skiphunt

I'm playing with FCP X using a 13in MacBook Pro i7. I believe it has the same graphics card as the MacMini which is an Intel Graphics HD 4000.  If I was going to mess with raw data, I wouldn't even bother with this setup. If I decide to do anything beyond working with compressed footage, raw, or anything beyond some creative grading, mostly straight cuts or standard transitions, or anything beyond some basic compositing, I'd likely at least sell off the MBP and get the most recent MBP with the GTX750 card. 

 

Mine with the HD 4000 card and the Mac Mini won't run Black Magic Resolve. I've read the brand new 13 inch retina's card will run Resolve, but it's extremely slow and glitchy. 

 

Really depends on what you want/need to do. At the moment, I have no need for anything beyond what I have now. If I launched on trying to edit a complete feature on my own, I'd certainly get the newest 15in Macbook Pro with solid state drive and maxed out RAM... at minimum. Or, a maxed out iMac similar to what Matt is speccing out. But, for the creative storytelling and/or art pieces I'd like to do more of, there's no reason I can see that I really need anything more than what I already have. 

 

I've read rumors before about possible external video boxes that could handle most of the graphics load externally via thunderbolt connection, so that you could theoretically do high end work controlling it from nothing but a stock Macbook Air. Seems I saw a proof of concept rig that they claimed worked, but I don't recall anything ever getting announced or making it to the market place. Has anyone else?

I advise you to wait a couple of days. Now we have FCP X 10.0.9. Within the next two weeks, the new MacPro will arrive, and a new version will be sold, 10.1. 

 

If Apple continues it's policy - an update is free, an ungrade isn't - you paid full for an obsolete, non-updateable software.

 

And I doubt very much that it just adds the ability to use multiple graphic cards. The wish lists sent to Apple are long, and some things really should be done.

 

One thing rarely discussed is the possible integration of CinemaDNG. I know it's wishful thinking on my part, but it's not sooo unlikely, given the fact, that FCP X could play back CDNGs from the start - if only as image sequences in the timeline, with the duration of each frame set to "1". 

 

With tiny mpeg2 or mpeg4, the 'philosophy' of hot-swapping external Thunderbolt-volumes would be close to pointless. With having to encode ProRes proxies from raw in Resolve in order to access them for editing the simplicity of the FCP X workflow is gone.

 

I haven't bought it yet, and was thinking the same thing, ie. a new one is about to be released in conjunction with the new Mac Pro. But, usually Apple at least includes free upgrades to those who just bought the app within 30 days. 

 

Haven't bought the app and have added the cash to my Apple account, but figured maybe I'll just play with the trial version for 30 days and wait until the last minute to actually buy FCP until it the rumored update. 

 

The only thing I've worried about is they'll increase the price and I won't be able to get it at $299 anymore. That being said, I think even though some folks who edit all the time don't seem to like FCP X for some reason, I think it's absolutely brilliant and is the most intuitive editing app I've used to date. Will be happy to buy it right now, but would prefer not to have to pay for an update too right off the bat. ;)

 

To answer Matts question... I've betting the Mac Pro won't be a wise buy until at least the initial bugs get worked out. Apple notoriously gets early adopters to pay a premium for the latest release while having to also deal with all the first release bugs. I'd get a solid 27in' iMac now, or a hopped up laptop in my case... and wait for the rough edges to get smoothed out on the Mac Pro.

That's funny, I've been redoing my setup recently too. Only, I went the opposite way. Got tired of maintaining 2 systems, ie. laptop AND a 21.5 iMac dual monitor setup. Thought about just upgrading to the 27in iMac and getting rid of the Macbook Pro... but I do use some of the portability. I also like being able to have everything on one machine and do regular backups. It always seemed there was something I forgot to move from one machine or the other, etc. 

 

So, I just sold the iMac and bought a 27in thunderbolt display. My Macbook Pro is the 2.9 i7 13in that I bought a little over a year ago. I like the setup, very much but I may sell the MBP and get a refurbed 15in in a few months instead for the faster graphics card and retina display. 

 

The 27in thunderbolt has a hub built-in so I've got internet wired in for more speed, there's a Firewire 800 port, so I have my externals daisy chained, into the back, as well as a graphics tablet, etc. 

 

There's one split cable that comes out that I plug into the macbook pro for power and signal. I was using in clamshell mode, but now have the laptop on a small stand and use it's screen as a second monitor. 

 

The 27in also has another thunderbolt port, so I'll likely buy an external thunderbolt solid state that I'll use exclusively for anything video. Everything else will stay on FW. 

 

I like being able to sit at a large screen, have two monitors, have wired internet, etc. Then, just unplug the laptop and pick up where I left off somewhere else. I'm also running an app that makes quickly unmounting everything from the desktop easy (Jettison). No need to connect and reconnect all my peripherals, drives, etc. because they stay hooked up to the monitor. 

 

When I come back to the desktop setup, I just plug the cable back in and boom, I'm instantly back to a large monitor with a second laptop desktop screen and all my peripherals are available again. 

 

Haven't been doing video stuff in a long time, but I used to use Final Cut 6 for cutting short TV spots, and a few longer form things. Never was crazy about FCP, but it was what everyone was using at the time. 

 

Was planning on buying FCP X, but have read so many negative reviews from so-called "pros" who claim it's not good enough because they changed it too much from FCP 7, etc. But, I've read enough actual user reviews who aren't crusty editors stuck in their ways... that implies that FCP X may be just the perfect editing platform for me. I downloaded the 30 day trial to make sure it'll run ok on my MBP, and played around with some editing until around 2AM. Decided I freakin' LOVE FCP X now! It made perfect sense to me. I didn't even read any instruction or watch any tutorials other than the intro videos on Apple's site to get an idea where everything was. I'm definitely buying it. 

 

Tough call on the iMac vs MBP. If you never take it away from you... even to carry into the living room to continue using it while you're watching a movie, etc. then going dedicated desktop iMac 27in makes more sense. Faster and more stuff for around the same money as a moderately specced MBP.

 

So far, I'm liking what I have set up now. After adding a thunderbolt solid state drive specifically for video use, and possibly upgrading my MBP to a faster one in the next year, I think it'll be the best of both worlds for me.

I wish them the best, but they are awfully late to the party. I'd love to try one though.

I was thinking the same thing... and almost abandoned even following their progress. However, their dedication to pure aesthetics beyond the pixel peeping obsessions you find on many forums... along with what seemed to be a fairly modular build, ie. could be easily updated without having to buy a whole new camera... make me think they might be worth keeping an eye on. 

I'm torn on it. What I've seen so far, indeed looks like a faithful reproduction of old bolex stuff... just trying to decide how much I actually like that look, and how much is simply nostalgia. The specs look like a sweet spot for me, and the price is not much over reasonable. 

 

When they initially promised under $3k, I thought it was a fair price. Now, at $3500ish... it's still fair I think, but will need stellar reviews and confirmation there aren't serious bugs to work out before I consider pulling the trigger. Been following their progress though, and looking forward to user sample clips. 

 

Have to say, it just felt right in my hand for the 15mins I messed with it. They told me they were working on a follow focus to be built-in at the place where the film crank was. Doesn't look like that happened though.

I'm surprised I haven't seen any forum chatter about the Digital Bolex D16 cameras. It's more pricey than what I want at the moment, but I did hold a prototype at SXSW2013 and was VERY intrigued. Felt good in the hand, good weight, and I personally think 2k is plenty res. Also liked what appeared to be a more modular approach to the camera. 

 

Anyway, I just noticed that they're shipping to the original Kickstarter backers now and they're taking pre-orders for the next 500 after Dec 16th. http://www.digitalbolex.com

 

What do folks here think about them?

Take a look at this...

 

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/12/08/the-last-d3100-d3200-d5100-d5200-and-p7700-firmware-update-killed-third-party-battery-compatibility.aspx/

 

- Third party batteries banned for use in D5200 and others

- Absolutely no mention in the change log for firmware update

 

I think that's an absolute disgrace not to mention it in the change log for the firmware update.

 

Imagine if you had an important shoot coming and then suddenly none of your batteries worked any more.

 

Again this will upset more customers and turn away more customers from Nikon than it will gain them in profit from genuine battery sales.

 

And I am sure they will say they did it for safety related reasons, so I must somehow be missing all those horror stories of third party batteries damaging cameras or setting fire to kittens. Bad bad third party batteries.

They did the same thing at the same time to the P7700/P7800 compact. The firmware update rendered 3rd party batteries useless. However, I did read some were able to reinstall the previous firmware so their batteries would work again. Still, kinda disgraceful. 

 

I did just buy a D5300, but I'm in no way a fan of Nikon or their practices these days. They really don't seem to give a flip about their customers anymore.

Thanks Andy! Cool! But, it's a bit hard to just the camera image underneath all the FX. ;) But, I can see enough in the sepia cuts, that the G6 is certainly capable. Looks great, and thanks for the sample!

This is my test shots on G6: 

 

 

Thanks! I'd actually already seen some of your test shots when I was searching for stuff shot on the G6, but hadn't seen the final piece. 

 

I should have a D5300 in the next couple of days and believe I'll be mostly satisfied with it for my needs, but I'm still intrigued by the G6. It's going for about $500US now, and from your video and other's I've seen, it might be worth getting in addition to the D5300 for no other reason than being able to play with a MFT camera with a speed booster or one of the knock offs. Has anyone here compared the knock-off speed boosters with the pricier Metabones one?

 

Your video looks excellent, and proof that I'd be plenty satisfied with the image a G6 can produce. Glad it was suggested to me by Matt, and thanks again for the sample!  

Skin tones depend on how you light them - Ive spent 15 years shooting girls in pop videos and its all about the lighting getting good skin tonesand the diffusion too ,

I do use alot of 85 (orange) with Lee diffusion on my lights this makes the skin warm , then dial in your colour balance manually until you hit a colour temperature with a colour you like - its very simple really !

I dont just shoot on AWB ever!! or preset daylight ot tungsten , dial it in on each shot and you will get nice skin tones!!

thats why its called colour temperature and on skin tones its very important

 

Hey Andy, do you have a link so some videos you've shot completely with the G6?

Interesting. Thanks Andrew! I already ordered a D5300 that I can return for 45 days, but I'm thinking I may keep it and add a small/stealth GM1 or G6. Considering the G6 does 60P and is $250 cheaper... do you think the image quality of the GM1 makes up for the extra cost and features it lacks from the G6?

If you have someone you want to be with (and I mean this in the simplest way), why would you leave?  My wife and I share few interests yet I'm always happy if she's just doing her thing and I'm doing my thing and we're in the same house.  Can I, or anyone, have both? 

 

 

I have this with my wife, and wouldn't trade it for the world... but, still trying to have both. If I was pushed to have either or, I'd take what I have now over anything else. That, and the MOST important thing of all... good physical & mental health. :)

I doubt the D5300 and D5200 sensors are identical, but they're are likely close enough. Just ordered a D5300 last night. Figured I already have speed light strobes for the Nikon, remote, trigger, batteries and chargers that should work, no need for expensive adaptors, etc. And, I can return it up to 45 days after I receive for a full refund. That gets me well into January in case something else amazing drops before then. And, I think ultimately... the pure image is very good from this camera even though it has many strikes against it in terms of features, ergonomics and function. 

 

Still intrigued by the G6 and it's MFT peers class though. Very interested in Andrew's shootout, and if the price drops any more, might pick up one of those after the first of the year as well, when they're blowing them out.

The more I read on Thom Hogan's site about product decisions Nikon makes, the more I'm tempted to sell off all my Nikon stuff and never look back. What happened to that company? I used to be proud to say I was a Nikon user. Now... not so much. I say that although I've been shooting mostly Nikon for about 30 years now, I'm no longer a "fan boy". Just looking toward who's got the image I want for the price I want to pay, with the least amount of back-end workflow. 

 

When it comes to the "art" of what I want to do with it, all of these cameras in this price-range are so very close these days... I'd rather put the peeping goggles down, stop shopping, and get on with it. If the last decade of history is any indication... there'll be something that blows all this stuff away within the next couple of quarters anyway.  ;)

The video above has really nice colours, and when I first watched it I thought of some of Brandon's twilight shots. Colour rendition in low light is something we haven't discussed here really. I think the Nikons probably win there by a long stretch - that matters to me. 

 

I'm surprised you're not finding the resolution of the Panasonics better though. It's always hard to judge online, but I always find them to be by far the sharpest of the low-bitrate cameras. Personally I think the video above looks quite soft (which I mainly put down to compression and him using a kit lens for some of it).

 

Can't you ask that store you want to buy the camera from to get one in for you? Perhaps even a G6 and a 5300 to compare? A lot of shops here would do that.  :unsure:

 

I thought the same thing regarding Brandon's 5D3 twilight shots. It's not that I don't find the Panasonics sharp, it's just that fine lines, like the cables in the referenced video above (about a minute in) shows that it holds fine detail resolution well. The Panasonic footage, though sharp looking... doesn't appear to hang on to the finer details as well.

 

The place I want to buy from is a big-box store. They show all of these cameras "sold out", but I think it's basically BS because they want to clear out as many of other models during the holidays as they can first. Though, they do have the 70D in plenty of stock... so, I'm not sure what's up with Nikon and Panny stuff. They have plenty GH3s and D5200s, so I'm guessing they're trying to blow as many of those out as possible. I really don't know. 

 

Didn't want to get into why I'm trying to buy from a particular store, but my wife is getting it for me as a birthday present. She wants to put it on Best Buy account, for the reward points, and the fact I get 45 days to return, as well as 18mos no interest. ;) If I was buying it myself, I'd likely already have something in hand. Though, I don't really need it immediately anyway. I'll need a good week or so to get acquainted with it, and maybe a short shake-out trip to make sure it's going to do the job on the longer trip. Would just like to get something in hand to start familiarizing myself with by the first of the year. 

 

Looking forward to Andrew's shootout and will likely make a decision based off that.

 

Truth be told, ultimately... any of the cited options mentioned in this thread would be within my stated parameters and would likely work just fine for my needs.

The first really nice footage I've found shot with the D5300:

 

 

Well... that looks pretty good to me from an $800 camera in low light. All the fine lines appear to be resolving very well and the subtleties of the twilight colors appear to be rendering nicely. Do you think the G6/GH3 would resolve the fine detail and pastel twilight as well as is exhibited in this video?

 

I sure wish someone would loan Andrew a D5300 for his shootout instead of the D5200. Haven't seen that much from the D5300 yet, but so far it appears it may not exactly be a D5200 with 60p. Looks like there were some changes made with the sensor that could be considered improvements. All speculative still. Though, I have to admit... from the descriptions I've read of the way the G6/GH3 handles, along with the lens mount flexibility of MFT, it sounds like those little G6's are considerably more pleasant to work with. Yet, I have yet to see fine detail resolving power in any of the G6/GH3 clips I've seen online... except perhaps the video Andrew did between the G6/GH3. That video, especially in the exterior church detail shots.

Haven't abandoned the D5300 since I haven't found anyone reviewing it from the aesthetic of a cinematic perspective. And, there are a few users complaining about focussing issues. The D5200 I tested for a month was capable of very good stills and spectacular lowlight video. However, I can't say it was a pleasure to use. 

 

I'm after the best low-end, low-light image I can get (under $1000) and the D5300 would likely deliver. However, this idea of a MFT G6/GH3 with MB has me more than intrigued.

Only one shop in town has it in stock, and I know I'm not buying from them... so I can't just go and test if I know they aren't getting my business. Personal ethics I guess.

 

I was impressed with the D5200's resolution and felt the image up to 6400 was quite usable from the test clips I made during the month I had it. I also thought it did a remarkable job with stills. Was actually more or less satisfied with it only I wanted 60p too. 

 

The GH6 and metabones option is interesting though. When reviews between the D5200 and G6 claim they're very close... I don't see it. Could be bad test footage, but what I see from the D5200, just looks to have much better low light and resolution performance. What am I missing? 

 

@Matt... you offered to send me a password to see some of your G6 footage. Would like to see some if you don't mind shooting me a private message. Do you have any using the metabones adaptor with Nikon glass in low light?

@Matt... dang you for putting that Pana G6 w/metabones idea in my head! ;) Been reading up on the G6 and am thinking your suggestion was a fairly good one. The samples I'v seen between the D5200 and G6 look as if the D5200 out resolves it and the D5200 just looks tighter and better at high-ISO. However, the user reports rave about this G6 and say it's no comparison. 

 

Sure wish I could find more definitive info on the D5300... but the G6 metabones combo you suggested has definitely piqued my interest.

Just found this on Thom Hogan's site regarding the D5300 and Df sensors: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/sensor-changes.html

When I reviewed the D5200 it was indeed the best camera for the money in terms of low light performance.

 

Not any more. The Pocket Cinema Camera with Nikon mount BMPCC Speed Booster is.

 

A lot has changed since last year.

 

D5300 is a known quantity. It's a D5200. With 1080/60p.

 

Same image. Same features.

 

I already tried one out earlier in the thread and closely compared the codec and image with the D5200 and convinced it's the same. What more do you want?

 

It just doesn't excite me. There's now a big gulf in image quality between cameras like this and cameras like the BMCC / Pocket with ProRes or 5D Mark III with raw.

 

The D5300 isn't even that hot as a video all-rounder. The GH3 and G6 have better features.

 

That's my opinion. You can take it or leave it. D5300 might make sense for some of you. I can accept that. You are all welcome to talk about the D5300 here, analyse it, that's what the forum is for.

 

But please no more dragging the thread off track by lambasting me for having a different opinion or different focus on the blog. I shouldn't have to take crap from people for not validating your potential purchase and not singing the praises of Nikon when actually they're not really offering anything significantly new. When they have something genuinely a leap forward from their old model I will buy one and use it, then there will be an article.

 

"Lambasting" you for having a different opinion? "Take crap for not validating..." Seriously? Where do you see that? The poster you just quoted even went over board telling you he respects your opinion and isn't trying to "convince or confront you"?

 

 I think pretty much everyone here knows very well that you aren't interested in any way shape or form, in the D5300. And very aware that your opinion is that it's not an interesting option. Well, sorry... but some of us haven't come to the same conclusion and don't yet share your opinion on this. And, if you include stills performance as a feature defining an "all-rounder", I'm sorry but the GH3 and G6 don't quite stack up in that arena. 

 

Just reread several posts, and I'm quite baffled at how you think anyone here is giving you any crap or disrespecting you in any way. If anything, it's the opposite. We all have a good deal of respect for your opinion. Otherwise, no one would ask for it or even visit this site. You have to accept that some people, with different needs than yours, are going to sometimes disagree with your opinion. I can't speak for everyone here, but it appears that most of us have accepted that you don't share our interest in the D5300 and likely never will. And, I think we've moved on from even expecting any actual data-based critical discourse from you at all on the matter. I know I sure have. 

 

 

Just read his comment where he says that the image is extremely soft, noisy and moire/aliasing is everywhere with the 70d.

 

I'm looking forward to what Johnnie Behiri at Cinema5D.com does with the D5300. From what I've seen so far, he does very good and seemingly unbiased reviews on gear there. And, it appears from the viewpoint of a budget minded indie filmmaker/journalists.

Maybe we should create something fresh on vimeo instead? Or, perhaps there's already one? Or, rename the D5300 vimeo group that Matt already created to be for general Nikon video? That way, we won't have to worry about troubling those uninterested on this site with our Nikon-centric dialogue.

Just buy one from Amazon, return if it you don't like it. I am sure you will love it, judging by this thread so far.

I don't really need it until after the new year, so getting the points and extra easy return time is worth waiting a little more.

And, I had a D5200 for a month so I'm sure I won't "love" the D5300. I found it awkward to shoot with & didn't like getting out of live view to change aperture, or the lack of headphone jack, or the useless AF. But, I did think the image looked amazing, and incredible in low light.

Was hoping the image from the RX10 was better in low light, and didn't look so sterile. I'd seen other clips from it that looked sharp, but not organic or cinematic. Then I watched your footage from it, from a cinematic aesthetic, and although it looks technically good, it still looks like TV news clips. I'm sure amazing work can and will be made with it, but it's image simply doesn't excite me at all.

The most impressive low/mid-end cinematic images I've seen have been from the BMPCC & 5D3. It's just I don't want the extra workflow & storage requirements, etc. I've also paired down my current computing power to a 13in MacBook Pro & thunderbolt monitor which won't even run resolve. I don't want to buy a new computer at the moment.

For my present needs, ie. great image that my current equipment will handle, low storage requirements, good lowlight performance for shooting alone on the road via backpack & no extra light, 60p, and capable of doubling as an excellent stills camera as well (since stills is mostly what I do: http://www.kaleidoscopeofcolor.com/galleria/ + http://skiphunt.carbonmade.com + http://skiphuntphoto.com ) and light weight without the need for a rig. Seems the D5300 meets all of those needs. Though, I really wanted the RX10's all-in-one solution or the massive video flexibility of the GH3 or G6. I just don't think the low light performance or stills resolution of those other options will satisfy.

I'm really not a pixel peeper at all. I know creativity trumps all gear leverage. I've seen amazing cinematic work from an iPhone only. I just think poor low light performance and low DR limits your choice too much. And, although I'm one of those who actually likes a bit of noise in some situations, as long as it mimics film grain and doesn't mush up detail or become distracting.

Given all that, would you still be considering the GH3, G6, RX10 if you were me?

Andrew, you seem a bit sensitive. You've misinterpreted my post. I DO think you share my aesthetic. You just don't share my particular interest & needs. Nothing wrong with that at all!

You are excited by new, innovative, cutting edge gear for independent filmmaking & don't mind dealing with a cumbersome raw/prores workflow. You also appear to have more gear, computing, and financial resources than I do.

I'm looking for something low budget that will give me a great low light image without all the extra gear, hassle & expense. My posts are not directed at you, nor do I harbor any wish for you to evaluate the Nikon gear. You've made it clear that you have no interest in the D5300. That's your prerogative.

I posted today asking a specific user who said he ordered the D5300 & expected it on the 27th. And he said he was going to test with the ninja. Instead, someone else derailed the conversation with a bunch of claims about "nasty noise" or something like that.

Is it not acceptable to get honest feedback from other users on your site who share interest in particular cameras even if you don't have any interest in said cameras?

 

FWIW: I've given up on waiting for 3rd party data/reviews on the D5300 and went to buy one today. Unfortunately the shop I want to buy from is still trying to blow out stock of D5200s so I'll have to wait a bit more. The fellow over at Cinema5D appears to be interested in the D5300. Hopefully, he'll get a chance to run it through the paces before I buy. But, if he doesn't, I'll buy one as soon as it's available and report back here what I think of it to those interested. 

I don't think anyone is criticizing you dude. Some of us are very interested in the D5300 but having trouble finding a reviewer who shares our cinematic aesthetic to put it through the paces.

I became interested in the D5200 first as a result of the impressive work Brandon Li did with it, then secondly after all the shoot out clips YOU did with it. I just wanted a lack of FPN & 60p. Unfortunately, you're not interested in the D5300 enough to verify & so I'm looking for someone who is. That's not a critique on you or EOSHD. If I didn't believe this site was a good resource with a great community of like minds, I wouldn't waste my time visiting or posting here.

The GH3 just dropped in price by $300, the RX10 looks to be a great all rounder, but without an organic cinematic look. The D5300 likely produces a very clean, detailed image at high ISO and may have eliminated all FPN, but nobody seems to know for sure. Trust me, I'm very much tired of looking into it. As soon as I can pick up one from Best Buy where I get 45 days to return, I'll just pick one up myself & be done with trying to find a serious reviewer who cares enough to give it a thorough look.