New Nikon D5300 with Expeed 4

[Danyyyel]

Samuel conclusion is that it is the highest DSLR. My only problem is his measurement is a more strict meaning of DR. Ot is like saying that every part of this DR is 100 gradable (I don't know how to explain it better). While the normal Dr test is Everything that can be recorded from black to white exposure. At those two extreme you have part that you can't grade/manipulate/post process heavily. Lets say you have dark skin person in a very dark room, you cannot expect to get like a beauty shot style from him if you don't expose correctly and the same goes for a pale skin in a very bright part in the same scene. While his measurement is more like this. I don't know if my explanation is remotely clear. That is why his measurement is a lot lower than general test.

 

For me I like to at least get both because the normal Dr is more standardise so that you can get a better comparison to most other camera and closer to normal filmaking. Where highlight will blow and shadows will crush or else things become a bit unnatural like HDR imagery.

[skiphunt]

I can say I'm happy with the D5300 personally. Handling is awkward and I wish it had focus peaking as well as being able to change the aperture without backing out of live view, but I can accept those faults for the pure image quality. 

 

No, it's not as nice as some of the raw stuff I've seen, but it's close enough and doesn't require all the extra workflow hassles. It actually even looks pretty decent edited and output from an iPad. I know, sacrilege to even mention that footage that's not raw and is edited with an iPad might be acceptable, but to my ol' eyes, it's pretty dang close. 

 

Quick audio question... I bought a Sony PCM-M10 recorder. I know, for dslr stuff I should've got something with XLR inputs, etc. but for what I want to use it for, I VERY happy with it. Just curious... what is the difference between recording with mic sensitivity set to high and backing off levels manually, with recording with mic sensitivity set to low and compensating with a higher manual level setting?

[Danyyyel]

I am watching Andrew test between gh3, 5d3, 5d3 Raw and Blackmagic pocket camera. I don't know if we can correlate it to Samuel H finding on Dvxuser. His finding where that the D5300 was about the same as BM pocket but lower than 5Dmark 3 Raw. While on andrews less scientific test the 5d3 Raw is lower than BM pocket ? I am referring to this comparison  https://disk.yandex.com/public/?hash=Le4Ee3Biq/a3jOphlYhqqvWPKrkIIj3Z7MAvPZbJ%2BME%3D between 5d3 and D5300 which looks like the D5300 has about 2 stop better highlight as in the Andrew test below

 

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11350/depth-test-5d-mark-iii-7d-raw-vs-blackmagic-pocket-vs-gh3

[Guest]

Please be aware that Samuel H's conclusion is based on me shooting some rather sloppy/imperfect test footage with Flaat 13, which from the little I've shot with it isn't very useable in the real world (ugly, blotchy noise). I've been getting good results with Flaat 11 though (will post sample later today hopefully). All I can say is the dynamic range latitude (perhaps not no. of stops) of this camera is way better than anything I've used before (I'm coming from Canon & Panasonic - haven't ever shot video with raw/prores).

 

As I've been saying all along, the fact that the D5200's banding is gone from this camera makes it very interesting. Grading and use of flat picture profiles now has much more latitude. For my money this is the best H264 alternative to the Pocket/5D raw available at the moment, for all-round image quality.

 

My DR test for Samuel below (downloadable in case anyone want's to do their own calculations). Turns out it was more like 1.5 stops ND rather than 3 (I didn't understand the markings on my fader filter properly):

 

https://vimeo.com/82195848

[Quirky]

I can say I'm happy with the D5300 personally. Handling is awkward and I wish it had focus peaking as well as being able to change the aperture without backing out of live view, but I can accept those faults for the pure image quality. 

 

To change the aperture, that's where the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/Walimex cine series lenses come in. For traditional SLR designs like Nikon, Sony A, Pentax and so on, none of which were originally designed with video in mind. (Neither was Canon, apparently, but they just got lucky with their later design, and that's a whole another story) One might also experiment with manual and legacy lenses with aperture rings.

 

As for the focus peaking, well, since the Nikon is a dSLR to begin with, and you'll have to rig it with all sorts of 3rd party shooting aids, anyway, you might as well go for an external monitor, too, a one with focus peaking built in. That'll also give you the option to monitor the audio track off the headphone jack in the monitor.

 

It's quite likely that you knew all this already, even before you decided to buy a dSLR for video, but just in case someone hasn't bought one, or thought of rigging his/hers yet.

 

Disclaimer: I haven't read through all the ten previous pages in this thread, so sorry if these topics have been discussed already.

[Guest]

D5300 Flaat 11 test shots. I'll try uploading a less compressed version later.

 

[Vesku]

Hi guys.

 

Nikons seems to have very good dynamic range and pleasing video with good colors and high iso performance.

 

BUT

 

If you compare Nikons with GH-line, 5D3 raw, BMCCP or C100, Nikons are so soft that they compete in different league. Like halfHD vs fullHD. Nikons has about 600-700 lines horizontal resolution and these other 900-1000 lines.

 

So it is like comparing 10Mpixel photos vs 20Mpixel photos.

[dahlfors]

Hi guys.

 

Nikons seems to have very good dynamic range and pleasing video with good colors and high iso performance.

 

BUT

 

If you compare Nikons with GH-line, 5D3 raw, BMCCP or C100, Nikons are so soft that they compete in different league. Like halfHD vs fullHD. Nikons has about 600-700 lines horizontal resolution and these other 900-1000 lines.

 

So it is like comparing 10Mpixel photos vs 20Mpixel photos.

 

I agree that the D5300 videos in this thread have looked soft, far softer than what my D800 outputs.

 

But check out the EOSHD comparison of D5200 and GH3 and you'll see that the D5200 perform similarily to GH3:

 

Hence, after watching the D5300 1080p video in this thread I'm left wondering what lenses these videos were shot with and if the focus was set correctly. 

 

And of course you can't compare it with C100 (which has 4k sensor for proper 1080p output) or 5d3 raw, but that's a whole different level of budget.

 

BMPCC, around the same budget though, has more resolution than GH3 or Nikon cameras.

 

I think you mean vertical resolution. 1920 pixels is the full horisontal resolution, which most of these cameras do resolve since they all read full horisontal lines but some of these above mentioned skip lines vertically.

I believe D5200 should perform somewhere close to D800 in terms of how many vertical lines the camera resolves and the D800 has been measured somewhere around/near 800 lines. I believe the GH3 is in the same ballpark, while BMPCC can do a bit better.

[Andrew Reid]

You need to sharpen both the D5200 and D5300 in post as it's too soft straight out of the camera.

[skiphunt]

I think Matts most recent test looks very good. Could be sharpened a bit, as could mine... but, I'm trying to find a balance of organic vs being too sharpened and digital looking. I've only had my camera a couple days now, so I'm still figuring out what I want to set the incamera parameters to, and how much to do in post. 

 

To be clear though, I'm not trying to emulate any particular look at the moment... just adjusting until I find the look I like. Some of you might prefer trying to get close to the sort of RED-camera-inspired very fine, high res footage... and there's nothing wrong with that if that's what you like. Some of the RED stuff is decent, some brilliant even, but most of it looks too cold and sterile to me. I'm looking for something different that I find aesthetically pleasing and doesn't call too much attention to itself. 

[Guest]

My D5300 is definitely softer than my G6, even with sharpening. I knew that would be the case before I bought the Nikon. I use the same, sharp Nikkor manual lenses on both so I don't think it's that. There may be some focusing issues in the first video I put up (cathedral thumbnail) but the more recent ones should be sharp (manual focus, z-finder, focus assist and usually f8-f11). It's not so soft it bothers me too much though - the D5300 is not mushy Canon-soft. I don't mind a little softness at all. I think with the good colours and DR it contributes to the film look (another discussion I know…).

I do wonder if the better DR has an impact on apparent sharpness though. No matter what I do in post, my G6 is always way more 'contrasty' looking than my 5300, which of course can to some degree give the illusion of greater sharpness.

 

Of course the other possibility is that 50p is softer than 24p. Not sure how likely this is but I'll get around to shooting some 24p soon to check.

 

My video above (Flaat 11 test) has a lot of noise reduction (especially the sunstar shot), and I'm still finding the right compression settings for vimeo, so that has probably had a reasonable impact on resolution. I'm going to replace it soon with a larger file, so please download it when I have and see what you think (I'll re-post). I'll give a detailed grading breakdown in the vimeo description.

[Danyyyel]

Hi guys.

 

Nikons seems to have very good dynamic range and pleasing video with good colors and high iso performance.

 

BUT

 

If you compare Nikons with GH-line, 5D3 raw, BMCCP or C100, Nikons are so soft that they compete in different league. Like halfHD vs fullHD. Nikons has about 600-700 lines horizontal resolution and these other 900-1000 lines.

 

So it is like comparing 10Mpixel photos vs 20Mpixel photos.

 

Nikons perhaps wen't for a softer look in the D5300 as they did with the D5200 compared to the D7100. As you can see in my blind test here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness . The sharpness of the D7100 is so close to the Panasonic gh2 that many did not commit and some got it wrong. Perhaps they want to differentiate there different model in some ways. We might see a D7200 shortly with near gh2 sharpness. Using an external recorder also gets even better sharpness.

 

Matt also has to see what in camera sharpness setting he is using because he was so afraid of moire that he said he would put the sharpness in camera setting at lowest :). My thought with my D7100 is that a setting of 2 to 4 was better on a scale of 7.

[Guest]

Nikons perhaps wen't for a softer look in the D5300 as they did with the D5200 compared to the D7100. As you can see in my blind test here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?310503-Nikon-D7100-vs-Panasonic-gh2-sharpness . The sharpness of the D7100 is so close to the Panasonic gh2 that many did not commit and some got it wrong. Perhaps they want to differentiate there different model in some ways. We might see a D7200 shortly with near gh2 sharpness. Using an external recorder also gets even better sharpness.

 

Matt also has to see what in camera sharpness setting he is using because he was so afraid of moire that he said he would put the sharpness in camera setting at lowest :). My thought with my D7100 is that a setting of 2 to 4 was better on a scale of 7.

This is true. Sharpness is dialled right down in all of my shots. But it is down already with Flaat 11, and I have added sharpness in post (though not much, around +3 in FCPX). I'll add more in the re-upload.

[Danyyyel]

To change the aperture, that's where the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/Walimex cine series lenses come in. For traditional SLR designs like Nikon, Sony A, Pentax and so on, none of which were originally designed with video in mind. (Neither was Canon, apparently, but they just got lucky with their later design, and that's a whole another story) One might also experiment with manual and legacy lenses with aperture rings.

 

As for the focus peaking, well, since the Nikon is a dSLR to begin with, and you'll have to rig it with all sorts of 3rd party shooting aids, anyway, you might as well go for an external monitor, too, a one with focus peaking built in. That'll also give you the option to monitor the audio track off the headphone jack in the monitor.

 

It's quite likely that you knew all this already, even before you decided to buy a dSLR for video, but just in case someone hasn't bought one, or thought of rigging his/hers yet.

 

Disclaimer: I haven't read through all the ten previous pages in this thread, so sorry if these topics have been discussed already.

 

The D7100 with a Ninja is like a wedding made in heaven. The Ninja is so small that it is less obstrusive that for example a Nikon Flash. Beside getting higher bitrate/resolution codec, you get very good peaking, false colour and zebras for exposure. It is not as good as my marshal monitor in terms of viewing angle and colour fidelity but for this you still have your in built monitor for colour accuracy. If they could get an loupe on it it would be a perfect evf coupled with the Nikons. The only thing that would really be needed is one of those bracket that would fix the mini hdmi cable securely to the camera.

[Danyyyel]

Image 1 and 2

[Danyyyel]

Image 3

[Danyyyel]

So I was doing some test from a side by side video from Oleg on Dvxuser between the Canon 5dmark 3 and Nikon D5300. What was striking is the difference in Dynamic range. As he is busy with work I could not resist to try and measure it. My first try was with lightroom but it seems that Adobe put a curve to protect highlight when using the exposure tool. 3 stop was a bit too much I thought LOL. So I went back to my test. This time I got a pluggin in photoshop that will move the exposure in stops. Again I am a bit amazed.

You can see some screen grabs with the histogram to compare exposure an clipping both visually and more empically with the histogram.

 

N0 1 The first one is the 5d3.
N0 2 It is the D5300 which I removed a little green so that it is closer to the 5d3 colors (better for seing clipping)
N03 It is the D5300 with 1.5 stop + exposure
N0 4 I graded it back to about the contrast ratio of the Canon (mainly black level) and put I think a little too much saturation.
There is a N0 5 is an earlier +2 stop exposure. But unfortunately I cannot upload more images and had to compress the heck out of them. So you will have to go and look at the Nikon D5300 images on Dvxuser.

My conclusion is that the D5300 has at least 1.5 to 2 stop better highlight than the 5D3. The first thing to note is that it clips less the green and blue channel. These two don't even clip with + 2 stop exposure in this scene !!!!!!!!!! Which makes the highlight clipping much better looking than the 5D3.

[Danyyyel]

Looking at Matt last video, I would say that it does look like this camera has some very good highlight handling. The second scene in particular with the sun light coming through the leaves. The highling doesn't seem to clip and you can clearly see the green colours and details of the leaves.

[Guest]

Looking at Matt last video, I would say that it does look like this camera has some very good highlight handling. The second scene in particular with the sun light coming through the leaves. The highling doesn't seem to clip and you can clearly see the green colours and details of the leaves.

 

That shot was a very extreme test. I exposed very far to the left to retain info in the highs, and then lifted the shadows - so the low noise of the 5300 contributes to the DR a lot here. There was a LOT of noise in the shadows of that shot (tree) and you can see from the lack of detail in the leaves that they have suffered a lot from noise reduction. I also bumped saturation up in the highs as far as it would go to get that green. So really it's a grading test of Flaat 11. Personally I wouldn't use that shot for critical work. But it's interesting that it was possible, and that the shadows didn't get completely crushed.

 

But having said that, I am finding that I can in general pull a lot of information out of the highlights, which is very nice.

[Vesku]

I made test charts of GH3 and Nikon5200. Nikon is actually pretty good and moire is minimal. Is 5300 sharper than 5200?

 

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/5118/nikon-d5200-topic/p24

 

Nikon horizontal lines with 30% contrast difference: about 700 and GH3 about 850.

 

I cant load any photos here in this forum. I dont know why.