documentary, Tv, wedding, corporate market. As is already seen the C line has become one of the most used camera for the indie filmmakers in festivals and has been used in many awarded feature films. As for the C7 I sincerely hope that Sony has made some progress into their colour science, because all spec in the world won't matter if skin tones look more like corps dead low CRI fluorescent colours (If I can describe it in words I see it used in horror movie). Working with Nikon, I just can't understand how a company like Sony cannot at least produce some good even if not great skin tone. I mean its a given for me, when I see all those threat where people discussing continually to get just decent result, I just can't understand. For me it is just saturation/contrast adjustment and voila great skin tone.

Thanks I downloaded it. I don't know if it is the lighting, but they seem to be better than I thought they would. At first I thought that it was the crushed black, but using Gom player and lifting the lows the noise is still very nice. The D750 is cleaner and in this lighting even the 12800 looks very nice and 25600 usable. The D810 6400 iso still looks good with lots of resolution and very nice filmic noise and 12800 would be usable. The D800 is clearly a step below those two in terms of noise and resolution. From what I have seen before they all look better by 1 stop from what I thought. In other footage the D750 seemed to have a sharp degradation of the quality between Iso 10 000 and 12 800, did you see the same. I can also understand why the D810 was chosen for that big studio Australian Movie. It has a lot of resolution and it retains a lot of detail even at high ISO. You can easily shoot at 3200 ISO with a ton of detail. This is enough for any movie.

I have always been very critical of the Canon Dslr video, but the C line is very solid in terms of image quality. People can say what they want but for $ 5500 this is a very very solid camera and you have just to look at the success of its predecessors to know that this will be another hit. The C300 was a bit overprice and the C100 had no slowmotion capability at all. Now the C100 mark 2 rectifies all that. My only wish would be 10 bit even if the 8 bit codec on the c line is considered to be very solid. In six month this camera will be selling for $ 5000, only 1500 more than the 5d3 which was considered industry standard (in these price range) only 2 years ago and you get so much more for the money. The only dslr I would consider close to it would be a D750 with a good EVF and an external sound recorder like the Tascam DR-70.

But is the 4k usable!!! I have seen from Cinema5d site and Samuel Hurtado on Dvxuser giving the A7s between 28 and 30 ms for rolling shutter in full frame mode. To put that in perspective the best cameras are in the 12/18 ms and ................. the Nikon D90 about 33ms. So already the A7s is very near to the D90 uhhhh and I have seen test that the Samsung is worst than the A7s. So has jello cam D90 considered good to shoot in 2015 now because it is 4k. Another thing to consider is DR and low light. Cinema5d has measured the Samsung at about 10 stop which is very low to todays standard. Well some of there readings of cameras are a little bit odd in terms of DR, but from nearly all the footage I have seen the DR seems very low, blown out highlight and crushed shadows in winter UK is quite conclusive about the Cinema5d readings. As the C line is very very sharp with its downscaled 4k sensor, I think the super low light and much better DR makes it a much better image and camera overall.