kadajawi

There is no hardware decoding though. None at all, as far as I know. Even though 10 bit is widely used for the past 3 years there was no interest at all in implementing hardware decoding for it. Imagination Technologies (PowerVR) have finally implemented something last year, but I don't think there is a mobile chip that supports it. Let alone solutions for desktop computers. AMD _might_ be working on it. Which means all that 4K decoding will have to be done by the CPU, which will be busy enough anyway... Oh, and Premiere Pro CS6 seems to fail at 10 bit too. Btw., perhaps, well, hopefully what Panasonic does is use XAVC by Sony, which already has 10 and 12 bit support. I'd rather have camera makers agree on a common standard.

@skiphunt: Oh, I was talking about the stills part. As in... you shoot video in the profile that is ideal for video, and stills you'll shoot raw anyway (I hope), so the only point where you care about the profile is when you look at the photo on the camera. As long as you have an idea of how that preview translates to the actual photo you'll get (as in is anything over- or underexposed) you'll be fine. I'm still trying to figure out what profile is ideal for my camera... :-/ Normal with reduced contrast gives me ugly clipping in highlights, while muted with reduced contrast gives me massively bumped up shadows with tons of noise and banding.

Hm. Does it really matter what the profile is? I have set my camera to a relatively flat setting, and use that to shoot still too. Once it's loaded in Lightroom the photo completely changes, but I trust my Pentax enough that I have deactivated the preview after taking a photo. The screen stays off. That you have to switch out of live view to adjust the f-stop seems quite annoying, but I'm quite certain it's a technical limitation. If they would fix that, the production cost per camera would rise. Btw., I love what Wild Ranger has done with his camera. Watched it twice, rewinded a few times more. Is it going to be a short, or a feature film? The other videos posted here I have yet to watch, but it's clear that the D5300 can do great things.

Haven't watched the videos yet cause I an on my phone. Will watch later. I think there is some frustration cause the cameras come close to being perfect, but the manufacturer doesn't go the last step to make it perfect, Even though it is a small, easy step. However it doesn't make sense that the D5300 makes it. The D7200 should though. As for not being able to change the aperture in live view... Perhaps the motor for the mirror and for the aperture are the same. i.e. once the mirror is moved into position the aperture is too, with no way to change it. They would have to install a second motor for that, which adds cost.

I would not try to stabilise in PP, unless you shot your video at fast shutter speeds and if possible 50/60p. It won't look good. My choice would be the E-M10... I mean, do you really need 24p for a home video? 30p will be fine, makes it smoother (unless you live in an area where having 30 instead of 25p will give you problems).

@Quirky: It depends. Even with IBIS you should know what you are doing... I recon someone who's experienced with his glidecam or steadicam will get much better results from IBIS (without any rig) than someone who isn't... walking technique etc. is important. Completely naked, without IBIS, without rig the results wouldn't be good though. IBIS is great for those who want to shoot light... no rig, nothing. Just the camera, lens, that's it. Doesn't matter if you are experienced or not, without any form of stabilisation (be it a rig or IBIS) the footage will suffer. IBIS is great at filtering out fast, jerky movements, smoothing them out. If your footage has that, no matter how you shoot (say your rig still lets some jerks through), you will probably profit from IBIS. Bigger, slower movements won't be filtered out by IBIS. Now those jerky movements are one of the big things that make rolling shutter look ugly. I don't see the point in video on the 645D at this point either, except in grabbing headlines. Pentax isn't exactly the most experienced company in terms of video, and to get it right they'd need to do a ton of work. Especially for a product that is this expensive it has to be really good, or it is worthless. And I don't see Pentax as a company that can pull this off. @Danyyyel: Ahem, no. At least not for me. The point of this thread is that neither Nikon, nor Olympus, nor Pentax, have released a camera that goes all the way. They all have good hardware, that would be capable of good video, of being a serious tool. They can produce good video quality. But they are all let down by the firmware. It's like building a modern Ferrari, but giving it the "interface", the "controls" of a Ford Model T. You won't be able to get good performance out of the car. That's the frustrating part. They are capable of doing great stuff, they just won't do it. And it would probably be a minor investment to do so. It seems like Olympus is slowly beginning to understand, which is why they are working on improving the E-M1 firmware for video, where before their stand was "buy a Panasonic if you want video, it's our philosophy NOT to have good video". Nikon... maybe, they have invested in the video portion of the D5300, but the user interface/firmware seems to be a problem. Maybe by design, since they'd rather have people buy the upcoming D7200. Sony, Canon and Panasonic are clearly capable of "getting it right", but they don't have such a big interest in doing so (except for Panasonic it seems, and they do it), as they have more expensive cameras to protect. Sony is using the same processor in the a6000 as they use in the AX100, which IIRC is a 4K capable, XAVC S (which seems to be 10 bit h264?) using camera. Yet the a6000 does neither. Why...?

@Quirky: The K-r, K-7 and K-5 do IBIS, the K-30, K-50, K-01 and K-3 do electronic IS. And yes, it is like software IS done badly, because that is exactly what it is. The only advantage is that it seems to be working from a higher resolution stream. But it is really useless. From what you describe you have seen one of those with electronic IS. Feel free to click my links in #129. The K-5 IBIS works well, maybe on par with the E-M10, maybe a bit behind it (from what I have seen). Btw., at least the Sony a57 has a similar electronic IS, though it does work a bit better than what Pentax has employed. It seems to eliminate the rolling shutter problems better, but other issues with electronic IS remain. Especially the motion blur that appears and goes randomly with an otherwise stable video is really irritating. The K-01 was an interesting idea, but it made adapters impossible. In terms of balance it would have been great, if Pentax had released lenses specially made for it. Lenses that would extend into the mirror box, so that only a bit is looking out in front. But the flexibility of other mirrorless solutions is a big advantage. I think they'll stick with the Q series for now... seems to be doing well in Japan. There are rumors that the 645D II may get video functionality, since there seems to be a hole on it that looks like it could be for a microphone. Are they going after IMAX or what? The 645D has a 44x33mm sensor.

@Quirky: The K-5 did have IBIS, not electronic SR. And it does work well, IMHO. Not as good as the E-M1, but perhaps on par with the E-M10? It completely eliminated wobble and jello, you barely see any rolling shutter effect, unless you pan quickly. The main problem with IBIS was also while panning, that at the end of a pan it would bounce back. That could be fixed in firmware. In any case I basically never turn off IBIS in my K-5, and am very happy with it. Pentax was quite proud of the video functionality of the K-3, but yes, it's not their main priority. And they really screwed up by disabling IBIS. But: It's all just firmware. They could probably make the K-3 pretty awesome, if they work a bit on the firmware. @Andrew: You could include Pentax in your tirades against camera makers not getting it. ;)

Nice. :) Maybe I'm a bit biased though, cause I hope to one day own one of those. :D Few things I noticed: The music is way too loud during the interview, made it hard to understand the man. Also, the shot where the camera is mounted to the side of the car didn't match in with the rest... the look was different. Contrast etc. For some ideas maybe you can watch Top Gear (hey, you're from the UK, you're watching Top Gear anyway, right?). They are very flashy and skilled of course. For example Fzb6z6f0cbY on YouTube. Especially the parts starting at around 0:25, 1:40, 2:18, 4:15, 5:10.

I'm sorry, but you can forget about the IBIS of the K-3. Pentax has DEACTIVATED it. You can look at how great it works in live view, but once you switch to video it's electronic SR. You can't even frame properly with the electronic SR, cause you don't see the effect of it until you look at the file it has recorded. Which will look like garbage anyway, because the electronic SR is a jello/wobble amplifier deluxe. If you use fast shutter speeds that helps, 50i or 60i too. Also, the stabiliser gets confused when the camera is on a tripod, and the motive is actually moving. If a large enough part of it moves, it will try to stabilise that. It does not use the sensors the camera has. You will also, AFAIK always, even with deactivated stabiliser, get a crop. Apparently it is a feature in the Milbeaut processor, and Pentax has decided to activate that instead of using the sensor shift system. Hopefully at some point they will listen to users who say they at least want the option of being able to use the IBIS. Other problems: Focus peaking works. Until you start recording. Then it disappears. Bitrates max out at somewhere around 24 Mbps. 50i/60i instead of 50p/60p. To be fair, you can turn 50i/60i into 50p/60p with some postprocessing, but it would be nice to do that in camera. AFAIK no clean HDMI out. The AA simulation doesn't work during video, perhaps due to the noise it makes. That MIGHT be the reason why IBIS is also deactivated, but to be honest I rarely ever hear it on my K-5, and if necessary it is always possible to have an external, shock mounted microphone. The built in microphone, perhaps due to it having to be weather sealed, is awful anyway (on the K-5). A quick sample I shot at a camera shop where I wanted to test a bug with my K-5 and the DA 50 1.8 lens (the K-3 has the same bug). I was wondering why I didn't see any stabilisation at all, so I shock the camera quite violently.

Also I think that this is a site that may be read by camera makers. Such a review can hopefully result in the next camera getting better functionality. Or even a firmware update. What I got from the review was mostly frustration that the hardware is great, but it is let down by the firmware. For years reviewers have complained that Pentax didn't have a "record video" button and an easier way to access video functionality. Finally Pentax has implemented just that. People have complained about the AGC, now they have manual gain too, including a headphone jack.

I wouldn't be surprised, but why then do they want to improve the audio part of the E-M1? That only makes sense if they take video serious now, and want to improve. Otherwise they'd be wasting their resources now...

What IBIS needs though is CONTROL. Sometimes you want that shaky handheld look, and only want to have quick bumps that lead to horrible jello removed. Sometimes you need perfect stability. Etc. (For example having good automatic AF isn't that useful if you can't tell the camera what to do and how to do it). So ideally you can adjust the amount of correction, and the type of correction. A button that works like AE-L (exposure lock), but for the IBIS would be great. Basically when you press it you'll lock the position, and the camera will do all it can to hold that position, rather than just smoothing out. The camera also needs to be able to detect panning motion, so that when you come to a full stop from a pan it won't have to move back (again, a button to tell the camera you are panning would be nice). While we are at it, an overlay that shows the position of the sensor/the maximum range of motion could proof useful. That way we are able to balance out if the sensor is at the edge. Or we know if we are moving too much and have to cut back. In what direction we have to move. Etc. Something like a histogram, basically, but for the IBIS system. For run and gun shooting, which IBIS makes it predestined for, I think having white balance lock would be great too. To be honest I hope Pentax reads this thread too, as their cameras have IBIS, but don't use it for video (and they have other video problems, too, though they do have different frame rates). Btw., I'm not sure if Olympus is doing it, but Pentax lets you move the sensor manually when shooting stills. What is missing is position bracketing. Say you need a wider angle/higher resolution, you can - when using a tripod - manually move the sensor to the corners and later join the photos in Photoshop, PTGui, ... if the camera could automatically acquire the needed photos that would be great.

@Birk: Yes, they are not, but it would be an obvious next step. They have everything that's needed for it, they have a big name, and it would help them sell more lenses, more cameras, ... What would Arri have to gain from selling photo cameras? Their sensor isn't exactly meant for that, they aren't that big, and it is a crowded market. A good photographer can pick _any_ DSLR and deliver great results. While I might not be that good, I've done jobs with a 9-10 year old midrange Pentax, and noone said the quality wasn't good enough. I've done a shoot with the cheapest Sony DSLR from a couple of years ago. Again, no one complained (though it was a bit frustrating to use at times). DSLRs are, in terms of stills, so good these days that it doesn't matter which one you pick. The difference is in ergonomics, in build quality, in lens mount. And speed. Low light might be a difference, but not everyone needs to push it to ISO 51200. What's wrong with differentiating, with offering more than the competitors do? And don't tell me it takes such a great effort to create a firmware that can cope with more demanding videographer's needs. The Magic Lantern guys implemented a lot of great stuff without even working at Canon, without having the insights and ressources that Canon has. Anyway it's not just Nikon. Olympus and Pentax are just as guilty of not realizing the full potential of the hardware. And the weirdest thing is that at least Nikon and Pentax have put some effort into their cameras to make them better for video. Also it's a bit of a shame that Andrew ignores Pentax. The K-3 should have much better controls/ergonomics than the D5300, and it might use the same sensor and a very similar processor (though the D5300 seems to have an improved version with 50/60p instead of 50/60i).

I'm not so sure about there not being need for this. When I'm invited to a wedding the videographer hired to shoot it is usually running around with a Canon or Nikon DSLR. Other events too, it's always a DSLR. I guess because that allows them to use the same gear for stills and for video, and because of the quality. The job offerings for in-house photographers I'm currently looking at also often mention video... the companies want their photographers to also shoot product videos, image videos etc. Clearly then there is a need for cameras that do both. I think that Olympus, Pentax and Nikon seem to NOT ask videographers what they need. I mean, how hard would it be for Nikon to implement aperture selection in live view, or having a dedicated video mode where the frame is cropped? How hard would it be for Olympus to allow different frame rates and higher bitrates? Probably just a switch in the firmware... How hard would it be for Pentax to allow higher bitrates and activate IBIS... which is already there and works when the camera is in live view mode! There is not much R&D needed to activate features that are already there! Though it is appropriate that the consumer camera (D5300) does not need to cater to professional videographers. But those DSLRs that cater to semi-pro/pro photographers should go all the way. I think the D7200 will show if Nikon has understood it. Probably the same sensor and processor as the D5300, but an orientation towards more professional usage. Sony, Panasonic and Canon do know what is wanted and needed, but they can't fully commit cause that would canibalize their higher end sales. And the other companies just don't get it. Or if they are scared that the advanced video functions might confuse their customers, they can make it an option in the menu. Flip a switch, and it unlocks all the more professional video functionality.

Everyone forgets about Pentax... the K-5 had pretty damn good in body stabilisation. Not as good as the E-M1, but good nevertheless. It's a pitty that in the K-3 you only get that in Live View mode... not while recording videos. It's like there's a battle between these companies for who makes the most idiotic firmware for video. I haven't bothered to check, but is the AF in the D5300 actually good enough for mom and dad who use the baby mode? Cause I don't think they will want to manually focus... Then again, this camera is not aimed at more serious photographers/videographers, basically it's a happy accident that the video turns out good. However the D7200 should carry over all the video quality from this one, but in a more useful package. The point of shooting video with a DSLR... well, maybe it's because some people want to do stills AND video, and at least for some stills a DSLR is still better.

Great review. Actually you are describing Nikon, Pentax (the K-3 has IBIS, but doesn't activate it in video mode, while the K-5 had great video IBIS but didn't have manual control over ISO and shutter speed), and Olympus (the OM-D E-M1 which has amazing IBIS but only ever lets you shoot 30p). If only any of these camera makers could team up with Magic Lantern... they could make superb cameras for stills AND for videos. I honestly don't know what is keeping them from doing it. I disagree that DSLRs are dead though. You complain about the build quality and the buttons? Try a Pentax K-3 or K-5. Small, nimble, and very solid. And there's nothing speaking against giving a DSLR ProRes, Cinema DNG, 4K, ... whatever you want. Except for the camera makers not getting it. Btw., I wonder what image processor the D5300 has. Traditionally Nikon has been using the latest Fujitsu Milbeaut, but last time I checked that one seems to max out at 50/60i. Has Nikon made Fujitsu produce an updated processor? And how can it get these higher bitrates? Wouldn't that mean that just a bit of firmware fumbling is needed to increase the bitrate of cameras using these Milbeauts? If only we could make camera makers invest a little in video. And in features that matter. I still don't get how Pentax has given the K-3 a video switch and record video button (at the same time sacrificing the still camera abilities... the AE-L button was pushed to a corner which makes it harder to use, and the switch used to be used to select the AF points), and they have given it a headphone jack and manual gain control, and then they screw up everything else video related. It is as if they actually tried to produce a more video centric camera, but just had no clue what such a camera would need.

The AX100 seems to use the same BIONZ X processor as the a6000, so it's a case of keeping the a6000 down. The processor seems to be able to do 10 bit h264 recordings at high bitrates, it can do 4K, etc. Perhaps at least the a7000 will do all that... As for the Nikon... is it the same sensor as in the D5200/D7100? Then might also be used in the K-3...

This is interesting. If it is accurate, the 7D Mk II is going to get beaten up left right, up and down by the Pentax K-3 in terms of stills. The K-3 is just as robust, it can burst for 24 frames in raw, it has 24 MP, it is _always_ very quiet, and it is lighter and much smaller with at least as good ergonomics. It is as if Canon doesn't have any interest in APS-C anymore. @MysticPictures: Where can Magic Lantern move to? I don't recall anyone having had much success hacking Nikon firmware, and with that Pentax is out of the game too, as they use the same sensor (unless the Magic Latern guys can form some sort of partnership with either company). Same with Sony. Canon seems the most hackable, or is it just because of more interest in Canon? I think the main problem with the 7D Mk II will be Canon wanting to push videographers towards their Cinema EOS line. It just can't be too good for video, unless they are scared of the GH4 and need something to compete with it. Currently I think Sony is the most interesting company, thanks to their alliance with Olympus on the stabilizer and their BIONZ X processor. However except for their dedicated video cameras they haven't unlocked all the potential of that processor. They too have an interest in pushing customers towards their more professional outings. In that sense it is Nikon, Pentax and Olympus who could do the most, if they'd invest in video. There is no professional video/cinema camera they could canibalize. Pentax has good, Olympus great in body stabilization (though foolishly Pentax has deactivated it...), but they both claim they can't be bothered about video (then again, why has Pentax added a headphone jack?).

It's funny. Pentax used to have in body video stabilization since the K-7 (their first video DSLR, if I'm not mistaken). But their newer cameras, although all the hardware is still there, use some useless electronic video stabilization. The latest that still has it is the K-5 series... but that has other problems when shooting video. Problems that were fixed with the K-3... but the K-3 loses 80 Mbps MJPEG and in body stabilization. (Stabilization does work in liveview... go figure). To be fair the Olympus seems to be able to compensate more, making it much more useful (especially the rotation correction is way too weak in Pentax cameras). It seems like the next generation of Sony cameras may get the 5 axis stabilization too, though no one knows if they will activate it for video. But if it happens they could create some pretty awesome cameras (XAVC with 10 bit video and very high bitrates, 5 axis stabilization, perhaps PDAF, ...).