Andrew Reid

@ Andrew Lings - You did ask something which was answered very clearly in the first half of the article. Not being rude just asking you to be more diligent before asking questions as it takes me a lot of time to answer a bunch of them every day!   Now hopefully we can go back on topic.

  It does share the same image processor and sensor, yes.

Hmm I don't agree that in every shot that is the case. What happened to the 5D Mark III at 1.25? That bit baffled me and I shot it!

  I'd be upset if a $700 was this close to the $3000 one for video as well!

  You are right but there are other shots where they resolve the same levels of detail.   Not sure why that one is the way it is - maybe the codec on the Nikon got stressed out or something.

HDMi is still at the exploratory stage, and companies like Atomos are doing the same as we are. They might be able to update the firmware on their device to get 24p from the 1080i feed.

  It isn't an excuse. I don't need one to give Canon a hard time.   Facts speak for themselves. 5D Mark III is $3000 and D5200 is $700. Look at the video. They're giving similar results.   I don't shoot with a flat profile on a DSLR it doesn't make sense. You trade important stuff like gradation, good skintones and colour for like ONE STOP extra dynamic range, and increase noise especially in a low light situation. It isn't worth it. Both grade similarly and have similar dynamic range - in the daylight shootout you will see that.   Clean HDMI on the 5D Mark III doesn't yet exist so until that day comes you're just speculating as to what it might be like.

  Please read the article before asking obvious questions.

  Appreciate some of your comments but it is clear I have a different opinion when it comes to Canon, price and image quality! I have physically tested the 1D X and I have seen a lot of original video files direct from the card, plus other people's very valid and comprehensive comparisons to the 5D Mark III and I still don't believe the image is that different. Maybe a very slightly better way of handling highlights and a different look to resolution when viewed very close-up but nothing to warrant the extra $3000. For you the extra seems worth it because of the better build quality and weather sealing. Not denying it isn't a nice camera but I have better things to spend $6000 on, especially since the Blackmagic Cinema Camera has the better dynamic range, smoother gradation, better colour, finer noise grain, less compression and much more creative workflow for half the price of the 1D X.   Canon do indeed have a whole lineup according to budget, it is just that the budget end of it is rubbish. Whoever is still shooting on a 7D, or 600D for example could be getting a better image for the same budget price tag from any number of rival cameras such as the GH2, GH3, D5200 and D7100. The budget Canon range still has some advantages but the video image is not one of them I'm afraid.   The upgrade path is crazy expensive too. It goes from the $1000 range pretty much straight to the 5D Mark III at $3000 - that's a lot extra for the 'little guy' as you put it. Then it doubles to $6k then doubles again to the 1D C level. The game has changed under $3000 now with the Blackmagic and a lot of strong budget DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

  I disagree about not being able to judge picture quality from the raw footage but what you see here HAS in fact been graded quite heavily. What do you mean by 'not that similar'? To the 5D? It is very similar. Grades about the same - 5DtoRGB or not!     May I draw your eye to 1:00 on the shootout? Yes that is moire on the 5D Mark III shot - centre top - it twitches a bit towards the end of the shot. The D5200 actually has slightly less.     It's a real pain we've had to wait over a year for something that should have been in there in the first place. If they are going to start disabling stuff and reenabling it later maybe I can 'disable' part of my payment too and give them the extra money when it is de-crippled at some unspecific later point.     You're wrong.     You're wrong.

  All the footage in this shootout is graded in Premiere with the fast colour corrector and digitally sharpened.   As I said in my review, the D5200 grades well for a DSLR. Of course it is a world away from the Blackmagic's raw or ProRes but then so are the C300 and 1D C and they are $15k and $12k.

  The D5100 wasn't usable because it lacked manual control of shutter and ISO in video mode. The image was poor too, with moire and aliasing issues. Not much better than a $200 GF1 really! Now the D5200 is a different league even though the body design and ergonomics are pretty similar.

  You're right. GH2 and GH3 still the resolution kings. Though the D5200 and 5D Mark III do sharpen up nicely in post. They need a bit of makeup.

The GH3 has some major advantages that the D5200 lacks.   Wait for my review...

http://vimeo.com/60135187 Let's pit the $700 Nikon D5200 against the $3000 Canon 5D Mark III and see which one comes out alive.  

The Nikon D7100 is here and appears to be based around the new sensor and image processor of the D5200 which is proving rather good at video so far. Whilst the D7100 gains a dedicated movie mode and headphone jack, it has a few things that may disturb video shooters.

  I don't read his forum. It sends me mental.   The ProRes is slightly better but the main issue is that it is 30p in live view, and drops to 720p if recording to the card. So no 1080/24/25p over HDMI from this camera until Nikon sorts it out with a firmware update. Might be possible to get 24p from the 1080i output but this needs more testing and possibly firmware updates from Blackmagic and Atomos as had to happen with the D800.

  One small problem with that test. Micro Four Thirds Speed Booster doesn't exist yet.

  Not tried JuiceLink.   It outputs the audio via HDMI so that is a solution.

  Great first post Sanka, welcome to the forum.   It is good to know some M42 lenses focus to infinity with the standard M42 to Nikon adapter. I'll get an adapter and try my range, as I have quite a lot of M42 glass including the Zeiss Flektagon 20mm F2.8 which is one of the best full frame wide angle lenses in my opinion.   I am a big fan of the Contax Zeiss stuff, it is just a shame it does need a modification of the mount to work on Nikon F.   The medium format stuff is very heavy and quite large and I once had the Zeiss Distagon 80mm F2.8 - it was pretty soft but as you say, good for organic looking portraits.

Have you tried setting HDMI to 1080p instead of auto? When I do this I get a true progressive feed but it is 29.97 frames (30p) even though the camera is set to PAL / 25p.   What about trying it in NTSC and trying 24p from 60i?

Nope. Nikon glass or Leica R fit.   Happily the Nikon AI/S stuff is not expensive and is very nice indeed.

Scaling and compression don't help either. I think the 8bit is only the main source of a banding problem when you grade heavily. (But don't mention that to Bloom!)   JPEGs are 8bit but usually have much smoother gradation.   The fix - well more of a bandaid really - is to add dithering or grain to the image.

  I can vouch for that. 1080/60p at 50Mbit is cleaner than the ALL-I 24p mode. It could be that the much higher bitrate on a per frame basis is allowing the codec to store more noise in the original output.

  Same issue for now. 29.97p progressive signal when set to 1080p. Not experimented much with it set to Auto or 1080i yet but the 24/25p seems elusive to me.   Could be a firmware thing on the HyperDeck / Ninja.   Find it strange that the camera, though set to PAL, would output a HDMI signal in NTSC. Maybe it is a firmware bug on the camera or some kind of compatibility issue.