stokstad

If you go for desktop, it can be good to check which graphic-cards are supported by adobe premiere for real-time rendering of effects.

I would recommend to get atleast 16bg DDR-ram and a proper graphics card (not only a integrated one). The 15" macbooks are good because they get alot of use and have a big community of users. They are expensive though. FCP is probably a good starting suite, very easy to learn and good value in my opinion.

I would look out for the Nikon D7200 announcement if you are looking for a good hybrid. It will most likely have a much smaller feature-set than GH4 for video but instead be a better stills camera and have great lowlight capable 1080/60P like the D5300. One could hope that it packs a aperture lever, larger buffer and a 7fps raw frame-rate.

M43 is a economic/technological compromise that makes many wonderful things possible, but Its not likely to be considered a real alternative to full frame professional still-cameras in quite a while. What me and I think many others want is a solid performer like the 5d or D800 that has an equally professional approach to video as the GH4 has. That camera is the future for journalists.

Great work with the tests, its the best way to learn. Interesting to se how they handle colour different in shadows. My guidelines for doing tests like this is to start with trying to get the best out of each camera in the same setting. I would try maybe three ISO values for each camera in lowlight and compare. Then do sharpness and DR at ISO 100 in daylight with like f8. Then I would do a static, indoor portrait shot around ISO 400-800 at around f2.8. Then, since I do docu, I would do some handheld walking shot with movement and going from dark to bright rooms etc, I would look how the camera handles under and overexposure, how it retains detail and noise in shadows. The last step is key for run n gun where you don't want to change exposure during the shot. The Nikons DR has proven useful in those scenarios because they don't just clip to black but gives slight detail and provides orientation for the shot. Then I would go to the pub and drink two beers, tell my friends what I did and have them laugh at me.

They released a D800 beta, thats awsome!

As it stands now: The D4S will probably be a really fun and flexible camera to shoot with! Imagine flawless, sharp 1080/60p from a full frame with good ISO 25600! And for many of us docu/journalists the small filesizes are actually really handy, I would not want more than ProRes LT for that kind of work.

If I was gonna guess like the rest of you: Nikon has a dedicated video-team that works with improving video-features as much as possible without affecting ANY still-camera functionality and almost no manufacturing price. Thus we can see every new iteration from Nikon improving in some video functionality and quality, but it will probably continue to be smaller improvements like this. Sooner or later Nikon will have to invest in their video-department because more of their customers will get both photo and video-work and someone will offer an true hybrid pro-solution (M43 is not good enough). Atleast I much prefer it to how canon does it, and it means that even the cheapest cameras will get all the upgrades (that does not cost money). Nikon must have a few brilliant video-engineers because the quality coming from their latest cameras are really good.

Yeah I think in the end no one profile will be best all the time. Im learning at what ISOs to have what contrast to get the most DR but still not have to tweak too much in post. And also what colour you like the best. In low-light it seems the codecs will benefit from not having to much noise to deal with in the shadows, so more contrast might give better image and detail even in the shadows (they will be darker but cleaner and more discernible) from what I can tell with the D800. I think the whole notion of flat should probably be considered an aesthetic choice more than a workflow choice when working with these 24mbps codecs. That said, the dynamic range of these cameras are really good and we don't want to waste actual detail, we just don't need that detail REALLY bright, its fine if its a bit darker and sublte. What I meant with standard profiles (which was a dumb choice of word) was the Nikon profiles the camera comes with. Slight tweaking with these will likely yield very good results. I like both portrait and neutral, each with different saturation and contrast setting. But having contrast on 0 (the default) you can really tell Nikon has chosen that setting for best results in higher ISOs. The Standard profile is a bit to punchy for most situations, even with the contrast dialed down max its like the "0" setting of neutral or portrait. Aslo: many Nikons seems to produce a greenish tint, I have therefor adjusted my WB-settings just a tad towards magenta.

Nice, which profiles did you use on this? On the D800 Im starting to use standard profiles again to avoid noise in shadows.

The whole point is that the D5300 has them all. We just need to conclude that the D5300 has alot going for it, and it has a lot going against it. Whats important is different for everyone, but just because a camera doesn't have a new gimmick or special innovation doesn't mean its a bad camera. Actually, I quite dislike this whole "special feature" approach, since it seems that it lets cameras without 25 or 24p off the hook just because it has good stabilization. What are we gonna do with that? We need balanced gear and often the weakest link is very important. D5300 doesn't have a really weak link in IQ, its quite good in every regard, and thats why some like it and why its offering something new. I think we all agree that its good and bad in some remarks, and what remarks are important are individual.

Im not saying Nikon is not behind, Im saying they are going forward. The canon crop-sensors have been the same for 5 years. Nikon is improving with every iteration. They are really slow on giving features that seem easy to implement though. So yes, what I think is that Nikon who is not focusing on video will be behind in terms of functionality and may not be the best choice for pure filmmakers, but I think they will stay moderatly relevant to the hybrid shooter. I don't want to give Nikon anything. Im just making a prediction of what I think is going to happen. A more precise guess would be this: Nikon announce a 4k Nikon 1 in 2014. In 2015 they announce D900 (or something like that) with 4K (probably UHD) to FF sensor. In terms of functionality its harder to say, if they decide to keep video as a bonus they might just go with the same style as of now for quite a long time. As long as they offer large sensor and good image people will probably still use it if they own it for photo. Personally, I like DR, low-light and large sensor better than sharpness in m43-size. Thats why I like the Nikons better than the GH3 right now. If the GH4 will improve on DR and low-light it might be a really great camera and will also be great for dragging along the competition, but its not out yet and we should not embrace it before we know. What I can say right now: The Nikon D5300 gives the best image I have seen in such a cheap camera, and is clearly not the camera that proclaims the death of DSLR, that one would be 550D number 25.

A review written in the heat of emotions rather than actually trying make any sense. Nikon is actually improving the video on every update they do to their cameras, and while not great in functionality yet, now offers the best picture you can get for the price. They are making progress, and their making it affordable. This makes me optimistic about nikon dslr. I think in max two years nikon will be offering 4k fullframe with VFR, histogram, peaking, great DR and some sort of 10 bit 4:2:2 HDMI out. It will be interesting to see what the new D4s bring, it might say something about where they are going, but might also be a big dissapointment. I suspect the latter, and that D5 and D900 iterations will bring the progress. So, while I agree with many remarks in your review, you are not really making any sense at all in the general sense. On flaat: In general it seems that the nikon cameras benefit greatly in DR from lifting the shadows a bit with a profile. It does not alter the colours in the midtones or highlights more than very marginaly, just taking away some contrast which is easy to get in post. I have made my own set of profiles for the D800 which I think have better colour than flaat10 and 11, but actually the flaat11p beta profiles are the best ones I have tried. Really nice pop and colour in the darker gradients while keeping the midtones and highlights a bit compressed. If someone wants to try these profiles with the d5300 just send me a message at edvard.stokstad@gmail.com