William Koehler

I was at the state fair last year and I had my camera hanging down my back while I was having a beer. some dude snuck up to it and did the shocker symbol and pushed the shutter button. He got off a few shots before I noticed. So I went ahead and put his photo on craigslist casual encounters male seeking male section.
 
And I laughed pretty hard about it.

With all due respect to Andrew... why the heck do so many here care what he likes and doesn't like? Everyones got different taste, needs, priorities, and budgets. Mine are specific to my own needs, so what meets someone else's criteria isn't necessarily the same as mine. 
 
Is the D5300 a great filmmaking tool with excellent ergonomics and a contender against cameras costing thousands of dollars more? No, of course not. 
 
Does it have a sweet low-light sensor that in the right hands can render cinematic results on par with the better filmmaking tools out there costing much more, and deliver stellar stills as well... for $799? You bet it does. 
 
I can't speak for anyone else here, but for me... it's now about realizing a good cinematic idea and using the tools I have to the best of my abilities. For me, that's the only hurdle to get over now. :) I'll leave the arguments over sensors, pixels, resolution, dynamic range, etc. to the gear enthusiasts. I've got to go brainstorm an idea and stop wasting time on gear forums. ;)

Wow, people are still whining about stills cameras that have added video functions? And an 800 dollar model at that!?!?!
 
What's next? A scathing critique of a Flip UltraHD camera?
 

I don't think this site is aimed too much at producers of content to big budget productions. Correct, you won't find GH2/GH3/Blackmagic, or D800 or Canon 5d mk3 there for that matter. (maybe any of these as funny experiments or very limited scenes where they don't want to risk more expensive equipment).
 
 
The nice thing about a camera like the Blackmagic, is that it affords filmmakers who can't afford a big crew of lighting people etc to still end up with good footage.
 
So:
 
Nikon 5300 - soccermoms
Blackmagic/GH2/GH3/GH3 - indie, smaller productions
Arri (mostly) - large budget digital
 

"In addition Nikon have all the technology to build a high end cinema line for pros like Cinema EOS, something which is turning out to be massively profitable for Canon. The sensor, the image processor, the codec, the lenses, everything."
 
The last few years Nikon has been on recovery after their most important factories got destroyed (Thailand and Japan). That makes a huge impact on a company which have cameras as their main business and no photocopiers to fall back on. I believe Nikon's reaction to this is to be cautious about investing too much into new product lines and try to recover with what they know they're good at.
 
Considering that situation, I think they're on a good track in improving the video modes on their cameras although they can't keep up with Panasonic in terms of features or handling. They've at least made incremental improvements with sensors, moire, aliasing and added 1080p60 modes in their low-end range - none of which Canon has done.
 
What I just can't understand with Nikon, is why that bloody Live view aperture situation exists with their lower-end cameras since that issue is not there on cameras like D800. If that is planned segmentation of products - it is very retarded. If it's something that requires some reengineering to fix it, it's really about time that they fix it.
 
I hope that Nikon is seriously watching what Panasonic is doing, and I hope they'll figure out how to do 4k and how to implement 10-bit 4:2:2 in at least 1080p. This is what Nikon EU product manager has to say about Nikon and 4k:
 
- “We are aware of the need for, and request for, 4K video recording. It is a bit tricky, it’s not something that we are purposefully excluding from our cameras; however we need to approach it carefully. There are high-end cameras that produce this but it just puts such a load on the equipment. For us, because consumers are demanding it we are aware of this and will be looking into it for the future."

--- Source: http://nikonrumors.com/2014/01/25/nikon-sees-future-in-4k-video-and-advanced-compact-cameras.aspx/
 
Sony, Canon and Panasonic all had a headstart thanks to producing video cameras for a long time. In my opinion Nikon hasn't been doing all that bad coming from a still photography camera background only. I certainly hope they will realize what handling issues and features that still are missing and provide that - either in mirrorless, DSLR, hybrid or specifically video-tailored cameras.
 
And my own review of the D5300 and D3300 would be:
- Great cameras for the newbies who want to start learning about video while also shooting stills. Far better choice than any other DSLR considering sensor, stills & video performance together. Panasonic G6 and Nikon D5300/D5200/D3300 are my first choice of recommendations for video+photo first-timers on tight budgets. There's handling issues and features missing that are available in more expensive cameras - but that's to be expected in entry-level/budget range.

Absolutely. In fact, most of this article just re-covered the ground of Andrew's fairly recent "Dear Nikon" article. I was hoping for a more in-depth review of the actual camera. Not another generalised rant about why MFT cameras are great. I have a G6 and love it, and agree that mirrorless is the future, but my D5300 is getting more use ATM because I like the image so much. Often I don't find the Nikon quite sharp enough, but resolution is OK and the other qualities trump the G6 for me. The 5300 really is a pain in the neck to shoot with though.
 
There is a lot about this article that is right, but there is also a lot that is unsaid or unacknowledged. There are some things I'm very disappointed EOSHD didn't address and that I actually feel make this quite a misleading/lazy review.
 
My responses to the article are below, mainly adding up to my opinion that for everything the D5300 lacks compared to other similarly priced cameras, it makes up for in other areas - making it one of the best all round choices at the moment. Having said that, I do completely agree that in a year's time the level of detail on the 5300 will look slightly archaic, and the extremely frustrating interface design and feature set makes it extremely frustrating and probably a no-go for a lot of work.
 
So, addressed in article-order:
 
 
Quote
The D5300 comes into a world where video enthusiasts are shooting 4K on Panasonic consumer cameras
 
Er, not yet they're not. And the D5300 actually came out in 2013.
 
 
Quote
I just wanted to shoot nice 1080p, conveniently, for a low price with interchangeable lenses. The D5300 to some is $799 for a Super 35mm camera that shoots quite nice 1080p with no moire & aliasing problems, good in low light, great articulated screen – and free Nikon stills camera into the bargain.
 
Agreed. This is where I'm coming from.
 
 
Quote
I just cannot get over the…
Baby Photo Mode
 
This is all an important point, but not really a problem specific to the 5300. But agreed. Nikon are being stupid about their video mode, and so are Canon.
 
 
Quote
The LCD has almost invisibly faint transparent masking marks for 16:9
 
I don't find this a problem at all, once you're used to it. A small, small, tiny inconvenience.
 
 
Quote
Simply by repackaging the D5300 and redesigning the firmware, Nikon could make it 10x more useful for everyone in the world with an interest in shooting artistic video.
 
Again, agreed. Hugely frustrating.
 
 
Quote
The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera is $999 with a 10bit 4:2:2 ProRes codec, crisp detail and 13 stops of dynamic range. The D5300 does have a better screen than the Pocket Camera, which is articulated and it does have an APS-C sensor, 1080/60p in addition to the film frame rate of 24p and 25p, so it’s not all bad…
 
The Pocket has a very different workflow that a lot of shooters just aren't going to want, and is even more frustrating to use than the 5300 in many ways.
 
Quote
Neither can quite match the GH3 for detail in 1080p (let alone the GH4). I believe the trick Panasonic are using to give us such crisp 1080p on their cameras is to down-sample the sensor to roughly 2.5K and then oversample 1080p from that higher resolution raw image. The D5300 looks like the 5D Mark III’s stock video mode for resolution – it’s a bit mushy. You notice this the most when shooting in daylight at focus points between infinity and roughly 5 meters. Sometimes you don’t notice the softness much at all, so it’s not the camera’s main problem.
 
Agreed. Interesting theory about Panasonic too.
 
Quote
Standard or Vivid picture profile ... Whatever method you use the results after grading look similar.
 
FFS ANDREW WHY HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO TALK ABOUT FLAAT?!
 
 
Quote
Low light performance is very good, even with the focus assist zoomed in 2 levels you will find it difficult to see any noise on the LCD while out shooting in low light at ISO 800. The image maintains rich colour at high ISOs and on brighter areas of the image at high ISOs noise almost vanishes altogether. ISO 1600 and 3200 are perfectly usable in video mode and even 6400 and 12,800 are better than on many cameras at the same price, closer in fact to the Super 35mm sensor in the Sony FS100.
 
IMO this is the major strength of the camera. It is superior to the Pocket, even with Speed Booster, here - because the Pocket has very washed-out colours in low light that completely negate it's low-noise levels. I haven't had a chance to look at how the GM1/GX7 do in low light (and forthcoming GH4). I really hope the GH4 matches the 5300 here. That will make me really happy.
 
 
Quote
The punch-in focus assist is generally a bit slow to use and you can’t simply half-press the shutter button to come back out of it, instead you have to tediously reverse back out out with the ‘minus’ key.
 
Minor niggle and entirely wrong. Pressing 'OK' (centre button) brings you straight out.
 
 
Quote
The lens mount is way too restrictive.
 
Seriously, WTF? You go on about the graetness of the Speed Booster all the time. Pocket + SB = awesome. Nikon mount = grim.
But I agree that it's ridiculous the way Nikon cripple their low-end cameras for using their own glass.
 
 
Quote
with the Olympus OM-D E-M1 any lens you put on it automatically has class-leading stabilisation better than any VR lens in the entire Nikon range including their pro lenses.
 
This is the case with any camera other than Olympus - not just Nikon!!!
 
 
Quote
Last year’s D5200 has an identical image in video mode and costs just $400 used, which makes it hard to justify the D5300 if you don’t need 1080/60p.
 
On the surface this is true, but in actuality it is entirely, categorically false. The D5300 has none of the banding/fixed pattern noise of the 5200. This means far better low light performance and crucially, AMAZING DYNAMIC RANGE POTENTIAL USING FLAT PROFILES. I know that you know about this Andrew. WHY HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO TALK ABOUT THIS?!?! A quote you made on our older D5300 thread:
 
 
Quote
EOSHD, on 16 Jan 2014 - 8:11 PM, said:
Today I bought a Nikon D5300 for review, and a bit of shooting, but mainly for the blog with intention of sending it back after.
Well, so far it is surprising me.
The dynamic range with the flat picture profile is really quite something. Head to toe with ProRes on the Blackmagic Pocket Camera. I'd put it at 12 stops. Very good colour and good shadows, and again good low light performance. The codec in 1080/60p seems ok so far too. The main drawback seems to be the cheap-mid-range Nikon ergonomics (not enough buttons and dials). Wish they had put this video mode (and articulated screen) in the D7100 instead.
But so far so good peeps!
 
Why didn't you address this in the article? You do know about this. DYNAMIC RANGE IS A MAJOR, MAJOR PRO OF THIS CAMERA. Far superior to any other low-bitrate camera in the price-bracket.
 
 
Quote
As of today, DSLR video is over. Dead. Kaput!
 
Er, I'd probably pick a GH4 over a 5D+RAW for convenience's sake and features, but I'm pretty sure I'll prefer the 5D image (?) and I think we'll be seeing just as much 5D RAW as ever, even after the GH4 is out. But yes, I hope in the long-run mirrorless is the direction we are headed in (and I believe it is too).
 

Quote
The lack of video features and 4K will put DSLRs at a very significant disadvantage on performance relative to the best mirrorless cameras this year.
 
Agreed.
 
 
Quote
To give you an idea of how antiquated the D5300 form factor is you still can’t change the aperture from the camera whilst live-view mode is engaged. Why on Earth not?
 
Agreed. Ridiculous.
 
 
Quote
But in the cold light of day for $1999 (maybe less by the time final pricing is announced), Panasonic offer us 4K video. At $799 Nikon offer us a Baby Photo Mode. Why bother with this crap any more? Really?
 
Ridiculous comment. $2000 is is over twice as much as $800. For some people that's a big difference.
 
 
Quote
Pros
OK video quality and very good low light performance
Better than Canon Rebels and 70D on image quality, for both video and stills
Pleasing colour straight out of the MOV files, richness of tone maintained in low light
1080/60p useful for slow-motion video when converted to more cinematic 24p frame rate
38Mbit codec avoids break-up in 1080/60p mode (only 24Mbit VBR in 24p and 25p mode though)
No significant moire or aliasing issues (though resolution falls short of being truly full HD)
PAL / NTSC switchable for wide variety of frame rates
Manual focus magnification has an ultra-detailed display mode (though painfully slow frame rate)
Quicktime MOV file format benefits (easy editing and access, thumbnail preview in Explorer and Finder)
Very nice smartphone standard 3.2″ articulated screen
The sensor produces immaculate stills quality for the price
$799
 
Agree with all of these, though it seems almost misleading for someone with the respect you have from your readers to neglect talking about dynamic range with the D5300. IMO DR is on-par with low-light as the greatest strength of this camera.
 
 
Quote
Cons
Charmless – looks cheap, bland shooting experience
Very poor ergonomics by Nikon standards
Extremely dated form factor
 
I really like the size, weight and shape of the camera. It is a pain in the backside to use though.
 
 
Quote
No real improvement in image quality over the D5200 in terms of video or raw stills
 
FFingF's sake!!! The banding is gone!!! That was THE major drawback of the D5200. You said so yourself when you reviewed that camera! At least bloody mention it!!!
 
 
Quote
Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera offers much better image for filmmakers (13 stop dynamic range, 10bit ProRes 422) for just $200 more
 
The Pocket workflow is a very, very different proposition for some people, and it requires a much greater outlay in terms of gear and time spent in post. The 5300 is also a much better all-rounder.
 
I agree wholeheartedly with all of your other cons.
 
 
As is becoming standard Andrew, I have been very critical of you. As always I still have the greatest respect for you and your site (in fact I may actually just change my signature to say this ;) ).

Pretty harsh review. :P But in all honesty, you are indeed right.
They have all the tech and know-how to make it happen, but they just don't.
 
Canon especially has been dragging the 18MP sensor for far too long. They had a head start with their 5DmkII and 550D (and all the models followed after), but started to lose their touch and had to see mirrorless camera's overtaking left and right because they we're not tinkering under the hood and weren't hitting the peddle to the metal. It's like entering the Formula 1 with one car and keeping it like that throughout the season, whilst others install performance upgrades and what not. Given that the new 70D is nice, it performs only marginally better than the in meanwhile ancient 18MP sensor (imho). The real power lies with the 5D. It was pretty ground breaking with the mkII and the mkIII opened a lot of new possibilities. But it's not really thanks to Canon, now is it? Great deal of the credit belongs to the amazing work from the guys over at Magic Lantern who can make it to something you can really get excited about. But why dumb down your own camera's when there's an audience waiting for the possibilities? Like you said, are you really just gonna ignore them and push 'em away towards the micro four thirds camera's?! If you'd just, like Panasonic, take notice of what people are saying and give them something to work with and get excited about, you can win too, but I guess they want to be at the losing end of things and stay cornered in the photo-specific corner. Because 'oooooeehh', you don't wan't to be known for your excellent video when making photocamera's.
 
Atleast Nikon is innovating. In the consumerline budgetfriendly camera's category, their sensors outshine Canon's by quite a bit. But they fail to recognize the wishes of cinematographers and video enthusiasts. And that would even be okay if there was a Magic Lantern realizing those wishes and completely changing how you can use the camera, but unfortunately there's no such thing, nor will there probably ever be. Which actually kinda pains me, because here you have Canon that more or less lacks potential, but they have ML. And then there's Nikon, actually quite capable in theory, but as they say: you can't polish a turd, and nobody is seemingly willing to (be able) to get their hands dirty.
 
The way things are going the only thing looking forward in terms of dSLR for video would be the 5DmkIV. And even then if they would just acknowledge the need for videofeatures on it and not dumbing things down so you can release a new camera after a little while with minor upgrades, you already could've provided months before. Same of course goes for the APS-C line of camera's from Canon and Nikon. It's like the story of Cinderella; a lot of potential wasted because it's being treated like dirt. But when given a proper chance and attention it could florish like a flower and win over hearts!
 
But anyways. It's gonna be too little, too late anyways I'm afraid. In meanwhile mirrorless camera's are performing better and better, but more so, provide dedicated videofunctionality that's lacking with dSLRs. And you can redicule the smaller sensor all you want, but it can keep up, but another prominent benefit thereof is keeping lenses very compact! That in combination with a small camera already opens up a world of possibilities and advantages allowing for small run-and-gun videomonsters that pack a punch. I'm personally very excited for the Olympus OM-D E-M1 (which I'll probably be getting next month to upgrade from my GH2), especially because of the built-in stabilization. This should be a standard on all digital camera's! I'm using prime lenses most of the time anyways and especially with the MFT pancakes, you have sick possibilities in the smallest of packages, though still giving you stellar performance.
 
To take it to the next level we need high bitrates, focus peaking, various fps-selections including 1080p at or above 60 frames per second. 2.5K already would be awesome for implementing in your 1080p projects. And then deliver 4K and uncompressed output for people who want to really get jiggy with it. That is the future! And mirrorless camera's are starting to give it to us already! You got to love the day and age we live in. We get to experience all these next levels! And it's starting to get more accessible and affordable as we go along.
 
Things are moving in the right direction. It's just a matter of who takes it upon themselves to ride the wave... :lol:

Andrew has aimed a lot of negative comments directly at nikon which apply to nearly every camera maker out there. I agree that 4K is the future, and panny seems to be leading the way, but to hammer nikon seems a bit inappropriate.

I own a D5300 and chose it specifiCally for its balance of ability to shoot both high quality stills and 1080p video without moire and aliasing. I looked at many cameras from the nikon D800 and D610, canon 6D, and panny GM1 and GH3 to sony nex7 and was unable to find a better all-around solution.

Perhaps if Andrew approached his review a bit less video-centric and recognized that many pros require a camera that can do both stills and video to acceptable stock photo standards, he might realize the humble little D5300 is, right now, about the best balance available on the market.

That said, I appreciate Andrew's website, insights, and all the work he does helping the video community.

I'm pretty new here but I think the tone in Tim's mail is.... Unnecessarily harsh.

Why "you failed to" etc? It's not that eoshd.com owes this person anything.

The tone is a shame because there are some good points in Tim's mail.

Anyway I thought the article was a good read.

The first poster (20s of wall) said it was 980MB for 20s.
 
So it looks like:
49 MB/s
= 22 min 17 sec for 64GB card.

To me that sounds like it might be just an internal reflection rather than an actual bug software/hardware bug. 
 
A kind of a glare reflection which appears only during very specific circumstances; when bright enough a spot light source is shining straight into the sensor from a specific (low) angle, and then the shiny surface of the sensor gets reflected back to the lens, and then some of the lens surfaces or a filter surface (or some other reflective surface) will produce this ghost glare. I've seen something (kinda) similar happen before, under certain circumstances. The easiest way to minimise it was to use a lens hood.
 
I'd try reproducing that scenario with different bright lights straight into the lens from varying angles, trying to create various glares on purpose, and then experiment with different lenses, filters and perhaps even the Speed Booster, if possible. Chances are the stripes will only appear with certain lens and light angle (and colour) combinations.
 
It it really is what I believe it is, I believe it will make no difference if it's a still photo or video. The reflection may just be easier to spot and reproduce in a video clip.
 
Well, just a thought, might be worth investigating.