Julian

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've shot virtually all of your Level cameras except the F5 and C500. I still think Epic color science was much to be desired. Range is great but skin tones are not there. If it was pure IQ/grade ability I'd put the F65 on top. 16 bit color / 8 k down sample is hard to beat. Just rarely used it because it's ergonomics stink and initially its work flow was cumbersome. I also think the F55 deserves a higher slot. If you shoot in 4k raw it delivers an incredibly gradeable image with global shutter and 16 bit color. 16 bit epecially with 4k cameras is a big deal as Epic tends to spread its butter thin so speak. The time I've wasted trying to get skin to look just right.
 
I had a GH3 and ditched it for a 5d3 because I found its DR too limited as well as its noise threshold. Sure it's sharper but the image, fleshtones, general color are no match for 5d3 IMO.
 
Eitherway, it's a cool list and definitely puts things in perspective when you see DSLR's knocking at the door of Level 1.

I know this is an old topic but I had to put my two cents in. The Go Pro cameras have gotten better and better over the years. The quality of video you can get from the Go Pro Hero 3 + (I do mean specifically the +) has gotten dangerously close to something that could be used along side other high end professional cameras. I personally have been using a Hero 3 + on a DJI Phantom with a Zenmuse gimbal and a pair of Fatshark FPV goggles to see what it was capable of. I have been mostly pleased with the results and feel that it could provide me an easy affordable way to add some aerial shots to the content I produce.
 
I love the protune mode and Camera Raw White Balance (although I do notice slight color fluctuations for some reason) and these are great additions for people who want to use this camera on a professional level. However, the major thing holding it back from being ideal is exposure control. I simply cannot understand those who cannot grasp the importance of this. If I am using this camera to simply document an experience such as surfing or skydiving, than sure... I love the idea of auto exposure. But if I am trying to meticulously film something on a professional level then I really don't want my exposure jumping all over the place. It gives it that distinct, "Shot on a cheap auto camera" feel and makes any serious color grading a pain. Anyone who does any sort of videography on a professional level can appreciate having full control over your image.
 
As much as I would love to have full manual ISO and shutter control (I believe the iris is locked at 2.8?) even a simple exposure lock that would let me lock it and dial it in with a slider via the LCD screen would suffice. This camera is so close to be something amazing and I do hope that they at least add these features into the next edition. 

Checkmate, Canon.

yeah and the other 40+ 4K imaging devices due on the market this year.. 

Was never expecting the lower price! No raw yet surprisingly

Uematsu-san said 4:2:2 sampling on the sensor, debayer, right through the imaging pipeline until the actual encoder, then it goes to 4:2:0.
 
Yes 10bit 4:2:2 over HDMI to your Ninja, which is how I intend to record 1080p on this beauty.

Thanks, I'm not the one to ask for magiclantern workflows as I have only used it once in that vid.
 
But I can tell you that the new .mlv module is very handy.
You can preview your files in camera and watch them on your computer with the mlv player.
So that is a big improvement over the old .raw format.
 
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7122.0
 
Regarding post-production workflow I always use the same.
I have a creative cloud subscription so I always use; premiere, speedgrade, and after effects.

no .....all shot in camera ....looks like real blood!! ......honest

Hi there, i have finished a Ducati Spec Commercial i have been working on. We shot it with a small crew of 3 people in two days. The whole promo spot was shot on the canon 5D Mark III with Magic Lantern Raw! I am really excited by what the magic lantern guys did. The raw is really great to work with and grading is a blast.
 
Take a look and tell me what you think:
 

 
Here the Vimeo link:
 

Sorry Andrew, but i've to insist. I want you to give the EM-10 a try for some reasons:

-The EM-10 shares the processor from the EM-1
-The same codec from the EM-1 (i know... isn't the best reference on codecs world)
-Small form factor (400 grams)
-PRICE! $699 body only (please think like you did on the very beginning of the EOSHD. I have no budget! It's all about indie filmmakers)
-And last but not least... It's not only 3 axis! M-IS (as they call it) already counts with the help of a digital stabilization mode making very similar to 5 axis in video mode.

Worth it? You tell me!
I live in Brazil, we hardly see some Olympus camera here... (The market is floated with Canon trash)

 

Just shot this with the mark 2 raw at high iso, quality is pretty good:
 
According to magic lantern forums, the 5d mark 3 is the way to go for shooting raw though.
It has better low light performance, and it can shoot full hd when the mark 2 cannot.
 
The only reason I used the mark 2 here is because it was what was available to me.
Really interested to try the raw on the mark 3, must be pretty amazing.
 
I don't see any reason why the mark 2 footage would look better, actually I assume it must be the opposite.
 

For home movies (sometimes even professional ones) I think this 3 or 5-axis stabilization feature is far more beneficial than superior  resolution.  You should go try one in a camera store to really get a sense how powerful this ability is for your movies.
 
Stable handheld shots without much effort?  That's incredible.  And your viewers will thank you as well.

Your situation screams Olympus E-M10 imo. It's cheap, nice form factor, great stabilisation.
 
Yes, it has downsides for video, like no 25/24p, codec not as good as Panasonic. But if you just want to enjoy filming the kids, I think the stabilisation is worth more. It's just pick up and shoot, you pretty much always have smooth shots.

A noble cause but Blackmagic have already done the same thing... with digital.

Thanks Julian, this is exactly what I was hoping would be the case. You gain a stop of light without increasing softness so to speak.

Not so strange.  Coke has embraced multiculturism in their marketing going back to at least the 1970s.  This is basically a variation on something like this:
 


 
...which were very successful ads here in the USA.  They represent people of the world but that's what makes up America.  Some people here forget that, which isn't too surprising since these folks, who will most certainly be right of center also get The Bible wrong and have a poor understanding of the "Founding Fathers" as well.  Everything is twisted the further you get to the right. 
 
But enough politics, Coke has a tradition here which the latest Super Bowl ad is consistent with and it was the prettiest ad for the whole schebang yesterday which will likely go down as one of the most disappointing Super Bowl commercial years ever.

Added the G6!

Show some G6 love Andrew! It's the real successor to the GH2. One of the most underrated camera's of 2013, it should get it's well deserved spot on your site of all places :) Why wait for march to put it in the list?
 
Not sure if it's logical to put the GM1 above the GH3. Maybe the GX7 should be in that place? The GM1 doesn't have 60p for example. No audio in- and outputs.
 
Also I'd say the D5300 / D5200 should be split. D5300 has 60p over the D5200, so I'd rank it higher.
 
Why is the RX10 rated so low? Is the quality worse than the 5D Mark II stock?
 
I think it'd be good to add a little bit of info to the list for each camera.
Like strong points and weak points (moire, resolution, framerates, in/outputs, peaking yes/no, etc).

Out of curiosity I made an ultra quick search for prices. In case anyone is interested, here's the chart. Please be aware that this can't be trusted blindly because I'm far from expert.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BweFGmvEN2CvRGZkYmFJVy1BOWc/edit?usp=sharing

 

Show some G6 love Andrew! It's the real successor to the GH2. One of the most underrated camera's of 2013, it should get it's well deserved spot on your site of all places :) Why wait for march to put it in the list?
 
Not sure if it's logical to put the GM1 above the GH3. Maybe the GX7 should be in that place? The GM1 doesn't have 60p for example. No audio in- and outputs.
 
Also I'd say the D5300 / D5200 should be split. D5300 has 60p over the D5200, so I'd rank it higher.
 
Why is the RX10 rated so low? Is the quality worse than the 5D Mark II stock?
 
I think it'd be good to add a little bit of info to the list for each camera.
Like strong points and weak points (moire, resolution, framerates, in/outputs, peaking yes/no, etc).

Minolta's are much cheaper in general, because they don't fit on dslr's so they are less popular than the Nikkors (that will fit on nikon and canon dslr's). I have a lot of them, picked them up for peanuts.
 
Advantage of Nikkors is that you can use them in combination with a speed booster on a G6. So if you are thinking about getting a speedbooster Nikon would be a better choice.

This combo seems to be the sharpest, even at f2.8.  I measured the actual squeeze of my Iscorama and it's 1.424, which works out to 2.53:1
 

 

£1250 per lens :) I was just extremely lucky. They are $8k each new. I'd never pay that much for gear. Never.

Has to be Panasonic. Andrew's silence about 4K GH rumours is telling.