Danyyyel
-
Posts
795 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Everything posted by Danyyyel
-
I am really eager to see the test, I think that we will see the expeed 4 and this sensor in the near future in a D7100s or D7200 model. Nikon seems to be updating rapidly its entire line of camera with the expeed 4 from the recently announced D3300 and Nikon D4s. The most surprisingly side of the Nikon line-up now is the the Nikon D3300 which seems to be the exact sensor and expeed 4 than in the Nikon D5300. If this thing has uncompressed hdmi out it will be quite incredible for a $ 600 body. In the case of my D7100 I am sure with its resolution and DR that it is very close to the C100. @Matt James Smith, for my experience with the Ninja and D7100, it looks a lot like between a stock and a hack gh2. There is better resolution as if you have removed a veil on the image. The grain is more tighter and the image holds up better to grading but the normal codec is surprisingly close at least on more static scene.
-
Many where predicting here that the dslr where going the way of the Dinosaur and that the mirrorless would prevail. The thing is, that it is at the lowest end consumer market that buys into the cheaper mirrorless systems and it is them that are the most prone to buy smart phone. This is what is happening, even in 10, 20, 50 years there will always be a passionate hobbyist/pro market who will always use a Camera and not a smart phone to take photos. Someday there might be only a market from the $ 800 and upward cameras and it will always be here even with the smart phone. It will be the camera manufacturers who have camera in this range who will survive. A last thing, reading comments here, people would think that Nikon is some type of dinosaur camera manufacturer. I can say that I am a very very happy Nikon photographer. Try to do some pro work from Fashion shoot or wedding during a whole day and see if ergonomic of a camera like the D800 is bad. Could I have dreamt to have such a camera for such a price, rivaling and beating medium format camera in many ways like DR. Even the lowest model like the D3300 sport apsc size sensor with 24 megapixel, 14 stop of DR etc etc. Nikon has been innovating all along. It is Canon who has been milking its user base with no big improvement in image quality. I am not saying that mirror less camera are not the future, but I prefer that they stick to optical viewfinder until the day that evf really beats it s optical counterpart.
-
No must be the lock to open the battery compartment.
-
So Nikon has a press release about the future release of the .... HD D4s. Nikon describe many time as a HD-slr abd most believe that it will be quite video centric. For me a true HD 10 bit 422 log base with some high internal bitrate camera would already be a big advancement. In the mean time, Nikon has released the Nikon d3300 which has full hd up to 60 Fps. It has the expeed 4 and If it has the same sensor as the D5300 it will be a very capable camera for $ 650 for a kit lens. As I said before, even if many think otherwise but Nikon is step by step pushing the video capabilities of its dslr line from the lowest $ 650 to it higher end. The in-between will also get those update as they launched.
-
Yeah the clipping in some of those shots is very very bad. Really don't like the look of the footage, I know why I prefer the more Cinematic look with large sensor and more importantly DR.
-
I don't know about all these claims. But the D7100 that I have has nearly same detail as the panasonic gh2 which itself has higher resolution than gh3. The uncompress does get yu even better resolution. What is annoying now is that most site are just not interested to review most of the dslr like the D5300. Everything is about RAW etc because it captures the headline. I would like to see test from most of the dslr because most will not even be able to use the raw cameras. In capable hand the Canons with their low resolution, moire/aliasing and ok DR, did some very good to amazing jobs. The D5300 has a much better image quality than those Canons but unfortunately we are in a world of spec sheet. I would love a Black magic camera but the moire aliasing and the raw work flow is not for me for now and would love some proper test. Just to be sure that I am not day dreaming about the image quality.
-
For my need, I would never go Canon any-more. I cannont bear the moire/aliasing and the low rez muddy look. For the rest it is more like best image quality in the D5300 and best convenience into the the Panasonic line. One good advice is the lens choice as it will last much longer than the camera body and Nikon is a good one because it will fit almost anything. One advantage that people rarely talk about the Nikon D5300 is the uncompressed hdmi output. For $ 200/300 you can add a nice monitor that will be much better for exposure/focusing than the tiny inbuilt screen in other dslr. For $ 700 you can have a Ninja 2 with the focus/exposure aids and prores 442 recording.
-
Yes unfortunately they don't do it. They just post some silly over sharpen video most of the time. For me I think that resolution is over hyped. Put a bad colour or DR video and at any resolution it will look crap. For me the cinematic look is a mix of Frame rate (24 fps), dof (super 16 minimum but cine 35 better), Dynamic range (11/12 stop at least) and Resolution .... (at least 1080P). Once you get about this mix you get an image which get near to the Cinematic look. For me the big success of the dslr revolution was not just about DOF with the large sensor. What many did not realise is that the Dynamic range also had a big push compared to the typical camcorder of those days. The Canons where delivering about 10.5 to 11 stop of DR compared to general other camcorders that where in 8 stop DR at most. Most people associated the dslr look to be much closer to Cine look while the usual camcorder had better resolution than the Canon dslr which are closer to 720p. When you see peter jackson going backward in the latest hobbit film by using diffusion filter like promist to tame the resolution it tells you a lot. Now I am not saying that we should use some of those mushy Canon dslr footage, but a solid 1080p image is damn good. I have played back my d7100 images on my 50 inch plasma and it was really sharp. It did not pale to some 1080 p movies and I went to see 2k movies of very big screen and never saw a pixel. The strangest experience for me when I saw a 5d3 projected movie at a festival, the thing looked good. I don't and can't qualify why when projected the suppose not so high resolution of 1080p and 2k look so good.
-
I think the Nikon 18-140 has some reviews as a good all purpose zoom lens. It would be nice if you could post some test scene with the different lens, because it could show if the D5300 is soft or not. You know all these first images tend to stick to a camera. Many people tend to conclude things a bit too rapidly. Hey its a Nikon so it is not good at video while today the Nikon dslr are much better than there Canons one and you would need a $ 3500 canon 5d3 with RAW hack to get better images.
-
I am all for that, looking at endless discussion etc about pixel peeping is exhausting. But unfortunately non of the testers seem to be interested to give proper test for the D5300. If someone did a proper test with some resolution chart, dynamic range step chart, noise etc. at least we could pass on tech and concentrate on the more artistic side. The only reason I am interested with the D5300 as a D7100 user was the 60p and banding. If the D5300 has about same resolution than D7100, as good DR/lowlight, with good 60p and without banding. I will surely buy it. Hopefully it will be possible to get to record the hdmi output with a Ninja and even not ideal, a little noise will make the 8 bit more than good. It seems that nowadays it is all about technical sheet with nothing interesting to reviewers if it is not RAW or 4k. For me a D7100 minus banding and added 60p for $ 800, is good enough. Things like a good eye and lighting will make a much better impact than RAW and 4k, once you get to this good enough level. More so that I would have to give up image sensor size or practical workflow to get those RAW camera or moire/aliasing etc. There is a thread here about someone asking for storage solution for working in RAW and the cheapest solution was some $ 700 raid system. The cost will add so much that you need to add thousand of dollar more for very little gain, if you don't have good shooting and grading skill. For now we are just explorers who think that we have some gem or good enough camera and only these test will show if we are not just some fools because we are looking at this camera. The day we have something like DXOmark for video that all these nerd discussion will be resolved. Nowadays it has really become the standard at least for sensor/image performance and no need of endless discussion about which one is better etc.
-
I was telling myself that it was really challenging shots to be able to get so nice highlight of the sun and the green leaf in back light. If ever someone wants to get the best I guest an extenal recorder will be needed. The noise structure is much tighter and fine grain with a Ninja with the D7100. But the banding forces you to do noise reduction, but it cleans very very well.
-
Looking at Matt last video, I would say that it does look like this camera has some very good highlight handling. The second scene in particular with the sun light coming through the leaves. The highling doesn't seem to clip and you can clearly see the green colours and details of the leaves.
-
So I was doing some test from a side by side video from Oleg on Dvxuser between the Canon 5dmark 3 and Nikon D5300. What was striking is the difference in Dynamic range. As he is busy with work I could not resist to try and measure it. My first try was with lightroom but it seems that Adobe put a curve to protect highlight when using the exposure tool. 3 stop was a bit too much I thought LOL. So I went back to my test. This time I got a pluggin in photoshop that will move the exposure in stops. Again I am a bit amazed. You can see some screen grabs with the histogram to compare exposure an clipping both visually and more empically with the histogram. N0 1 The first one is the 5d3. N0 2 It is the D5300 which I removed a little green so that it is closer to the 5d3 colors (better for seing clipping) N03 It is the D5300 with 1.5 stop + exposure N0 4 I graded it back to about the contrast ratio of the Canon (mainly black level) and put I think a little too much saturation. There is a N0 5 is an earlier +2 stop exposure. But unfortunately I cannot upload more images and had to compress the heck out of them. So you will have to go and look at the Nikon D5300 images on Dvxuser. My conclusion is that the D5300 has at least 1.5 to 2 stop better highlight than the 5D3. The first thing to note is that it clips less the green and blue channel. These two don't even clip with + 2 stop exposure in this scene !!!!!!!!!! Which makes the highlight clipping much better looking than the 5D3.
-
Image 3
-
Image 1 and 2
-
The D7100 with a Ninja is like a wedding made in heaven. The Ninja is so small that it is less obstrusive that for example a Nikon Flash. Beside getting higher bitrate/resolution codec, you get very good peaking, false colour and zebras for exposure. It is not as good as my marshal monitor in terms of viewing angle and colour fidelity but for this you still have your in built monitor for colour accuracy. If they could get an loupe on it it would be a perfect evf coupled with the Nikons. The only thing that would really be needed is one of those bracket that would fix the mini hdmi cable securely to the camera.
-
Nikons perhaps wen't for a softer look in the D5300 as they did with the D5200 compared to the D7100. As you can see in my blind test here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness . The sharpness of the D7100 is so close to the Panasonic gh2 that many did not commit and some got it wrong. Perhaps they want to differentiate there different model in some ways. We might see a D7200 shortly with near gh2 sharpness. Using an external recorder also gets even better sharpness. Matt also has to see what in camera sharpness setting he is using because he was so afraid of moire that he said he would put the sharpness in camera setting at lowest :). My thought with my D7100 is that a setting of 2 to 4 was better on a scale of 7.
-
I am watching Andrew test between gh3, 5d3, 5d3 Raw and Blackmagic pocket camera. I don't know if we can correlate it to Samuel H finding on Dvxuser. His finding where that the D5300 was about the same as BM pocket but lower than 5Dmark 3 Raw. While on andrews less scientific test the 5d3 Raw is lower than BM pocket ? I am referring to this comparison https://disk.yandex.com/public/?hash=Le4Ee3Biq/a3jOphlYhqqvWPKrkIIj3Z7MAvPZbJ%2BME%3D between 5d3 and D5300 which looks like the D5300 has about 2 stop better highlight as in the Andrew test below http://www.eoshd.com/content/11350/depth-test-5d-mark-iii-7d-raw-vs-blackmagic-pocket-vs-gh3
-
Samuel conclusion is that it is the highest DSLR. My only problem is his measurement is a more strict meaning of DR. Ot is like saying that every part of this DR is 100 gradable (I don't know how to explain it better). While the normal Dr test is Everything that can be recorded from black to white exposure. At those two extreme you have part that you can't grade/manipulate/post process heavily. Lets say you have dark skin person in a very dark room, you cannot expect to get like a beauty shot style from him if you don't expose correctly and the same goes for a pale skin in a very bright part in the same scene. While his measurement is more like this. I don't know if my explanation is remotely clear. That is why his measurement is a lot lower than general test. For me I like to at least get both because the normal Dr is more standardise so that you can get a better comparison to most other camera and closer to normal filmaking. Where highlight will blow and shadows will crush or else things become a bit unnatural like HDR imagery.
-
Matt do you still have the D5200. If ever it would have been nice to see two shoot of the same high contrast subject at base Iso just to compare the Dynamic range.
-
Yes could you tell us at what time you see moire. I couldn't find any looking at the downloaded footage.
-
I think you should put those reviews in perspective. Most of them are just treating it as a simple update to the D5200 because it reads 24 megapixel Apsc camera with GPS and wifi. But for the more knowledgeable user there is quite some difference. The first thing for photo and video is that Nikon fixed the banding issue. None of those review site even know about this. For video you have the benefit of no banding and 60 fps at 1080p which is very nice at least for me. To be able to get a camera that can do slowmotion at 1080p while no Canon does that. The last thing is that the D5300 has easily the best image quality in any Apsc camera. It might not have a touch screen or peaking but pair it with a Ninja and you are close to the Canon C line. The irony is that below 800 Iso the $ 800 D5300 is superior to the highest Canon camera in terms of resolution and dynamic range.
-
Thanks matt for the test, you really need to look for it and I personally couldn't see it. Any camera will moire at a certain frequency, at this level I would say it is insignificant.
-
The only solution for us is Oleg on Dvxuser. Tell him to shoot side by side between the two at different Iso from 100 to 6400 if possible.
-
One good thing about going Nikon at least for lens is that you can put a 50 year old lens on it and can expect to put one you buy today on a camera body for the next 50 years. Because of that you have big big lens choice. That is why Nikon lens tend to keep there value very high. The second advantage is that it has a manusl aperture ring which can be used on many adapters while the Canon can only be done electronically. Which is very costly and difficult to do. As for the Body you have to look more at the new D5300. I don't know against the g6 but it wipes the floor for gh3 camera and the Canons APSC in low light condition as it is close to the D5200. It is very close to the Canon 5d3 in video for low light and looking to have at least 12 stop DR (could be higher because it is still in test). The D5200/d5300 also does not have any moire/aliasing if you compare it to the Canon Apsc cameras. It also has 60 fps at 1080p and you can add a Ninja to get 220 mbs prores if you want for high motion and very detailed scene in the future. For video it has one disadvantage is that you can change exposure while in live view. The solution is to have a set of older prime lens or zoom with an aperture ring. In term of photos the D5300 is better than any Canon camera below 800 ISO. It best the 5d3 in resolution and DR by two stops. Only in low light that the 5d3 full frame sensor beat the lowly $ 800 Nikon D5300 LOL. I think it will be the same against the micro 4/3 cameras. So as a conclusion, if photo is really important for you the D5300 is clearly in front. For video if you can live with the aperture problem and dynamic range and low light are very important for you it is the best choice.
