Nikon D5300 Review and why DSLRs are dead for video

[Danyyyel]

According to Chipworks, the D5300 deploys a Sony sensor:

http://chipworks.force.com/catalog/ProductDetails?sku=NIK-D5300_Pri-Camera

If indeed it is a Sony sensor then Sony should be hanged by the foot. If they can already do moire/alias free photo APS size sensor and just deliver turd on turd moire/alias galore camera, they should be the one to get the wrath of abuse from the dslr community.

[Danyyyel]

Well, it's not unusable. I actually really enjoy using it, particularly when I have plenty of time and my subject matter is not of the run & gun variety. 

 

My use of the word nightmare is partly an attempt to bridge the gap between the polarizing that, as you say, is going on here. I don't want to get in a Nikon vs Panasonic war. I'm really just trying to talk from an objective point of view. If the people here who have problems with the D5300 feel the need to use words like "nightmare" to describe the design of the Nikon, then I'm happy to go along with that in order to establish some middle ground. It is really annoying to shoot video with compared to a Panasonic. But it's a bloody DSLR, not a mirrorless! Andrew just hates mirrors, and he's picked on the D5300 to show that yet again. Personally I agree that the future of low budget filmmaking cameras is in mirrorless, but at the moment there is not a Panasonic camera that matches the D5300's image.* Yes they are sharper, but low-light, DR, colour, S35 sensor, organic image all add up to an image that for me is sometimes more appealing than for example my G6. But ultimately that's a personal thing. I just like the 5300's image a lot. But I do wish it had peaking, a histogram, zebras, aperture control in LV, autofocus that doesn't suck, buttons in the right place, an EVF. But at the end of the day it's what's on the screen that matters, and with practice and perhaps a few add-ons you can shoot whatever you want with the 5300. It's a bloody brilliant video camera. 

 

Without question the GH4 is going to force a change in the low budget ILC market. I just hope that either Nikon decide to build on the lovely image the 5300 has and go for broke with video in some way or other, or the GH4 and its successors give us an image that is more than just super-sharp - I want the organic, low-light, great dynamic range quality of the D5300, just with a little more sharpness and ease of use. I worry though that MFT sensor will never look quite so filmic, even with a Speed Booster. We'll have to wait and see. If the GH4 is all of those things, I'll be over the moon.

 

BTW, I will be looking seriously at buying a Ninja - but it seems daft to loose 60p wit the 5300 ATM.

 

* I haven't seen enough of the GX7. I'd love to see some low light footage shot with a GX7 and Speed Booster. And some dynamic range examples with the same. That might give us a ballpark idea of what the GH4 image will look like. I believe FuzzyNormal has a GX7 (not sure if he has a SB though) - any chance of a few example shots Fuzzy?

By perpetuating that it is a nightmare the word will stick to it and as you say yourself you quite enjoy using it. I think either the D7200 (dedicated video button and more buttons to contorl WB, iso etc and a headphone jack ) will be an upgrade in use. It is preferable to wait until nab to buy a Ninja, because I am sure that Atomos will upgrade their recorders, you might get 60 p recording in 1080p, perhaps better screen and even 4k recording. New model will surely drive the price down.

[Danyyyel]

I was looking at some articles and fell on this one  http://www.eoshd.com/content/11350/depth-test-5d-mark-iii-7d-raw-vs-blackmagic-pocket-vs-gh3    if the D5300 is indeed as good as the Bmpcc in prores mode like in this review. Then it must be higher than the 5dmark 3 in Raw!!!!!!!!! In fact it is not as surprising because the 5d3 is ratted at about 11.7 by dxomark in raw and the Nikon's have been rated about 12 stop in video mode from many sources.(The D4 was even rated at 13 stop by the BBC test). The d5300 puzzles me a bit from the oleg Kylian test of the 5d3 vs d5300, because the dr difference was quite huge. If Nikon has not tweaked its profiles to give even a little bit more DR than the previous cameras.

 

I would kill to see some side by side test like the one above to have an answer for these questions.

[tpr]

So I'm asking you to stop picking on the little guys and get comfortable with the idea you've outgrown a certain demographic.

 

The standards Andrew is applying are constantly raising higher, but that's understandable. Andrew is maturing as a filmmaker and the cameras available at the moment are much more advanced than they were a couple of years ago. If he were judging the D5300 by the standards he applied when the 5D mk3 came out, I'm sure it would be a completely different review. That could easily come off as inconsistent if not properly explained.

[Andrew Reid]

The standards Andrew is applying are constantly raising higher, but that's understandable. Andrew is maturing as a filmmaker and the cameras available at the moment are much more advanced than they were a couple of years ago. If he were judging the D5300 by the standards he applied when the 5D mk3 came out, I'm sure it would be a completely different review. That could easily come off as inconsistent if not properly explained.

 

Still looking at cheap cameras objectively, it's mainly about the year we're in, 2014. Indeed if the D5300 had come out when the 5D Mark III had come out of course I'd have been more positive about it. Such little innovation will no longer cut it. Look at it another way... if I had glowingly recommended the D5300 this month, in 2 months there would be a lot of upset people with buyer's remorse come NAB 2014. Wait to see what's coming.

[kadajawi]

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.

[Andrew Reid]

Speaking of Pentax the K-3 has the same if not identical video quality to the D5300 from what I've seen of it so far. I haven't tried it first hand yet so don't take it as confirmed 100% but it looks to have the same 24MP sensor - BUT with two very neat features. First is 4K time-lapse mode in MJPEG format (3840 x 2160) and second is in-body stabilisation. Don't think the stabilisation is effective as on the E-M1 but the camera itself seems pretty nice. Proper pro-DSLR body, weather sealed, looks better than the Nikon D7100 for video thanks to those features mentioned above but you do lose 1080/60p and the tilty flippy screen from the D5300.

[Andrew Reid]

Oh and anti-aliasing simulator, though not sure what affect if any this has in movie mode. There's no evidence of moire and aliasing on the K-3 videos I've seen so far, so you probably won't need to use it.

 

Check out the 4K time-lapse footage here - vimeo.com/search?q=pentax+k-3

 

And download some original 1080p from this stabilisation test (not inspiring but look at the detail... looks sharper than D5300 and more organic?) - >click through to download don't watch it below

[kadajawi]

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.

 

[fuzzynormal]

Ahh... wait a minute... I get it.... Just like with motorcycles and other toys people obsess over. There are those who're are really into specs, tread patterns, new kinds of braking systems, synthetic vs non-synthetic oils, reading all the data, comparing speed tests, etc. And there are those who are really just interested in riding. Those two conversations obviously have crossover, but really aren't the same thing.

Dang right. And I need to get out in the desert and ride the twisties some more... On my motorcycle designed in 1962...

[Andrew Reid]

Thanks for the K-3 info. I'll think I'll pass on that one then!

[Quirky]

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. 

 

Yup, unfortunately.

I'm not a Pentax shooter, but what I've seen and experienced from the previous models like K5 confirms that the Pentax electronic SR works great for stills, but is useless for video. Whatever you do, turn it off for video clips. Looks like they've disabled the sensor shaker for video in the K3. Only works for stills.

 

 

 

The AA simulation doesn't work during video, perhaps due to the noise it makes. 

 

Could be heat and durability, too. There would be a whole lotta shakin' goin' on if it was active during video recording, too. I doubt that it would make that much difference, anyway.

 

One of the major issues with video shooting is the same with the Nikon d5300, it's a dSLR. Nice for stills shooting, not so nice for video.

I think there are many good reasons to go for the Pentax K3, but video shooting may still not be one of them. I believe Pentax/Ricoh have admitted themselves rather recently that video is not one of their highest priorities now. But suppose things can change. They may soon need a new "purple cow," á la Sony and Panasonic.

[kadajawi]

@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. ;)

[Quirky]

Thanks for the K-3 info. I'll think I'll pass on that one then!

 

Well, if/when you do have the chance, we do hope you still at least keep an eye on some of the unlikely underdogs, too.

 

For example, right now I'd be curious to know if the latest Samsung model is still as uninspiring for video as the earlier models, or have they made some progress with aliasing, moire and such. I read that the latest NX30 has a mic in and clean HDMI out, albeit only the usual 8-bit 4.2.0.

 

Not that I'm a Samsung fanboy, either, but the latest model with its twisty EVF could, at least in theory, make an interesting video tool, if they actually put some effort into the video side of things.

Chances are they haven't done so, as their target audience seem to be the cellphone geeks and tablet nerds, but what if they did, some day. Rumours say they, too, are going to release a new top of the line model soon. Hopefully something different from the ghastly Galaxy NX.

 

Another obvious target of curiosity is the Sony A6000, although the signs would indicate it won't be too exiting in video shooting. But who knows, what if they did something unusual this time...

[Quirky]

@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.

 

Well, I've only seen footage from K-5, K-30, K-01 and K-r, (I think), and the naming of these different stabilising systems is a bit confusing at times. What I saw was an electronic stabiliser of some sort making a clip look restless and uncomfortable, like digital jello. A bit like software IS done badly, or overdone in post. Parts of the image look terrible, while some other part may look stable. Not my cup of tea, anyway. 

 

Again, I've got nothing against Pentax per se, I like the brand and many of the cameras, and have sold quite a few of them in previous life. I do hope they will live long and prosper under the shadow of the mighty Canikon. I also hope they'll come up with a new, refreshingly wacky mirrorless system. :)

[kadajawi]

@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]

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).

 

That's what it was. K30 and K-01. I just thought there was K5, too. As for the K5, I'll take your word for it, because I've seen good enough footage shot with it, by shooters who know what they're doing. Often in such cases the IS doesn't really matter that much, anyway.

 

 

 

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.

 

Yes, that indeed sounds interesting, but I don't quite see the point in that. 

Unless they've put some serious processing power into that thing, the larger sensor would just mean more lines to skip, and more focusing problems to deal with.

 

The colours and dynamic range of the 645D stills are great as it is, but for high quality (4K or HD) video with a reasonable price tag, surely a smaller and lighter system would be more practical. Something with a new mirrorless and electronic mount with shorter flange distance.

But we'll see what it's all about soon enough.

[Danyyyel]

This thread has turn into a joke. It is like everything except Nikon, oh look at the night in shinning armour, yes the Pentax it has ibis produce some suppose organic image. 3 post below, oh the knight in shinning armour is all rusted. Ibis does not work in video, quirks right and left in video, no hdmi out, no 60p, etc etc.... Oh lets find another camera to discredit the Nikon, we already compared it to blackmagic, OLympus, Panasonic and now Pentax. What other we will see discussed on the suppose D5300 review thread, to show a camera that has

 

- No moire/aliasing as the Blackmagic and Gh3

 

- A set of frame rate from standard cinema 24p to 60p for slow-motion.

 

- very good DR about 1.5 to 2 stop than any other dslr/M43 camera

 

- very good low light again better by 1.5 to 2 stop than the Bmpcc and any other Apsc dslr/m43 camera.

 

- Proper Cine 35mm standard compared to the 1/2 smaller M43 and much smaller Bmpcc camera

 

- Clean hdmi out, which will give you the possiblity to add some Monitor that can give you 10 times more focusing/exposure tools than most of these Apsc/M43 cameras.

 

- Clean hdmi out that you can also record to give you a better 200 mbit codec in 422, which is much better than any of the internal codec of all the apsc/m43 cameras.

 

Show me one of the cameras that have been compared with the D5300 who has all these features, more so at $ 799?????????? And this is not the camera that will really show the well balance Nikon dslr camera. It will be a future D7200 which will still be only $ 300 more.

[Andrew Reid]

Danyyyel, it's no joke. Name one Nikon innovation for video since the D90's shoddy 720p heralded others to do better....

 

As for the things you listed, they're not so unique on their own, but yes somehow the D5300 has accidentally ended up with quite a lot of them.

 

No moire / aliasing - see 5D Mark III, which came out before the moire & aliasing Nikons. Nikons were a veritable moire and aliasing PARTY before just around 9 months ago when they finally got wise. Shame D800 did not come out this year instead, maybe they could have done a better job.

 

Frame rates 24p to 60p... numerous other cameras had this a long time before Nikon (2-3 years). Sony were first to 1080/60p. Panasonic I believe offered 1080/24p first with the GH1 before the Canon 5D Mark II firmware update.

 

Very good DR... I'm not seeing it myself. Way more on others, such as Blackmagic cameras and even the tiny Panasonic GM1 does better in the highlights.

 

Very good low light... It's not hugely different to others. 5D Mark III is better and GM1 is near enough identical but with more fine detail.

 

Proper S35 sensor... yeah, but crappy lens mount which I can't use 80% of my glass on! 1.4x crop with Speed Booster on GH3 = larger than S35.

 

Clean HDMI out... been around since GH2 times. For external recorder this output on the D5200 and D5300 like on other cameras brings little-to-no real image quality increase but for a lot of hassle. Wait until it is 10bit 4:2:2 or 4K then it will actually be useful.

[kadajawi]

@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...?