Andrew Reid

*Shakes head violently, and wants to give up on life*

I've re-written the review based on ScreensPro's suggestion:   ***   The undoubted highlight of the camera is the Baby Photo Mode which produces optimised, colourful JPEGs of your children for uploading to Facebook, though one major downside of the camera is the inability to make calls on it and upload directly to Facebook, it does include WiFi. Of less interest is 1080/60p, which is good for that 'smooth home movie look' but is really designed for slow-mo. Unfortunately slow-mo requires very expensive and complicated editing software like Adobe Premiere. The D5300 benefits from not having 10bit 4:2:2 or ProRes because you can store a year's worth of heavily compressed footage on mum's iMac from 2008 with a 120GB hard disk.   *12 pages of in-depth scene mode coverage*   Conclusion...   The D5300 is perfectly suited to making shitty home movies with because it lacks any kind of innovation whatsoever.   The Super 35mm Toshiba sensor is completely wasted on a low-end camera, but it shouldn't bother THE FAMILY MARKET, the main target of this camera, and therefore top marks 10/10.

Let's follow that RIDICULOUS logic through shall we... oh man... it makes my blood boil. You've got to be trolling right? I'll start writing reviews of DSLR video modes based on the family market and whether they would enjoy shooting Facebook videos of their kids with it?   EOSHD is a filmmaking site. It doesn't take much to put two and two together does it??

ScreensPro. I am not writing for these f***ing people OK? Get a clue.

  The Pocket workflow for ProRes doesn't require a greater outlay in anything aside from fast SD cards.   You can grade it in Premiere like DSLR footage and even just put Film Convert on it.   If you mean raw than yes I agree with you, it does invite a lot of time spent grading in post and a lot of storage space.

I've used Flaat picture profiles and also CineStyle before and I never liked the results 100%, felt that a small bit of extra dynamic range comes at the expense of colour and tonality.   Feel free to show me some examples in your next post Matt and I'll revisit this.

There's a lot of things the GH1 was doing in 2009 that are far better than Nikon are doing in 2014 with the D5300, which is kind of laughable. The hacked GH1 is over 3 years old and ranks just 2 places below the D5300 on my video quality charts from earlier this month.   The D5300 is of course much better in low light and has a slightly larger sensor. That sensor is the best thing about the D5300. The rest is so middle of the road.   I don't deny that sensor gives above average video and certainly very good stills for the money, therefore you can get some lovely results from it.

  True for video and this is a video site. So you see why the D5300 gets harsh marks.

Then don't watch this...     Shot on GoPro :)

Review now published - '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>   Please post further discussion on that thread.   Cheers

Original music by Berlin electronic act Herdwhite - see more on iTunes 9b1ac465df855a9bc029756b08a6a8ff >Join EOSHD on Facebook - we broke 10,000 likes and counting yesterday - thank you everyone I’ll start this review with a parable. It is a parable about an old man, who fell asleep... Read the full article here

I felt the same way you do about the D5300, when the GH2 came out, so I understand where you're coming from. The D5300 does have an attractive price and it gets the job done. But seriously, think about the future and where things are heading. Wouldn't it be far better to wait until after NAB and to see what else is on offer? Even if you end up having to push towards the $1999 range or get the GH4, it would be money well spent in my book.   Want Super 35mm, 1080/60p, good low light? Consider GX7 with Nikon Speed Booster or a used Sony FS100.   Also I'd question why so much importance is placed on Super 35mm sized sensors, 1080/60p. Good low light I can appreciate more and the D5300 certainly has that.   I think when people see the review, it might be divisive and start a few arguments... Remember it is just my opinion and what works best for me might not necessarily be right for you, so consider your own views ahead of mine.

Great stills, indeed. It has a superb sensor for that.   But taken purely from the perspective of video, it's all very 2010.   The $799 doesn't really excuse it from being so low on innovation either. For this you can almost get a Pocket Cinema Camera and a much more cinematic image. Or you can get a more video optimised mirrorless camera with more features.   The D5300 does not even enable me to properly mask off the LCD to 16:9, that's how little thought Nikon have put into it for video.   OK say you have $1999 to spend in total. If you're not too serious about video you might be happy enough spending $799 on the Nikon and spend the rest on lenses. But in light of the upcoming GH4 it makes no sense to invest in the D5300. I understand well that $799 might be the budget and nothing more. In that case, get the older D5200 for $400 and spend the rest on a lens.

I am still quite unenthusiastic about it to be honest.   It's all a bit 3 years ago.   Why aren't you guys putting your $799 towards a Blackmagic Pocket Camera or GH2 instead?

Review is coming tomorrow!

  Yeah I prefer the 2x anamorphic bokeh too. Way more dramatic. At the beginning I tried pushing SLR Magic this way, to give us the full 2x, but they wanted to do the 2.39:1 thing. Understandable really, as 3.55:1 is quite extreme.

Not sure about royalties. They already have AVC H.264 MP4 in the camera, and H.264 already forms the basis of AVCHD, a Sony & Panasonic standard.   Unless you mean they have to license the Quicktime MOV wrapper from Apple? Maybe they have to pay a small fee for that but there's nothing stopping them from using MP4 as now at a higher resolution and bitrate than 1440x1080 / 12Mbit.

So if Nikon site PR says it does good movies, it does good movies. What do you need EOSHD for max??!

No plans for a Nikon guide at the moment, sorry!

Added bulk of Speed Booster? The SB is smaller than the standard Nikon adapter. The Nikon 50mm F1.4 is similar size to Nokton 25mm F0.95 when paired with Speed Boooster on the GH3.

Honestly guys this percentage breakdown thing is ridiculous. If you're a shit shooter accounting for 20% of the overall look, your overall look is going to be zero percent good not 80% good thanks to a camera and set of lights.   And if your camera and lens looks horrible and can't deal with the scene or the light, then even a good shooter will struggle.   Back to the original question of why some cameras are more filmic than others...   It's a combination of some key things but not exclusive to this list only -   Motion cadence, 24p Dynamic range Colour Compression and codec and the effect that has overall especially on grain texture Lens   If your right brain loves the D600 then it's probably due in part to the footage and the way it's shot, also the sensor size and lens used. Because nothing else in terms of the D600's image is more filmic than the GH3. It has more compression, more weird digital artefacts, more moire and aliasing. It's just easier to make full frame look like film because of the lovely rendering of optics at that sensor size. GH3 needs fast optics to really shine.

If the Anamorphot looks too clinical, pair it with a taking lens that has some soul like the Trumps. Edwin's footage looked pretty good on full frame with the Zeiss. Also bear in mind it's a $899 anamorphic not a $3000 Iscorama. And the flare heavily depends on the light you're using to flare it with. A lot of LED lights are actually multiple bulbs and they don't create a nice flare at all.   Everyone is entitled to their opinion :)

  Ignore! That screen shot is compressed and over sharpened to hell - just look at the 4K motive, icon (not from the camera) in the top right.

It's actually 100% the shooter, 100% the editor and 100% the camera :)

Sony have taken their Alpha re-think to the NEX 6. For video it looks like an interesting alternative to the ageing NEX 7, adding a 16:9 screen, zebra, dedicated movie mode, new sensor and uncompressed HDMI output. It also points to some of the new features we're sure to see on the NEX 7's actual successor, the A7000. Read the full article here