Nikon DSLR with fully manual video?

[Andrew Reid]

The D7200 isn't worth waiting for or the extra money, looks like a very tiny incremental change. And 1080/60p only in 1.3x / lack of articulated screen makes it worse than D5300!

[Wulf]

but... no change of aperture of g-lenses in lv (source: slashcam)

really, nikon?

in which world they are living?

they think still about optimising fx-sells, but in reality it could be very soon a question of ... surviving?

 

 

 

 

[Inazuma]

Maybe they have a cinema camera in the works and thats why they're holding back?

Has to be the only explanation for this foolishness, right?

[Nikkor]

The explanation is that they would need another sensor.

[IronFilm]

 

D5200 / D5300 available used for £279 / £320

Bearing in mind that ANY of these is going to be an improvement over my stills camera (still rockin' a D50!!) and that utmost quality isn't THAT important, which would you go for?

 

​I went from a D50 to a D5200 and I'm very happy! :-) In both stills and obviously video too! (although, I already had a GH1 too)

Check out Andrew's review on this website and the article on D5200 vs 5Dmk3, is what sold me on getting one. Use it now for weddings, short films, music videos, and corporate work.
 

[Danyyyel]

 

Looks to be very sharp for a youtube compress video. Beyond the spec sheet the Nikons are some of the best image quality if you are not 4k frenzy ( yes all the oscar film where mastered in 1080p). My only concern is if they you still need to change aperture while filming or not and peaking. People can say what they want the Nikon imaging factoring not quantifiable element like colour science are some of the best, I would say only blackmagic and Canon can compete. But where I will be critical is no aperture change if it is verified and peaking, this is bad. The rest is gorgeous colours, feel, motion cadence, DR, low light and good resolution (I think jello is also very good). The last thing is 1080 60fps  at 1.3 crop... is it a typing error or what. The d5300,d5500 and D3300 have 60fps at full DX size.

[Danyyyel]

Nikon moves at a certain pace, in general they will upgrade their flagship pro camera every 4 years, which will be in 2016. In 2016 they will have a new expeed processor that will do 4 k, for the simple reason that cell phone will be doing 4k. Sometime the innovation comes from a low model to test the design etc. like the d5200 was the first pixel binning alias moire free and very good low light camera in the line.

[M Carter]

The 7200 is a shockingly ho-hum upgrade. For 7100 video users, all you get is full 1080 @ 60p.  My next body will be an NX1, which will just love my Nikkor glass.

I'm a little jaw-dropped by Nikon this week. They should have made their own cheapo cinema camera a year ago. Meanwhile, Samsung seems in this to win.

As far as the 7100 - never missed an articulated screen on any DSLR, but I have a loupe, an HDMI viewfinder and an HDMI monitor. I think about every time I would have needed an articulated screen, a monitor would have been 500% better anyway (I'm in Texas - the sun gets pretty dang bright here...) In fact, I have never, ever, ever shot an important video clip with "just the camera screen" on any of my cameras. It's either a built in VF (on broadcast-style cameras) or a loupe or a monitor or an external (HDMI or SDI) VF. You just can't guarantee focus on a 3" screen - I even keep 2x reader glasses in all my camera bags (handy little helpers for focus!) but I still only use those on at least a 5" Marshall. (Cheap reading glasses are just kickass with monitors though! You can't focus on anything father than 6" or so, so they really keep your brain focused on the screen).

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Nikon cameras make huge jumps in video performance with every new model. D5100 to D5200 to D5300, D3200 to D3300, D7000 to D7100, D610 to D750, D800 to D810, and these changes do not appear at all on release in the spec sheet. That's why I am interested in seeing how the images out of their new D5500 & D7200 will look like. The D7200 above looks very sharp and pleasing even on YT. 

Andrew, please try them if you can

[M Carter]

Hmm. You know, I don't know about the 28-70/2.8. It's a nice lens, but it's also an old lens. And unlike the AIS lenses, old AF-S lenses are horrendous to get repaired when the SWM breaks down. If Nikon no longer has parts that's it for the lens. I helped a friend fix his 80-200 AFS and it took three weeks as Nikon specially imported the last of the SWM reserves for that lens from Japan.

I suppose it might not matter much if you're solely using it manually with a follow focus.

​The "old" lens isn't necessarily an issue... we're reaching a point where glass can only get so much sharper. The 28-70 is gorgeous.

And yes, mine is primarily my main video lens, so if the AF conks out, I may not ever notice... the main issue with the 28-70 vs. the 24-70? The 28's a beast. One big-ass lens. But I kinda like that... does mean an extra 5 pounds on the back of the crane though!

[leeys]

They're both big lenses. I don't think one's lighter than the other, not significantly anyway.

When I was referring to old, I didn't mean quality. I meant in terms of repairs, which I focused on.

[M Carter]

So... $1100 for the D7200. (And I say this as a guy who loves the look from my 7100 - and I'm all-aperture-ring glass so I don't give a flip about LV aperture changes - even if I could, I'd still just use the ring) What about the 7200 would keep someone primarily doing motion work from buying an NX1?

It's not glass investment - I can stick my Nikkors on an NX1.

I'm not railing on Nikon - either (A) video buyers who want pro features are too small a market segment for them to worry much, or (B) they'll announce a 4K cinema camera in the next year. (If you chose "B", I'd love to try what you're smoking...)

[Danyyyel]

 

Guess rolling shutter for once compared to the Samsung NX1 Jello cam. From test I have seen, the NX1 is worst than the Sony A7s which itself is average in DX and quite bad in FX. When you look at behind the scene video they did not have some advance stabilising equipment with them. So imagine those shots on the bike etc with A7s or worst the NX1. I don't want to be look like a Nikon Fanboy, but sometime the treatment they are getting is ridiculous. There are things that really bothers me like no internal peaking or even no aperture change on the D7200. But the D7100 for those that have used it is already a very solid video camera, to get no banding, 60 p (hopefully not only 1.3x), flatter picture profile better meterring control and supposed better low light makes it a very solid camera, with some flaws that can be remedied.  And last but not lease you get the best APSc photo camera in the business with what seems to be the same AF module in the D750 which has been praised, praised and praised as being exceptional and which goes to -3ev which is the limit of human vision (moonlight)

I am sometime surprised by people on supposed specialised forum that react like basic consumer people. Oh yes it has 4k, oh yes it can shoot clean at 12 800 iso etc but forgetting some big intangible flaws like colour science or rolling shutter. I mean I am a professional photographer and been doing video for myself for some years and I can't comprehend how many on these site just are mesuberators. Don't people see the colors, motion cadence, highlight or shadow details etc or it is just numbers that are ussually coming from manufactuers, oh yes the 15 stop DR of the Sony A7s, a camera measured at about 13 stop in Raw.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

A bit irrelevant here but I never understood how people like the AF Nikon uses on their pro line, I was shooting stills with the D750 last night and absolutely hated the AF system compared to any Canon. Those 51 large squares lighting up randomly anywhere on subjects that don't even turn out sharp in the end. Hunts crazily in lowlight. Tried every mode and found using single point AF the only usable way for me! It's quite strange because pro stills people like it... 

[leeys]

Disagree, Nikon AF is way better at this stage. As you said, us pro still users like it. ;)

[Wulf]

 Tried every mode and found using single point AF the only usable way for me! It's quite strange because pro stills people like it... 

​

make sure only to activate the cross sections in low light :-)

 

 

[jimcroisdale]

Hiya all,

I've done a ton of reading over the last week, and there's a lot to learn. There's also a lot of new stuff on the market since i was last keeping tabs on the photography market, back in 2005 - especially all of the mirrorless stuff. I've looked at the Blackmagic, the Panasonic/Sony stuff and the prices of what I've been looking at have crept up and up... :-)

Here's the reality: Whatever I buy probably isn't going to get used an awful lot.

In short, I don't think there's any sense in paying for any more than my original brief:

1. 1080p videos in 24p

2. Nikon

3. Fully manual video controls (which my current D3100 doesn't have)

From all this reading, it actually seems that the D3200 will do what i want. yes, I know it's not the best quality, but for me, as an occasional hobbyist that does also need a stills camera, I'm thinking this makes a lot of sense for a little money. 

What do you think? At the end of the day, if it gets a lot of use I can always upgrade later...

Jim

[leeys]

Well, I'd still suggest a D5300 - the articulated LCD is useful! How much more would it be for you?

[jimcroisdale]

The d3200 would essentially be free - my d3100 and 50 would cover it. The d5300 would be an additional £160 approx.

[Cinegain]

The D5300 imho is the best APS-C reflex camera out there to give you great 1080p (although perhaps the newer D5500 has an ever so slight edge over it). The fact that it comes at a rather affordable price just makes it even more awesome. Would strongly suggest it (in addition to Ebrahim's and leeys' support for this camera).

Yeah, sure, better would be: full frame Nikon (D750/D810) or Canon 5DmkIII with ML RAW... but full frame pricing and with the ML RAW the workflow... not to mention the size and weight of it all.

Have you considered going mirrorless or do you really need to stick with Nikon? Because going mirrorless I'd say might just be the best bet entirely. If the A7S, GH4, NX1 are too expensive, there's still the GX7, G6, GM1, A5100, A6000 and soon NX500.