Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by skiphunt

  1. This camera looks VERY "usable" at 6400, especially compared with anything else under $5k. I tested the D5200 & found it totally workable, especially when using a manual lens. I'm not certain this one is for me, but after looking at Andrew's own testing of the D5200 against the GH3 (unless his testing was flawed & skewed by poor glass choices as some have eluded) the D5200 smokes the GH3 in low light. If the d5300 is a bit better with FPN eliminated, adding 60p, then it won't be any contest. The RX10 footage I've seen so far, including Andrew's, is sterile & looks like digital
  2. Did your D5300 arrive yet?! :) If so, have your tried the external recording, etc. yet? I get Andrew has completely dismissed this camera as nothing interesting and simply a D5200 with 60p. He could be right, but I'm thinking this camera has some surprises. I'm a little baffled how he could make a blanket statement like that from nothing more than dinking around with it in the shop and no real testing. No matter though. I'd rather read the impressions of someone who didn't already have a negative bias before testing. Can't get one here yet, because I think they are blowing out D5200's
  3. @Matt, the D5300 will exceed all the current options with regard to low-light low-noise sensitivity, and the stills performance. I still sell some stock images via exclusive contract. The stills from any of the options would likely suffice, but I'd prefer to have a bit more resolution for the stills. Also, the D5300 can serve as a backup to my current still gear and will also serve as a backup for my next still camera upgrade. The G6/GH3's are still viable options though. Good points against the RX10. But, I think ultimately... out of all the cameras cited in this thread... when it co
  4. Just found the first docu-narrative-journo piece using the RX10 in a few of the same conditions I'd be using it. Although, the footage mostly looks very good for an "all-in-one", the fellow who made it was less than thrilled with it's performance overall. His issues are related to what I suspected would be issues. Looks like another plus in the D5300 column for me. Here's the video: Here's his thoughts of the RX10 in real world use: http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=22136
  5. @Danyyyel, the reason I'm considering the RX10 is because the first project I want to shoot will likely be while traveling with a backpack in Mexico. Ideally, I'd prefer to have someone very talented shoot it for me and let them carry all the gear and play with all the raw/prores conversions, storage, extra gear, etc. However, the reality is... that the subject matter and project are of high-risk, ie. the content may be completely uninteresting to all but a few. This means, it's not likely I'd be able to raise the funds for a larger production with hired crew. I think I have an idea of an
  6. With regard to the skin tone in the sample above only... yes, the guys tone looks off, but the woman's skin tone is very good. If it were the camera's profile, both would be off... so, it's likely the guy just has an olive/yellowish natural skin tone (or bad makeup) the woman's tone is very lovely throughout so I don't think it's the Nikon to blame in this case. I don't think anyone here is implying that you can get the same level of control with as raw/prores. There's no doubt you can do amazing things with incredible control using the 5DMk3, BMPCC, etc. That's a given. But, for those
  7. First off... I don't see any "horrible nikon yellow" the skin tones look fairly accurate to me. Second, yes... a raw workflow certainly has it's benefits and is extremely versatile. For some of us, the gains are not worth all the extra time, software, storage, and computer speed needed to squeeze that extra range out. Yes, I'm sure for some of you it's worth it. But, for those who're looking for the best we can get without having all the raw workflow costs and baggage, the D5300 and RX10 are looking to be very viable contenders.
  8. Among the few excellent videos Brandon Li has made with the D5200, check out this short film made with the D5200 as well. If the D5300 exceeds this quality, at a low price point without the need for a tedious prores/raw workflow, loads of storage and fast computer, then I'll be quite satisfied with it. Check this out:
  9. Had a quick look at a few original downloads. Yep, for image quality alone... especially low light, I think it's a keeper. Can't get one at the shop I want to buy from yet, so I'll likely wait for Andrew's RX10 shootout before I pull the trigger. Glad my search is almost over. ;) FYI: You embedded the wrong video clip in your previous post. You grabbed the 700D sample instead of the D5300 ;)
  10. Yeah, I'm really torn. For me, the RX10 would be the "easy choice" that Andrew warns against LOL ;) But, for pure image capture in low light with the ability to use different lenses at a budget price... it's looking like the D5300 is hard to beat. Didn't download the originals, and heading out for the night in a few. But did you find any FPN or banding at all yet? Much better than the D5200 in your opinion?
  11. WOW!!! Those new low light samples that camerlabs.com did with the D5300 are VERY impressive. He did the same shots with the Canon 700D and there's no contest. The Nikon smokes'. Really curious how the RX10 shakes out. For low-budget, lowlight with excellent detail, the Nikon impresses. But, the RX10's feature set is also very impressive. Andrew's tests so far of the RX10 don't really tell me much. Will likely wait for him to do a more thorough shootout comparison with the RX10 before I pull the trigger on the D5300, but I like what I'm seeing so far from the Nikon.
  12. The RX10 is not off my radar yet. Haven't seen any tests or evaluations based on it's video performance beyond how well it would do as an all-in-one journalist package. The high iso performance for stills seems lacking at 3200 and above. The general look of the images, though sharp, has a sterile quality that I can't put my finger on... looks digital and not very organic. You mentioned getting one and testing. Looking forward to your findings as a potential low-budget, travel, filmmaking tool that doesn't require huge storage, or a tedious work flow. I'm not one of those who has to have t
  13. Yeah, I don't get that. Either we're the idiots ;) or the rest are too busy reading up on raw/pro-res workflows, pricing more storage and checking their bank accounts to see if they can afford a faster computer to handle it. ;) Let me know what you find out about the Sony ICDSX1000. I was about to get the little pcm-m10, but wondered about the newer one. Why are you considering that one ver the pcm-m10?
  14. Just finished. Good review. I've only recently discovered his reviews and they seem consistently fair and thorough as well. If you find out something on the high iso video tests to confirm whether or not banding/FPN or not? Or, at least significantly improved over the d5200. To be honest, I personally didn't find it all that bad with the D5200. I'd only ever manually focus in video mode, but it'd be nice to be able to use AF in a pinch. The full-time AF on this camera appears to be absolutely useless. Or, perhaps it's just that kit lens? I had the kit lens on the d5200 I tried out, an
  15. Yes, they do (RX10). With the Nikon I'm pretty much forced to a dual audio system. If the on-board pre-amps are quiet and of very good quality, together with having a headphone jack and level meters you can adjust while recording... that's something to consider for sure. It's really a shame they didn't at least put a headphone jack on the D5300.
  16. @Matt, I'm fairly sure I'll be going for the D5300. The only reason I haven't yet is that the store I want to buy it from (one that gives me 45 days to return) doesn't have them yet. I think they're trying to blow out their D5200 stock first. Since I have to wait... am keeping an open mind with the Sony. If it's on-board audio happens to use the fantastically quiet audio pre-amps that Sony portables like the pcm-m10 use... and I could even record wild/ambient sound independently with the camera as well (doubt it) then not having to carry a separate audio rig might sway me.
  17. @Danyyyel, I generally don't like the look of Sony... but I have to admit, I've seen some impressive work from those little RX100 compacts. I'll be traveling with whatever I get. Likely either via motorcycle or backpacking. I'm a still photographer from way back. Also, studied film and have a background in motion (though I haven't done anything in a long time). My needs are to be able to get great stills AND very good video that can at least be shaped into something organic looking, and not as cold and sterile as the Sony footage I've seen from the past. As much as I don't like the Sony c
  18. @Matt... I saw that earlier. Looks good except the background is doing something odd. Could be a distortion caused by whichever method he used to conform down to 24p. I'm waiting of for better testing too, but also eyeing the Sony RX10. There are a couple test clips on vimeo for an upcoming camerlabs review, but they don't show the low-light performance. The auto-focus looks as bad as the D5200 though. Don't get why some are dismissing this camera as not enough difference from the D5200... citing only the GPS and WiFi. Doesn't having 60p count as a significant difference? Does for m
  19. You'd include the GH3 in the "innovative" column? From what I've read, it's already being eclipsed as old news. And, it seems the RX10 would be THE "easiest choice" of the whole lot. Just haven't seen anything from it that even came close to an organic cinematic look... yet. Andrew, I get where your general interests are and appear to be headed. Don't blame you... the are some incredibly interesting things being done with anamorphic, raw, prores, magic lantern, etc. if you've got the patience and budget to keep buying expensive add-ons, rigs, storage, faster computers, etc. But can you or a
  20. Andrew, first off... thanks! Second, I already have 4 or 5 nikon lenses, want something low budget with exceptional low light capabilities for shooting on the road/backpacking, and don't want to carry even small LED light sources. Want 60p, the ability to shoot good stills, and articulating LCD. (don't really want to buy into a new lens system at this point), and don't want the extra hassle of a raw or pro-res workflow or heavy storage requirements. Would you still go for a GH2/GH3? Look seriously at the RX10? Or grab a D5300 and be done with it? - Body only here in the US is $799 retail
  21. Really looking forward to your findings with this camera. Although I certainly appreciate the amazing results people are getting from their BMPCC and Canon raw dSLRs, I really don't want the storage and raw workflow hassles. I too became interested in the low-cost D5200's awesome low light performance based on this site and Brandon Li's work with it. Though, it appears Brandon is firmly in the 5D3 raw workspace now with excellent results. Still, I bought and tested a d5200 for about a month. The workarounds for aperture adjustment, etc. were fine for me and the images is low light we
  • Create New...