Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by skiphunt

  1. I didn't get the 18-55 kit lens with my D5300, though I sort of wish I had. I got it with the D5200 and didn't think it was anywhere near as bad as many on the forums made it out to be. The VR worked well and it seemed plenty sharp enough. It was also very lightweight and did an impressive macro ratio. The only kit lens offered when I bought mine was the 18-140, so I just went for body only since I already have the 18-200VR. If they bundle it after the holiday with the 18-55, and it's still inside my 45 day return period, I may swap it out for one with the short kit zoom. Going to tes
  2. Matt: I think I might be more interested in the Nikon route, but figured those Rokinon cine's were somehow better because they're newer and potentially tuned/coated for cine? I have nothing to base that on, but yes... I'd love to have your thoughts on this since I know we have a similar aesthetic taste and we both have the D5300. Had an 85mm f2 that I loved, but sadly sold about 5 or 6 years ago. Would've been perfect now, and as I recall, the focus was buttery smooth on it. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I'm always confused with all the different Nikon lens names, i.e.. AI-s AI, D, etc. Wh
  3. I got decent results out of this lens on a D300, but I do recall having sharpness up and smart-sharpening just about everything. Half of these where shot with the 18-200 (the 16:9 images mixed in were the compact Panasonic LX3) http://www.kaleidoscopeofcolor.com/galleria/go-west-color/ All of these where the 18-200 on the D300 as well: http://www.kaleidoscopeofcolor.com/galleria/guatemala-2008/ I think for stills, I prefer my newer Nikon lenses, 35mm f1.8 50mm 1.8, the the 18-200VR for carry around. But for video, I'm liking the look and color I'm getting from an old Nikkor 135mm f2 an
  4. @Henry, Reaper isn't actually free, but the trial lasts 60 days. After that, it's $60 for a non-commercial license. Does it keep working after the 60 days? I've only been playing with it for a couple weeks. So far, it's been somewhat intuitive. @Zach, that's just it... I don't really think so. I've been out of the motion game for a few years. The last version of FCP I used was V6 and I can't say I was ever that proficient in it to be honest. I got the job done, but it was always a struggle. So now I'm just getting back in slowly. Just bought FCP X and am finding much more intuitive. I use
  5. Wow! Hadn't ever thought of that. I already have the Gorrilla SLR with a heavy-duty Sunpack head that came bundled on it from B&H a couple years ago. That's perfect and I'd be taking that along anyway for time-lapse stuff. Thanks for the tip! :)
  6. Quick question: I recently bought the latest FCP X and was thinking about getting Logic Pro X as well. However, I've also been playing with Reaper and like it. It's only $60 for a license and Logic is $200. The more I delve into DAW software reviews, the more it's clear they're mostly targeted and designed for musicians. For filmmaking, are the audio tools already built-in to FCP X sufficient? Perhaps Garageband and FCP X are really all most of use ever need? Or, are there very compelling reasons to also have Logic Pro or Reaper DAW software? ProTools is out due to the higher cost. I coul
  7. @Danyyyel, I hear ya about being frustrated regarding the lack of interest from 3rd party testers, but they're function isn't necessarily at the whim of the few of us interested in a particular camera. ;) I saw enough that I was willing to take a chance and am glad I did. It's not perfect, but for the money I think it's a darn good image with lots of potential, especially in low light. Regarding the lenses, my testing has been all over the map. The 18-200 isn't horrible and I can get VERY sharp images/video with it. What I wasn't paying close enough attention to is the ISO. Detail and
  8. I like the look too Matt. At some point, I think people should take off the pixel peeping googles and start evaluating, and crafting images based solely on aesthetic taste. It's fine to try and figure out what your tools are capable of, and whether or not they can deliver the look you're after via grading, etc. But after you've figured out if the tool is capable enough, it's time to focus on the artistic part. On pretty much all of the camera enthusiast sites, you read post after post that imply some users get stuck in eval mode... they can't see anything other than noise, corner foc
  9. Here's some D5300 test clips under artificial fluorescent at the mall. Used a 18-200 DX VR lens. Not my sharpest lens, but the VR makes handheld tolerable.
  10. I think Matts most recent test looks very good. Could be sharpened a bit, as could mine... but, I'm trying to find a balance of organic vs being too sharpened and digital looking. I've only had my camera a couple days now, so I'm still figuring out what I want to set the incamera parameters to, and how much to do in post. To be clear though, I'm not trying to emulate any particular look at the moment... just adjusting until I find the look I like. Some of you might prefer trying to get close to the sort of RED-camera-inspired very fine, high res footage... and there's nothing wrong with t
  11. I can say I'm happy with the D5300 personally. Handling is awkward and I wish it had focus peaking as well as being able to change the aperture without backing out of live view, but I can accept those faults for the pure image quality. No, it's not as nice as some of the raw stuff I've seen, but it's close enough and doesn't require all the extra workflow hassles. It actually even looks pretty decent edited and output from an iPad. I know, sacrilege to even mention that footage that's not raw and is edited with an iPad might be acceptable, but to my ol' eyes, it's pretty dang close.
  12. Ah! Ok. Vaguely remember that. Been awhile. ;) No matter... I'm about finished with sharing test clips anyway. Just figured I'd upload a 2 or 3 for others considering this camera. I know it was so difficult to find anything to judge it's image quality by, so I thought I'd pay back a little. Also, trying to figure out a combination that's as minimal as possible for taking on my next travels. Will be carrying backpack so I need to keep it sparse. Carrying a portable audio recorder, Sennheiser ME66, a very compact but sturdy tripod, the D5300, maybe a couple small LED lights with collaps
  13. I'm not sure why the Vimeo version is only displaying a SD resolution and not even a 720p version like the last one I uploaded. Am replacing the file now, just out of curiosity.
  14. Second compilation of test clips using the Nikon D5300, standard profile, at 60p with old Nikkor Full-Frame 35-105mm f3.5 lens. Acquainting myself with the new Final Cut Pro X 10.1 as well, so all handheld clips stabilized with default settings, mild grading, vignettes added to last clips, conformed to 23.98, and all slightly sharpened. Vimeo version with download enabled here:
  15. Matt: Based on what you have now, I'd agree it's time to upgrade. But, I wouldn't recommend my setup. The MBP 13in doesn't have a fast graphics card. I was just using it as an example regarding my comment about not investing in more than you really need right now. I'm only playing with short-form stuff with the D5300. When I move on to my longer, feature-length projects I'll be upgrading my hardware. If I didn't want to keep my main machine mobile, I'd go for an iMac. More bang for the money. Chrisso has a good point about never buying the first new product until the early adopters shake
  16. Personally, I think it's a mistake to be thinking in terms of "future proofing". The reality is, you simply can't do that anymore with anything. The manufacturers across the board have completely adopted a model of planned obsolesce. That's with computers, cameras, etc. If the investment in your gear isn't showing an immediate return on that investment, you're foolish to spend any more than the bare minimum of what you really need right now. Now, if you've got the money to blow and you want a lighting fast system that will allow you to create more, faster, and give you more free time
  17. Another thing I noticed about 3rd party batteries and the D5300. Figured because the most recent firmware updates to the D5200 and P7700 compact to make them compatible with the new EN-EL14a battery, made 3rd party batteries useless after the update. I have a couple of normal 3rd party EN-EL14 batteries, one MaximalPower and the other is a no-name generic. Both of these batteries work fine in the D5300. I'm assuming the firmware in the D5300 I received just yesterday is the latest since Nikon doesn't list any D5300 firmware on their site at the moment. Here are the two 3rd party batter
  18. Here's the Vimeo version. Unfortunately, you can't even download a 1080 version with a free account. Here it is anyway:
  19. My D5300 late today, but I managed to get a few clips shot. I'm just getting re-acquainted with FCP X, so there's not much done to these except for conforming 60p to 24p. No grading or sharping. First test clips from my D5300. Didn't have much time so I tried to check several things out at once. Wanted to see 1. how the 1080 60p conformed down to 24p 2. How well I could focus on the fly by the LCD 3. how well the lens VR worked to stabilize 4. how it looked with no sharpening or grading I had a D5200 for about a month 2 moanths ago. I can say that although on paper it's not that much sma
  20. Matt, looked again... replayed about 10 times and didn't see it at :53. Sure you're not talking about the little bird that flies through the shot, left side of roof in shadow at :54/:55? I do recall sharpening up my D5200 a fair amount in-camera when I had it. Always looked good and never any artifact or over-sharpening halos as long as I didn't go too far. In practice would just sharpen in post. It's looking good so far. Thanks for testing and feedback!
  21. Matt, I really don't see what you're talking about with moire. Can you tell me exactly what you're seeing and at what time mark? It looks fine to me. Regarding softness, are you sure you don't have a focus problem? Your footage does look a bit soft, but to me it looks slightly out of focus or possibly a back focus problem? Some on dpreview were sending D5300s back for focus issues. Your recent clip looks decent though. Regarding G6, yes... would get a SB, but possibly the cheaper copy-cat one as long as it has the clickless aperture ring. I've since seen plenty of compelling footage f
  22. It still looks pretty good. I saw some subtle color shifting/shimmering in the roof tiles that might be a nominal bit of moire, but didn't really notice it in the full res download. Mine still isn't here, but I'm starting to watch for last minute price drops on the G6. Was obviously a great deal when it was recently going for $500 here, but now all vendors are back up to around $750. Hoping there's some blow-out sales after the holiday. Matt, I know you got the D5300 primarily for the low light performance. Since you have both the G6 and D5300, can you tell if it's really all that muc
  23. Will have to look on another monitor, but I don't see any on my laptop screen at all. What shutter speed is this? Looks good on large plasma HD via Vimeo on Apple TV, though... it looks a little over-exposed. Otherwise looks pretty good. Just checked out the downloaded full res, looks good.
  24. Mine has been perpetually delayed for delivery. Was supposed to be here over a week ago, then delayed due to storms, then finally made it to Austin this weekend, but got delayed again for some reason. Likely backlog. Getting nervous about the purchase. Of the professional reviews I've read so far, no one seems to be raving about this camera... and most seem to favor the Canons, while admitting the Nikon has a better image. Thom just published his review of the D5300 today: http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/current-nikon-dslr-reviews/nikon-d5300-review.html Not too nervous since I have
  • Create New...