skiphunt

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 video camcorder footage. Very sharp, but not cinematic looking at all. The guy at Cinema5D (Johnnie Behiri) is supposed to be putting the D5300 through its paces. Very much interested what his findings are as a working shooter.

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 for Black Friday sales and such. Looking for someone who's put it through the paces. Hopefully I'll be able to just go buy one myself and decide if it will suit my current needs. Would like to have whatever camera I'm going with before the end of the year. Am still considering the RX10 and now the GH3. Mostly interested in the D5300 over the other two, for higher res stills and better low light performance.

@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 comes down to the image itself in good and low light particularly, the D5300 should produce significantly better results.

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://***URL not allowed***/news/?p=22136

@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 alternate, hybrid way to go about it and creatively use some style that doesn't require the dynamic range of a raw/prores system. It may be that I can at least get a couple extra people to help, but I'm preparing for the worse case scenario, ie. that I have to do all the shooting and pay for it myself. This is the most likely scenario by the way. ;) So, keep in mind that I'll be working solo and carrying everything I need on my back including clothes, batteries, storage, etc. for at least a months time. Keep in mind also that I don't want to have to many variables that can go wrong. I want to know for sure I've got what I need without having to grade it first on location, before I move on to the next location. Also, I don't want to attract too much attention. I want to look as much like some tourist making a home video to avoid the usual questions regarding permits or looking so "professional" that it attracts thieves. I've narrowed it down to the D5300 and the RX10 for the following reasons. The RX10 is small, has a headphone jack and audio level monitoring so that I wouldn't necessarily have to use a separate audio recorder. Sony has long made small recorders with excellent low-noise preamps. I don't know if the RX10 incorporates excellent preamps or not. The RX10 also has a nice lens range for most uses. I've used a small sensor Nikon P7700 compact camera while traveling, and it's range of 28-200 was just about right across the board. Used on this recent moto trip: http://skiphuntphoto.com/moto-southwest-2013 With the RX10, I wouldn't need to bring extra lenses, it's got a click less aperture ring built-in, the image stabilization and auto-focus appear to be very good and accurate on the tests I've seen so far. On paper, this camera meets all of my needs. I practice, from what I've seen so far... the footage looks like it was shot with a video camera and does not have a cinematic, organic look at all. It's definitely sharp and pristine, and the stills look good up to about ISO1600, but the video stuff looks sterile and flat. It may be a talented colorist could pull more out of it though, but I'm guessing that smaller sensor is to blame. Still, it would make producing my project on my own so much more easy than doing it with the D5300 that would require a dual sound system, tripod for stabilization, and relying solely on manual focussing since it's AF appears to be nearly useless. The D5300 is attractive to me because it's only $800... I already have other Nikon glass and SB strobes... so far, it appears that the D5300 is capable of producing a very impressive detailed image in very low light, even beyond iso 6400. This means I'll be able to utilize natural light and reflectors more often than not. The D5300 also appears to be cable of producing an organic/cinematic image with the right lenses. And, it is certainly capable of producing very fine still images that I plan to incorporate into the project as well. Neither of these cameras will require I buy tons of more storage, a faster computer to process raw/prores files, or spend loads of time tweaking grades. Ultimately, I want to have the best possible image with the least amount of light, and have the freedom to stylize the look with a variety of glass. And have a kit that requires the least amount of extra computing power and storage. If I see proof that the RX10 can produce an organic/cinematic image that doesn't look like a very sharp digital video camera... then I'd have to seriously consider the RX10. My guess is that when it comes to the pure image in low light with detail and low non-distracting noise, with my stated constraints.... the D5300 will likely serve me better. I don't know the right answer to be honest. All I know is that I don't want to get distracted by all the extra variable that go into a current raw/prores work flow. I'm posting stuff here because I'm interested in those who pay attention to the pixel minutia, etc. all the time, to tell me I'm wrong, why I'm wrong, and what would be a better solution. So far, going by my own parameters and budget... it looks like either the RX10 or D5300 could work just fine. Which is great, because I'm looking forward to getting my head out of the pixel-peeping pool and out into the shooting world with whichever camera I pull the trigger on. :)

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 who're not willing to jump through the extra hoops, and invest in more powerful computers, software, storage, etc. not to mention all the extra time and money... then, I think some of the options like the D5300 and RX10 may get you plenty close enough for most real world projects without all the hassle.

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.

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:

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 ;)

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?

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.

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 the absolve shallowest DOF, and what I've seen from the RX10 thus far has been tolerable. Still on the fence, but I've already got some Nikon glass, SB600/800 speedlites, other bodies, batteries, etc. and if the high ISO performance of the D5300 is as good as the D5200 minus the banding and FPN, it would be an easy choice. Still looking hard at the RX10 though.

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?

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, and I found that my older 18-200 VRII lens did a much better job with AF and was considerably quieter too.

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.

@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.

@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 company of the past... I can't deny that their new cameras over the last couple of years have been impressive. On paper, the RX10 meets most of my needs. I'd rather stick with Nikon since that's what I know, but if the D5300 does not meet at least minimum expectation, ie. at least as good as the D5200's image, with 60p, and no significant banding or FPN, then I'll be forced to get something else. Also, with the Nikon I'll certainly have to carry extra audio gear. I'm curious... since Sony has made some very highly regarded portable audio recorders such as the now 3-year-old pcm-m10 among others, I wonder if that same audio tech made it into the RX10? The little cpm-m10 is supposed to have some of the quietest pre-amps of all the little portable recorders. Has anyone tested the pre-amps in the RX10 yet? With a good external mic? And, is it possible to record audio only with the RX10? The "easiest" choice for my needs is likely the D5300 and it's also the lightest on my wallet. ;) Unless the camera is earning it's keep immediately, it doesn't make sense to invest in expensive gear that will be eclipsed by the next gear-porn within 6 months.

@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 me. All I want is a good image, 60p, able to use my current Nikon lenses, and great low-light with at least a reduction in FPN. Also want great stills performance with excellent resolution. Haven't seen great stills performance from the GH3 and I don't want to invest in the m4/3 system. So that one's mostly out for me. Not crazy about the stills performance I've seen so far from the RX10, especially higher ISO, but it's not bad. Not crazy about being stuck with that one lens, although it may be all I really need. Leaning toward the d5300, since it mostly meets my requirements and is not expensive. But am still on the fence until I see some good test footage from both cameras. Was really disappointed that Andrew didn't feel inspired enough to test it, but I get it's not in his current line of sight and general interest. His reviews tend to be very thorough and fair in my opinion.

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 anyone else here recommend a site/forum that takes an intelligent look at the "easier" choices? I get the attraction to cutting edge innovation, but some of us simply want to get out there and rely on creativity rather than get lost in tiring/expensive workflows that could ultimately be obsolete in a year. When I saw what Brandon Li was doing with his little RX100 & d5200, it was clear that one need not get lost on the bleeding edge of "innovation" in order to make fine creative work.

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, so much less than 820 euros. Never mind. Will seek a less raw/prores/4k-centric site for info & tests. Thanks for the quick look-see though. Cheers

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 were very acceptable. I was content to keep it until the D5300 was announced and I really wanted the 60fps too, so I returned to d5200 to wait a bit longer. If the d5300 at least matches the d5200 for low-light and eliminates the fix-pattern noise, I'll likely pick one up and be done with it for now. Also very interested in the RX10 for travel stuff, etc. but all of the samples I've seen so far have such a cold digital look to them. Nothing I've seen so far looks like it's capable of anything organic looking at all... even with skillful grading. Still considering that one too though. Glad you're having a quick look at the d5300 and am anxiously awaiting your findings. Thanks!