Danyyyel

From photo samples people have reported that banding is gone and you can clearly see that it is not the same sensor as the D7100/D5200 dpreview.com/forums/thread/3561765 In terms of sharpness the D7100 (no olpf apsc sensor) is very close to the gh2 http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness . I have tested with a Ninja and you get another notch of sharpness/detail with a Ninja. If the banding is gone you will be able to truly exploit the DR without noise reduction. The D800/D5200 have been tested very near to 12 stop and if this one is the same you would have a very very good camera. The only thing that they could have added to make it near perfect for me is 10 bit. The encoder is much better than the gh2 for banding, but 10 bit would have been so much better. We would get a $ 800 camera with very good resolution, Dynamic range, low light. I hope to see more test to confirm that. For those that want convenience/feature it would be gh3 and pure image quality would be D5300 for low cost dslr.

Another thing I wanted to add about this thread is about the suppose non flexibility of the Nikon mount. In the photo world it would be considered a joke. Nikon with Canon are the two most matured lens system in the world. You can have all type of lens from super wide to super telephoto, macro, micro, tilt-shift etc. and all these lens will work as they should with autofocus, metering, stabilisation etc. They also have all sorts of third party manufactures to choose from Tamron, tokina, sigma to the high-end zeiss. In the case of Nikon you can also buy hald a century old lens that will work on the camera. When you invest in the Nikon lens you are sure that it will be a guaranteed investment because you will have a body to attach it to in 50 years. This is why, those lens tend to not depreciate a lot with time.

Exactly what I think is happening, it is more the lower end that is partly suffering because of smartphone, but the main reason is that the cameras are just good enough. Until I bought my D800 last year my workhorse camera as a pro photographer was the D300. In terms of image quality alone the D3200 would put it to shame in resolution and DR. I also printed gorgeous A3 print with my 6 megapixel D70 in 2005, I bet no consumer needs more than 6 megapixel for there A5 maximum size prints.   The 10 bit is my main concern because I think that it is tied to the jpeg processing engine. In case of Nikon it is the expeed processor and they have two functionality which are 8bit jpeg/tiff and raw. I think that we might see raw even before any 10 bit codec. I am not against raw for video, but the size is too prohibitive now. An internal log base 10 bit codec at about 100 mbit would be perfect with the uncompressed hdmi in 10 bit. The worst case for me is the 4k marketing that is gathering pace. They could go 4k 8bit before 10 bit or raw, just for the sake of being competitive against the new wave of smartphone tablet that will be coming out.

People are just as dumb here as the people in photo forum that despise video on dslr. It is the same lack of knowledge and sense of self entitlement that Nikon is not giving them what they need. In the case of the photo shooters what can they complain about? Nikon has the best Line-up since 2007/2008 at the launch of the D300/D3 since suffering for about 7 years complete dominance by Canon. Is there anything comparable to D800 in the Canon Line-up. Medium format back resolution, highest DR ever (nearly 3 stop above Canon 5d3), Low light very near to the Sport/low light camera 1dx/D4. Even the $ 1000 D7100 has better resolution and DR than the 5d3. . In case of the D800 it is currently the best Dslr and by extention the best photo camera ever to exist. So if they are complaining about a button that they are not forced to use, then they should change job/hobby/passion. Now for our friends here, who are complaining about Nikon not putting video in the DF… why should they do it? If anyone took 5 minutes to investigate, they would see that Nikon already have a solid line-up of video dslr, that are continuously updated. They just launch the $ 800 D5300 which included 1080p at 60 fps. A feature that even the Canon C line does not have!!! If it uses the same Toshiba sensor tech than the D5200/d7100, it will have no moire/aliasing problem like the gh2. The day Nikon change sensor manufacturer from Sony… Hey, gone are the moire/aliasing. Gh3 gets a sony dslr sensor and back is moire/aliasing. Guess who is holding back sensor tech for moire/aliasing in its sensors. That joke of a Company called Sony is now telling us that they are sampling all pixel form there small sensor compact camera and people are falling for that!!! This is already gone from the Apsc/S35 sensor Nikon dslr for a year. The low light is very good, it rivals the 5dmark 3 http://www.eoshd.com/content/9713 test from eoshd and the resolution of the d7100 comes very close to the gh2. A Blind test by me, where many got it wrong and others did not commit http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...-gh2-sharpness. You do get even better sharpness using an external recorder. The DR is superb in the 11.5 to 12 stop depending on different testers. Not the best test but again confirming the more scientific test done by people like Samuel H who did the Flaaat profile for Nikon camera http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...mic-range-test. With an external recorder, I would say that you could get 1/3 to 1/2 stop more Dr. So we would be in good 12 stop DR camera. The only caveat is the Fix patter noise, but neat video does a stunning job with the high bitrate Ninja footage which is also a bit sharper than the internal codec. The aps Nikon are nowadays for me the best DSLR in terms of image quality below the Raw 5dmark3 and even then... until some knowledgeable people test them we will never know by how much. I have always been critical about Nikon but at least they are trying. They were the one that released the first dslr with uncompressed hdmi which is already a big step in the right direction and you even have it in its $ 800 camera. Everybody would have been all over it if there was not the RAW revolution of the Blackmagic camera for $ 1000. Unfortunately they were not bold enough as nobody could guess that you would have raw and 10 bit prores for 1k. The latest step is 60fps in 1080p, something you don't have even in the $ 12 000 Canon C300. Again every new Nikon dslr generation is progressing, but where are the reviews, where are the bloggers/reviewers etc … who are supposed to guide us. So because it is not raw it is not good!!! I chose the D7100 over the Nikon D600 as a back-up to my D800 (I am a professional photographer), because of the video quality. I chose to buy an Atomos Ninja rather than the BM pocket camera, because I wanted the S35 camera look and lack of moire/aliasing. I sold my beloved gh2 because with my test, the D7100 was exactly what I wanted during the frenzy of hacked gh2, a better DR gh2. What I would really want in terms of image quality is at least 10 bit, the rest would be just bonuses for now.

I don't see how it could be viewed as a blackmagic killer. For 500/1000 more you are getting a 2k/4k raw and Prores camera. The DR should be about the same and global shutter. With the difference in cost of media, they should be very close in price and the camera is truly meant to shoot continuous video. Now if you really own a 5d3 or really want the full frame look or better low light, then it becomes a very attractive camera compared to the Blackmagic cinema cameras. Now if ML can make the raw work on the lower end camera in the $ 1000 range then it changes everything.

Nobody I think is saying that about 12 stop (11.7 by DXO) of DR is not good. But having now a D800 and compared to the 12 stop DR D300 before it, I can say that it reaches the treshold of near human vision. That is why I think the Alexa is so much hailed for its DR, because this is about really near to what I can see. (I know the different theories about the human eye DR). There is by DXOmark nearly 3 stop of DR difference and I will believe it beyond any people guess, experience or whatever. Again that does not mean that the Canon is not able to do supperb image. I sincerely hope that we see a DXOmark type of rating in the video world soon. What Dxomark has done is to pacify the dslr world. With it scientific method it standardise sensor performance ranking and except certain Fanboys everybody now has a standard to rate what is in the camera. The result is that the endless my camera is better than yours at least in image quality has subsided and people have gone more into the creative talking.

People that are contesting Dxomark today are trully baseless. It has proven during the last few years that it was the most reliable measurement for sensor performance in the dslr photography world. It total sensor score is somewhat subjective but the rest is scientific and has the methodology. For example it test at 8 megapixel, so for example the D800 is 14.5 stop at 8 megapixel but about 13.9 at pixel level. Most of the time, the people that are contesting it are Canon fanboys because it is hard for them to see that Canon sensor tech has not evolved a lot the last 4 years. In any case I am not saying that the 5d3 raw hack is not incredible. At 11.7 to 12 stop of DR (perhaps a little lower at pixel level) it is still very good and much more usable than in a compressed 8 bit format. Another of note is that I did not see any real scientific test of the DR of the BMC, so for now I take the 13 stop with a little grain of salt.