Danyyyel

Im not saying Nikon is not behind, Im saying they are going forward. The canon crop-sensors have been the same for 5 years. Nikon is improving with every iteration. They are really slow on giving features that seem easy to implement though. So yes, what I think is that Nikon who is not focusing on video will be behind in terms of functionality and may not be the best choice for pure filmmakers, but I think they will stay moderatly relevant to the hybrid shooter.
 
I don't want to give Nikon anything.
Im just making a prediction of what I think is going to happen. A more precise guess would be this: Nikon announce a 4k Nikon 1 in 2014. In 2015 they announce D900 (or something like that) with 4K (probably UHD) to FF sensor. In terms of functionality its harder to say, if they decide to keep video as a bonus they might just go with the same style as of now for quite a long time. As long as they offer large sensor and good image people will probably still use it if they own it for photo.
 
Personally, I like DR, low-light and large sensor better than sharpness in m43-size. Thats why I like the Nikons better than the GH3 right now. If the GH4 will improve on DR and low-light it might be a really great camera and will also be great for dragging along the competition, but its not out yet and we should not embrace it before we know. What I can say right now: The Nikon D5300 gives the best image I have seen in such a cheap camera, and is clearly not the camera that proclaims the death of DSLR, that one would be 550D number 25.

Thanks for the review, I am in some ways as anoyed as you about Nikon having all the tech but not using it to the fullest. I have been saying it for ages, if they want to make a splash in video world, they should do some revolutionary steps like at least internal 10 bit high bitrate or even raw nowadays. But credit should be given to them where it is due. I think that Nikon thought that giving uncompressed hdmi out 2 years ago would have done the trick, but unfortunately they could not guest that, most other manufacturer would follow rapidly and that Blackmagic and ML would follow. Taking them outside of the highlight. But in the mean time they have been constantly updating there camera to sampling more pixel and downscaling to get rid of moire/aliasing and giving very good low light and now adding 60fps at 1080p. More so that they are implementing those tech in there entry level camera first, not afraid to cannibalize there higher end camera at least in the video side. That is why you find yourself in the situation as you mentioned in your article that the low end camera is better than the higher end one. Would you have preferred that they keep that tech until they update the D4, D800, D600 and D7100. They are actually updating their camera line with the expeed 4 and a new D4s has been announced and we can expect a D7200 in the near future. The only problem is the Sony based Sensor D800 and D610 which might only do line skipping and that is perhaps why Nikon has been abandoning Sony sensors.
 
You have also been comparing the D5300 against a plethora of other cameras and each of them with their fort. The D5300 does not beat any of them at one thing but it might be todays most balance camera in the DSLR world. It might not match the 13 stop of DR of the pocket, But it matches by your say in Proress mode and so should be 1 to 1.5 stop better than the Canons. But it has a  Cine 35 mm sensor, no ugly moire/aliasing and will surely beat it in low light and you can do good slow motion. You could even add an external recorder to get high bitrate. Talking about external recorder, I have a Ninja with my D7100 and it really completes the Nikons, apart from the obvious high bitrate, you get peaking, false colour, zebras, sound monitoring in a very compact package.
 
I think the d7200 will be the Nikon camera to get shortly for photo/video hybrid Nikon users. The body will be much better in terms of button and construction. I don't know why the D5200/D5300 (perhaps Nikon doin it deliberately to differentiate camera), But the D7100 is nearly as sharp as a gh2. With a Ninja it is even sharper. My guess is that a D7200 would be very very close to a Canon C100 and have equal functionality with a Ninja with the added bonus of 60p for 1/3 the price.
 
Again I would have liked Nikon to be bolder, but this camera might not be better than any other camera in any specific domain, but it is good to very good in nearly every aspect of a camera. It would have been very nice to see it on one of your chart/scene to be able to compare it with the other cameras.

Thanks for the review, I am in some ways as anoyed as you about Nikon having all the tech but not using it to the fullest. I have been saying it for ages, if they want to make a splash in video world, they should do some revolutionary steps like at least internal 10 bit high bitrate or even raw nowadays. But credit should be given to them where it is due. I think that Nikon thought that giving uncompressed hdmi out 2 years ago would have done the trick, but unfortunately they could not guest that, most other manufacturer would follow rapidly and that Blackmagic and ML would follow. Taking them outside of the highlight. But in the mean time they have been constantly updating there camera to sampling more pixel and downscaling to get rid of moire/aliasing and giving very good low light and now adding 60fps at 1080p. More so that they are implementing those tech in there entry level camera first, not afraid to cannibalize there higher end camera at least in the video side. That is why you find yourself in the situation as you mentioned in your article that the low end camera is better than the higher end one. Would you have preferred that they keep that tech until they update the D4, D800, D600 and D7100. They are actually updating their camera line with the expeed 4 and a new D4s has been announced and we can expect a D7200 in the near future. The only problem is the Sony based Sensor D800 and D610 which might only do line skipping and that is perhaps why Nikon has been abandoning Sony sensors.
 
You have also been comparing the D5300 against a plethora of other cameras and each of them with their fort. The D5300 does not beat any of them at one thing but it might be todays most balance camera in the DSLR world. It might not match the 13 stop of DR of the pocket, But it matches by your say in Proress mode and so should be 1 to 1.5 stop better than the Canons. But it has a  Cine 35 mm sensor, no ugly moire/aliasing and will surely beat it in low light and you can do good slow motion. You could even add an external recorder to get high bitrate. Talking about external recorder, I have a Ninja with my D7100 and it really completes the Nikons, apart from the obvious high bitrate, you get peaking, false colour, zebras, sound monitoring in a very compact package.
 
I think the d7200 will be the Nikon camera to get shortly for photo/video hybrid Nikon users. The body will be much better in terms of button and construction. I don't know why the D5200/D5300 (perhaps Nikon doin it deliberately to differentiate camera), But the D7100 is nearly as sharp as a gh2. With a Ninja it is even sharper. My guess is that a D7200 would be very very close to a Canon C100 and have equal functionality with a Ninja with the added bonus of 60p for 1/3 the price.
 
Again I would have liked Nikon to be bolder, but this camera might not be better than any other camera in any specific domain, but it is good to very good in nearly every aspect of a camera. It would have been very nice to see it on one of your chart/scene to be able to compare it with the other cameras.

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.

Nearly completely shot on the C100, I think that if someone cannot do nice film with the C100, then no matter what technology he uses won't make a difference.

Nearly completely shot on the C100, I think that if someone cannot do nice film with the C100, then no matter what technology he uses won't make a difference.

Just look at this test between the D7100/70D at about 17.50 min on moire/aliasing between the two. I think it is telling. You cannot get more organic than a hippie style community shot during golden hour LOL. I think the reviewer himself shot some other video and he was a bit critical about the moire/aliasing and low resolution image.
 
For me one of the secret of the Alexa vaunted film look is the highlight roll-off. Many have speculated and analyse that Arri hss put a diffusion filter like the tiffen promist filter before the sensor. There are many thread on reduser forum about this and I have bought a 1/4 promist to test it. I would have preferred a 1/8 but I got a very good price on a used one on Ebay. I wanted the lowest number because I don't want the filtered look too much. Just a little bit seems to make wonders but in the process you loose some resolution. At least with the higher resolution Nikons I can afford it for a much more film like image.
 
Some good resources http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2012/06/diffusion-for-the-digital-age-the-use-of-glass-filtration/
 

I think the reason many here expected a review of the D5300 is because you where one of the people that showed the capability of the D5200 to the film community. Until now it is still the reference to show the fantastic low light capability of the Nikon D5200 that rivals the $ 3500 5dmark3 full frame camera which itself is hailed as a very very good low light camera. Now you have told us that you don't want to review it and I respect your opinion because it is your site and your time and you can decide your priorities. I will just tell you why I am interested in this camera, it might just be for the sake of discussion and comprehension. I am not in anyway trying to convince or confront you.
 
The first thing is that I am a pro Nikon photographer that is always interested in Cinema. Contrary to those pseudo pure photographers that can't photo their shoes I am a big fan of the hybrid concept. So for the last 5 years I have bought a Canon 7d and a panasonic gh2 for video because Nikon was behind. Then I bought the D800 for my photography and it was much better than the 7D and previous Nikon  but still kept my gh2, the moire/aliasing of the D800 (much better than the 7d) was still a little annoying for me. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?286855-Sharpness-test-between-Nikon-D800-Panasonic-GH2-and-Canon-7D
 
Then came the D5200!!! What is that thing a $ 800 Nikon camera that had no moire/aliasing with fantastic lowlight and about 12 stop of DR and you could even record in high bitrate 422 with an external recorder. Further test showed that it had one downfall and it was the FPN. There was a solution with neat-image but it was a bit cumbersome if you pushed into the shadows for some shots. In the end I bought its sensor brother in the D7100 as a second body to my D800. It took me some time because the logical choice was the D600 but I wanted so much the better video image. There was report that the D7100 image in video was sharper than the d5200 and I did test against the gh2 as you can see it was blind test and most did not commit and some got in wrong, so close they where that I sold my gh2. I can also confirm the the hdmi output give an even more detailed and sharper image. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness
 
During those time I had to chose at first between the D7100 and the BMC camera (I already had my D300 as backup for my D800) and then when between the Ninja and the BMCC. For some it is like heresy but everybody would have drooled on an APSC size sensor camera with gh2 resolution, about 12 stop of DR, low light of the 5dmark3 and 220 mbits prores image with a Ninja 1.5 years ago. the only prayer for me would be 10 bit output for now until raw can become mainstream. I also have to think in terms of production environment if I want to do film that I have to have reliable cameras (at least 2) and reduce the maximum number of point of failure with native set of lens, no adapter that can fail etc. etc. To have cameras where I don't even know how much space is left on the disk etc. or moire/aliasing and in the end things like lighting will make so much more difference than any raw.
 
To come back to the D5300, why I am interested to get the d5300 is because the FPN is annoying, I can live with it but an FPN free image would be much more than a simple upgrade. I like to get in those deep deep shadows that the Nikons have to get the most out of the DR of the camera. The second thing is the 60p, for filming my fashion shoot it will be huge. even if for now until we get external recorders that do 60fps 1080p out of the hdmi. But I think next year we will see in next atomos ninja with the number of 60p camera with uncompressed hdmi coming out. So in the end we might be getting very close to Canon Cinema EOS line of image quality for $ 800 and even getting 60p.
 
The last thing I will talk about the industry in general. What many video/slr website don't take into account is the vast vast vast Nikon world. Contrary to what many on here were talking about the demise of Nikon, they have survived 6 long years to Canon dominance between 2000 to 2007 until the Nikon D300 and D3. One of the big reason is the lens and ecosystem. I can mount 50 year old lens on my camera if I want or if I buy a lens tomorrow I know that I will be able to but it on a camera for decades. This market won't just disappear even if tomorrow cell phone kills the low end. The enthusiast semi pro and pro are not going to cell phone any-time soon and both Canon and Nikon will still be billion dollar company in 5 years. They might adapt but they won't just disappear overnight.
 
So what about this huge Nikon slr market, if only 1 out of 5 Nikon users cares about video it might be more than lumix users. That is why you will more and more Nikon users because they will start to push the video button and the image will be so good that they won't be interested to buy other equipment, but will search for Nikon related test and info on the video capability of their camera. The one who understand that will get part of this cake.

I think the reason many here expected a review of the D5300 is because you where one of the people that showed the capability of the D5200 to the film community. Until now it is still the reference to show the fantastic low light capability of the Nikon D5200 that rivals the $ 3500 5dmark3 full frame camera which itself is hailed as a very very good low light camera. Now you have told us that you don't want to review it and I respect your opinion because it is your site and your time and you can decide your priorities. I will just tell you why I am interested in this camera, it might just be for the sake of discussion and comprehension. I am not in anyway trying to convince or confront you.
 
The first thing is that I am a pro Nikon photographer that is always interested in Cinema. Contrary to those pseudo pure photographers that can't photo their shoes I am a big fan of the hybrid concept. So for the last 5 years I have bought a Canon 7d and a panasonic gh2 for video because Nikon was behind. Then I bought the D800 for my photography and it was much better than the 7D and previous Nikon  but still kept my gh2, the moire/aliasing of the D800 (much better than the 7d) was still a little annoying for me. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?286855-Sharpness-test-between-Nikon-D800-Panasonic-GH2-and-Canon-7D
 
Then came the D5200!!! What is that thing a $ 800 Nikon camera that had no moire/aliasing with fantastic lowlight and about 12 stop of DR and you could even record in high bitrate 422 with an external recorder. Further test showed that it had one downfall and it was the FPN. There was a solution with neat-image but it was a bit cumbersome if you pushed into the shadows for some shots. In the end I bought its sensor brother in the D7100 as a second body to my D800. It took me some time because the logical choice was the D600 but I wanted so much the better video image. There was report that the D7100 image in video was sharper than the d5200 and I did test against the gh2 as you can see it was blind test and most did not commit and some got in wrong, so close they where that I sold my gh2. I can also confirm the the hdmi output give an even more detailed and sharper image. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness
 
During those time I had to chose at first between the D7100 and the BMC camera (I already had my D300 as backup for my D800) and then when between the Ninja and the BMCC. For some it is like heresy but everybody would have drooled on an APSC size sensor camera with gh2 resolution, about 12 stop of DR, low light of the 5dmark3 and 220 mbits prores image with a Ninja 1.5 years ago. the only prayer for me would be 10 bit output for now until raw can become mainstream. I also have to think in terms of production environment if I want to do film that I have to have reliable cameras (at least 2) and reduce the maximum number of point of failure with native set of lens, no adapter that can fail etc. etc. To have cameras where I don't even know how much space is left on the disk etc. or moire/aliasing and in the end things like lighting will make so much more difference than any raw.
 
To come back to the D5300, why I am interested to get the d5300 is because the FPN is annoying, I can live with it but an FPN free image would be much more than a simple upgrade. I like to get in those deep deep shadows that the Nikons have to get the most out of the DR of the camera. The second thing is the 60p, for filming my fashion shoot it will be huge. even if for now until we get external recorders that do 60fps 1080p out of the hdmi. But I think next year we will see in next atomos ninja with the number of 60p camera with uncompressed hdmi coming out. So in the end we might be getting very close to Canon Cinema EOS line of image quality for $ 800 and even getting 60p.
 
The last thing I will talk about the industry in general. What many video/slr website don't take into account is the vast vast vast Nikon world. Contrary to what many on here were talking about the demise of Nikon, they have survived 6 long years to Canon dominance between 2000 to 2007 until the Nikon D300 and D3. One of the big reason is the lens and ecosystem. I can mount 50 year old lens on my camera if I want or if I buy a lens tomorrow I know that I will be able to but it on a camera for decades. This market won't just disappear even if tomorrow cell phone kills the low end. The enthusiast semi pro and pro are not going to cell phone any-time soon and both Canon and Nikon will still be billion dollar company in 5 years. They might adapt but they won't just disappear overnight.
 
So what about this huge Nikon slr market, if only 1 out of 5 Nikon users cares about video it might be more than lumix users. That is why you will more and more Nikon users because they will start to push the video button and the image will be so good that they won't be interested to buy other equipment, but will search for Nikon related test and info on the video capability of their camera. The one who understand that will get part of this cake.

I hope that someday he might see the market not only in terms of what looks more innovative but camera that are also ... good enough. In my case for example, I am a Pro Nikon shooter with about $ 15 000 in camera, lens, flashes etc invested in the Nikon system the last 8 years (I don't live in a first world country). In the mean time I have bought a Canon 7D and a Panasonic gh2 for video. If there was no Nikon D5200 and the D7100 that I bought, I would have gone Panasonic gh3 or Blackmagic. But in the end, from what I saw the D7100 is good enough for me and I am so thrilled about the image quality, that is why I am so interested in the d5300. A D7100 image without the Fix pattern noise and 60p is just ideal for me. No need to search for new lens, adapters that might fail etc etc... For sure I would like at least 10 bit, high bitrate internal codec and eventually raw when I can afford the size and resources needed. But until now with my ninja if need be, I get what I always wanted when I had my hacked gh2. Better dynamic range and lowlight with good 1080 resolution without any aliasing and moire... The combo with the ninja is still very small and adds peaking, zebras, false colour and high bitrate codec. If someone cannot do nice pictures with such a combo then he needs to look at himself.

It is good that eoshd did a good review of the RX10 and saw its limits. A camera that he himself has been hipping a lot. For me I have stop believing  in any of the Sony dslr camera. Every new model is crippled in one way or the other to protect their high-end camera line. It is so obvious that I can't even understand people who get excited by any Sony dslr camera for video use. One example is the claim that it has full sensor readout. I am 200% sure that is just marketing bull-shit because of the moire/aliasing in the shots.
 
On the other side you have Nikon who release the D5300 camera which gets rid of the only major problem of its predecessor (fix pattern noise) and adds 60fps 1080p and gets a paragraph with a test done in the shop. It might look like minor upgrade but from an already very very strong Nikon D5200 image quality. This camera with its lack of FPN and new expeed 4 could even be better than the 5dmark3 in many area. Some I am sure like Dynamic range and sharpness and others like lowlight will need some test. Hopefully someone else (Cinema 5D Johnnie Behiri said that it was on his list).
 
My guess is that the D5300 will have an image very close in term of sharpness, DR etc  to the Canon C100/C300 below ISO 3200. And it will at least have 60 fps for $ 800. Unfortunately for most people and bloggers, what they will remember with their lack of research is that the Nikon DF has no video, and as such Nikon does not care about video and should be crucified for this. Yet Sony just released 3 cameras that all have their dose of moire/aliasing, codec, etc. etc. issues and they get all the headlines.

It is good that eoshd did a good review of the RX10 and saw its limits. A camera that he himself has been hipping a lot. For me I have stop believing  in any of the Sony dslr camera. Every new model is crippled in one way or the other to protect their high-end camera line. It is so obvious that I can't even understand people who get excited by any Sony dslr camera for video use. One example is the claim that it has full sensor readout. I am 200% sure that is just marketing bull-shit because of the moire/aliasing in the shots.
 
On the other side you have Nikon who release the D5300 camera which gets rid of the only major problem of its predecessor (fix pattern noise) and adds 60fps 1080p and gets a paragraph with a test done in the shop. It might look like minor upgrade but from an already very very strong Nikon D5200 image quality. This camera with its lack of FPN and new expeed 4 could even be better than the 5dmark3 in many area. Some I am sure like Dynamic range and sharpness and others like lowlight will need some test. Hopefully someone else (Cinema 5D Johnnie Behiri said that it was on his list).
 
My guess is that the D5300 will have an image very close in term of sharpness, DR etc  to the Canon C100/C300 below ISO 3200. And it will at least have 60 fps for $ 800. Unfortunately for most people and bloggers, what they will remember with their lack of research is that the Nikon DF has no video, and as such Nikon does not care about video and should be crucified for this. Yet Sony just released 3 cameras that all have their dose of moire/aliasing, codec, etc. etc. issues and they get all the headlines.

@skiphunt, I can't understand too much you choice between the D5300 and Sony Rx10. One cannot even be categorised at a large sensor camera while the other one is a Cinema 3d mm sensor size. The fix lens at 2.8 on such a smallish sensor will be more like f7/f8 on an Apsc size sensor. Compare that to the Nikon where you can add some very fast primes or the superb Sigma 17-35 1.8 zoom. Even if you put the more common extended zoom like the 18-140 f 3.5/56 you will still have more light than the 2.8 on the Rx10. There are also some very good variable ND now for not too much money. For me one is only good if you want camcorder type of image and flexibility and the other one much more cinema type quality image with a little less flexibility. For me they are very very different type of camera and for very very different use.

Nikon does a niche $ 3000 camera just for photographers without video and the world wide web of video shooters bloggers etc. erupt in anger. Predicting its downfall etc. with all type of silly argument that the company will disapeer etc.
 
Nikon release a camera which is truly hd resolution, looks like having no moire/aliasing, very good low light that will challenge the 5dmark3 and DR in the 12 stop range. They eliminate the big problem that plague its predecessors like banding, added 60 fps at full 1080p and no ones talk about it. This shows you how silly people are, from pseudo expert and bloggers that only look at the spectacular and not the concrete things. More so that if it follow the other latest Nikon camera trend you could add an external recorder to film with 220 4.4.2 prores.
 
The closest you could compare it to is the Canon $600/12000 C100/C300 and both of them don't give you 1080p at 60 fps. For sure they have other qualities for video but this D5300 is only $ 800 and can take gorgeous 24 megapixel photos with 14 stop of Dynamic range.