Canons vs. Nikons Video DSLRs- the entire line up comparison

Ebrahim Saadawi

Ebrahim Saadawi

Carbonite Member
As Canon was the first to introduce the DSLR video option to the masses and everyone of us probably owned one, we love the colours, the feel and aesthetic of the image, and we also got used the ergonomics, it's become second nature for us to use Canon DSLRs that everything else seem like a compromise by comparison, at least for me. So it's useful to summarize how Canon DSLRs stand now with their latest generation compared to their main DSLR maker. I was at my friend's camera store last night and we spend the entire night comparing Canon DSLRs to Nikons, just for video mode. So here are the findings.

_______________________________________________________________

1- Canon 1200D vs. Nikon D3300

D3300 has slightly higher resolution.
D3300 has significantly less aliasing and moire
D3300 has about a stop advantage in low-light performance
D3300 has 60p in 1080p, quality similar to 30p mode
D3300 has clean HDMI output with embedded audio
D3300 had a better screen (900k vs. 400k)

they both have similar rolling shutter, similar audio, similar colour performance (although I personally prefer the magical Nikon's). The Canon has the advantage of live-view being able to adjust iris, and the focus assist zoom is much better.

_______________________________________________________________

2- Canon 700D vs. Nikon D5300

D5300 has slightly higher resolution
D5300 has significantly less moire and aliasing
D5300 has about a stop advantage in low light
D5300 has 60p in 1080p, similar to 30p in quality.
D5300 has clean HDMI output.
D5300 has a better, larger screen.

Rolling shutter is marginally better on the Canon, ability to adjust iris in live-view, and also the live view zoom assist is better. Similar colour performance and audio quality.

_______________________________________________________________

3- Canon 70D vs. Nikon D7100

D7100 has slightly higher resolution
D7100 has significantly lower aliasing and moire
D7100 has a clean HDMI output
D7100 has a 1.3x crop mode (horrible but adequate for closeups)
70D has a lovely autofocus system, magical to say at least, you touch the subject and it goes there, silently, fluidly and organically, it looks better than most focus pullers. It's accurate, organic, and tracks what you touch.
70D has an articulated screen.
70D has a better live-view implementation of zoom and iris.
70D has higher bitrate of 90mbps ALL I vs 24 mbps AVCHD
70D is just nicer to use!

Both have similar rolling shutter, audio performance,

Note: the 70D aliasing makes it unsuitable for serious video production.

_______________________________________________________________

4- Canon 7D mk II vs. Nikon D7100

-D7100 has slightly better resolution. But strangely, the 7D image can be sharpened to show effectively higher resolution (actual detail) than the sharpened D7100 image, which doesn't respond as well to sharpening.
-7D has about a stop low-light advantage
-7D has 60p at 1080p, similar quality, D7100 doesn't
-7D has an all I 90mbits codec vs long gop 24mbits on the Nikon
-7D has clean HDMI output with embedded audio and timecode for triggering. the Nikon (drops to 720p when recording internally), only outputs 30p while the Canon allows selecting 24p and 30p. The Canon screen can stay open whilst outputting the clean signal, and it comes with an HDMI locking protector. It's over-ally a much better implementation.
-7D is the first Canon I've seen allowing a native 24p capture mode, not 23.97.
-7D is the first Canon I've seen allowing MP4 and MOV capture.
-7D is the first Canon I've seen with a built-in timelapse mode (in the D7100) but the 7D implementation is better and it has a surprisingly good HDR timelapse recording function where it combines up to 4 exposures to creat each frame.
-7D has a marvelous Autofocus system in video mode, an the ability to rack focus with the silent joystick is surprisingly intuitive. It's a very good feature.
-The 7D has better audio, has a headphone jack for monitoring and the ability to adjust sound level silently with the touch pad whilst recording.

Both have similar screens, similar aliasing performance, similar rolling shutter, and also the Canon has a better implementation for adjusting iris and live-view zoom assist Both have great colours.

-Note: I was pleasingly surprised with the 7D, especially after the Nikons beat the Canon on the previous rounds. The 7D is just a nice s35 camera to use. It's more expensive though in Nikon's defense, and is more comparable to a D300 successor than a D7100)

_______________________________________________________________

5- Canon 6D vs Nikon D610

-D610 has slightly higher resolution. 6D image can't be sharpened.
-D610 has clean HDMI ouput
-D610 has s35 crop mode
-D610 has a headphone jack for monitoring audio
-6D has around a stop advantage in lowlight (it's a very, very, very clean high ISO camera, better than the 5D)
-6D has a higher ALL I 90mbits vs 24mbits avchd
-6D has the liveview zoom and iris advantage.

Note: both have horrible aliasing and moire, which alone makes both unsuitable for serious video production.

_______________________________________________________________

6- Canon 6D/5D mk II vs. Nikon D750

The D750 hasn't arrived yet so sadly was unable to check it out. It seems like the best Nikon for video and perhaps the best DSLR for video but still haven't tried it.

_______________________________________________________________

7- Canon 5D mk III vs. Nikon D810

D810 has higher resolution - also the Canon can be sharpened to slightly match it and looks natural for some reason while sharpening the Nikon results in a digitally artificial image with artefacts, but un-sharpened it's still better than the sharpened 5D. it's closer to the 5D raw.
D810 has a s35 crop mode (quality takes a big hit but suitable for close-ups)
D810 has 60p in 1080p (the 5D 720p 60p is clean though with no aliasing or moire and adequately detailed)
D810 has a log-like picture profile (though Canon offers Cinestyle)
D810 has Zebra pattern for exposure
5D has about half a stop advantage in low-light performance
5D has a better implementation of clean HDMI output (see 7D vs d7100)
5D has the ability to silently change audio levels whilst recording with a touch-pad
5D has a better liveview implementation of zoom assist, although the D810 can change iris while in live-view (horay!)
5D has a very reliable path of recording 14bit CinemaDNG raw internally to CF card, with all the extra peaking/zebras/waveforms/ etc

_______________________________________________________________

8- Canon 1Dx vs. Nikon D4s

1Dx has significantly higher resolution, and I mean significantly, the 1080p of the D4s looks a bit worse than the 720p on the 1Dx!
1Dx has a higher bitrate of ALL I 90mpbs vs 24mpbs AVCHD
1Dx has better live-view zoom implementation
D4s has clean HDMI output
D4s has a headphone jack for audio monitoring
(both above two points are in the 5D yet bizarrely not here)
D4s has a s35 crop (as horrible as the fullframe), and a s16 crop that looks stunning

both have identical low-light performance (which is strange as I thought the D4s would be better), rolling shutter is the same,

note: the 1Dx is identical to the 5D for video, same image, same options, but loses the clean HDMI output, and the headphone jack, and all the advantages of Magiclantern including raw internal recording. No reason to use neither these cameras for video.

_______________________________________________________________

Note: if you're comfortable with magiclantern, add to the comparison above: Focus peaking, Zebras, Waveform monitor, on screen meters, crop markers, and a few other feature to all the Canons.

-in testing we used a landscape shot outside for all the cameras to test resolution, and the indoors for low-light performance, a chart for aliasing and moire, and we had a list of all the usability features to compare. The images were all exported to Sony Vegas 13 and viewed on a calibrated Eizo monitor. It's a pretty accurate real-life test.
_______________________________________________________________

Just for fun we put a CF card in the 1DC and shot a landscape out the window, and put an SSD in an Epic Dragon and shot the same at 6K, I liked the 1Dc's image better. God I love that damn 4K Canon Log image So much that I quickly turned it off, stopped testing and left the building before my credit card makes any stupid 10$K decisions!
biggrin.png
 
Thanks for posting.

Very interesting to see all the info laid out in this manner.

To summarise it seem Canon is starting to lag behind Nikon somewhat. At one time we all thought Nikon was dragging their heels especially since Nikon has no pro cine camera line to protect as Canon does now with it's C range offerings.
 
I own a d7100 and use it in tandem with a 70d we have at work.

I have come to much prefer the 7100's image and functionality for what I do, but man is that 70d autofocus amazing.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
As Canon was the first to introduce the DSLR video option to the masses and everyone of us probably owned one...
Click to expand...
Actually, the Nikon D90 was the first. Canon's T2i (a year or so later?) had a much beter implementation however.

At a quick glance at your chart, a couple things:

Ebrahim Saadawi said:
4- Canon 7D mk II vs. Nikon D7100

-7D has 60p at 1080p, similar quality, D7100 doesn't

-The 7D has better audio, has a headphone jack for monitoring and the ability to adjust sound level silently with the touch pad whilst recording.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, the 5300 has 1080-60; its quality is at least at the 7100, perhaps a bit better level. It may be the best value in a DSLR for video as of now.

The D7100 has a headphone jack and manual audio controls as well. I can't speak for the quality of the D7100 audio compared to other DSLRs... with a good external preamp, the internal recorder actually sounds good enough for web or lower-end client stuff. But I can't imagine one would use the audio from either camera for serious work other than sync.

The biggest issue to me (since either system can use Nikkor lenses, which I prefer for their availability and aperture rings) is the "look" of the footage. Since the 7000, Nikon's color has been a big leap from that pinkish-orange the Canon have had for some time (referring to first-gen, T2i, 60d, 7d, 5d etc which all were quite similar). This is subjective of course, but the 7000/7100/5300 color, and the arrival of the 7100 with its video improvements - for me anyway - instantly took Canon off my radar (and I was shooting primarily Canon video when the 7100 came out). I haven't shot any of the recent generation of Canon DSLRs, but it's likely the 7100/5300 combo will be my last DSLRs for video. If I can get a prores 422 or raw solution that hits 60p (like a souped up BMC) or if the new Samsung NX plays out for video, that'll be my next "I own it" camera.

I'm still unpleasantly surprised that Nikon didn't take the GH4 bait and give us 4k and 10-bit out 2k in a 7100 replacement. But the Samsung NX1 - on paper anyway - has caught my interest.

Thanks for taking the time for your test!
 
Yes Micheal the D7100 has a headphone jack, just loses the ability to change levels silently while recorder over the 7D. Will fix.

A few notes:

Regarding the D5300, it's my main A camera for my fairly large production company. It's that good. One of the best video cameras under 5000$, I'd go that far. I also owned and tested the GH4 extensively against it and the D5300 for me produced a better image, while the GH4 is sharper, the Nikon has better dynamic range, much better colours, much better lowlight performance and a standard s35 sensor. It's the little secret of the video world. I also agree there's a certain magic to the Nikon colour science and image, which is something hard to explain but knowing these cameras I know Nikon delivers the best colours out there. There's something vivid and pleasing on how it renders faces and colours, something I believe comes from the experience in the photography world that translated directly into their video modes. When I see Nikon footage I can point it out among tens of camera systems. Canon is also very close to these colours, but not quite. The GH4 is a little behind, and the Sonys are a LOT behind. Just an opinion after testing.

Another note: the 7D mk II was a pleasing surprise for me too, much better than what the internet says! The best video DSLR by Canon under the 1Dc. It's the only one that beats its Nikon counterpart, while the Nikons win in all the other line-ups (except 1Dx vs D4s, which are irrelevant for video anyway as described above). The 7D has no headline grabbing features but offers many small upgrades that make it the most well-rounded s35 video camera under 5$K. It's just a complete package that delivers. Only downside is I wish it had the D5300 articulated screen. Anyway ignore the internet and test yourself if possible, or ask those who did. Just ignore the internet. :D

Another note: is that the Nikon D810 delivered the best image in that test of the Canon and Nikon DSLR line ups (minus the 1DC and 5D raw). That says a lot. It has the most detail, best colour performance, no aliasing or moire, and it's very close to the top in lowlight performance (only bested by the 6D, 1Dx by about half a stop, which is mighty impressive for a 36mp camera!) The image is actually closer to the 5D 14bit raw than anything else. If the image quality is your only criterion get that camera. But there are many other aspects to compare which is why I made this test to help a bit.

Another note: man Canon is behind in their entry level video line (rebels and 70D, which make a huge market of indie filmmakers). Canon is not actually that far behind in the grand scheme they just need to update their 70D, 700D and 1200D to the 7D mk II video level of image and features, this will make them pretty comparable to the market. I am not holding my breath.
 
It all sounds about fair to me - though I would have hit Canon a bit harder, I'm definitely not impressed by the soft 7D2 and 5D3, and won't take anything with such bad aliasing/moire anymore so their lower models aren't even an option. 5D3+RAW is the only Canon option I would consider today. Not that much better than my stock a7s, though, and the workflow just can't compare.
 
It's hard to describe the 7000/7100/5300 color - there's a warmth to the skin, yet sometimes a subtle coolness to the shadows. The old color advice of cool colors being background and warm foreground may be part of what can make a good Nikon shot seem to have a 3D-ness to it.

It's just weird, weird, WEIRD that Canon has done so much to promote DSLR sensors for video, and Nikon seems very after-thought-ish about it all. Can two corporations market research tell them such totally different stories as to market conditions? Nikon seems to feel that video isn't moving cameras, Canon feels video is a big part of their future.

It seems reasonable to me that for a low R&D and tooling expense, Nikon could at least house their APS-C tech in a video/cinema form factor, add XLRs and good audio circuitry, one of their standard large DSLR battery setups, and on-board ND and focus peaking for well under $2k. Might not be a BMC killer until you look at power, audio and workflow issues.

And if Nikon can do such a great job of resizing their live view stream, why not a peep about 4K from them? It's still a little faddish on the consumer end, but a great production tool to have.

Would love to chat off the record with someone at Nikon about all of that.
 
What I want from Nikon is a picture profile that saves all the DR from the sensor in video mode. Or RAW video, if that's the heavy workflow it takes to get FF video with nearly 15 stops of DR (here). Get the D810, D750 or even D5300 sensor into a mirrorless body recording sharp 1080p60 RAW video to an SSD drive and I might sell my a7s.
 
Yes we're shooting thank you for asking. We're shootng a Toyota Ad for national TV this month, and I am using 2 D5300s as A cameras, that's how much I love the Nikon image and colours and feel compared to anything outthere, we can rent anything for no additional cost up to a Red, but I ike the Nikon image more, especially since the resolution advantage is moot as it's eventually going to SDTV. This is why I would pay very serious money and be very happy with Nikon video cameras to come.

I am not a business expert (a Radiologist- farthest from business expert!) but the decision of forming a new video division for Nikon seems like a no brainer to me, it's just a great business step and has almost guranteed success. They already have the technology and power to do this. It just needs a decision and some investment money. They should take one of their s35 sensors in the D5300, put it in a body that's not too far from a DSLR (keep the grip), and include a good audio recorder system with XLRs, phantom power, add a few ND filters instead of the mirror, put a high quality EVF they already have, put one of their D4s enormous batteries, license ProRes from apple to carry the images out of the sensor, or Cinema DNG if licesncing is expensive, and rehouse some of their lenses in cine housings. That's it, we would have one of the best video cameras on the market especially if they can keep it around 3K, everyone would get one, and they will start a whole new business with more employees more revenue more market power, just like Canon did with the C line (man that was a successful business decision for Canon!). They have all the components including great sensors, power, processors, colour science, factories, everything, just put them together. And they would be able to make them very cheap as they don't have a higher product to protect. I would love to hear Nikon's opinion on why they haven't started a video divison when the market is clearly asking for it. The D5300 images are lovely and I am sure it looks even better before the hedious compression, imagine how it would look in raw or ProRes, more lile the stills you get out of the camera I imagine. Do it.
 
Samuel: on hitting Canon more, I decided to delete any remarks about which cameras "win'' or any personal remarks to keep it as fair as possible. These are now just raw facts on how the two line ups compare for shooting video.
 
It would be nice to see more hacks for the Nikon cameras. I'm note sure how many of the magic lantern people are involved with Nikon hackers, but if they could do with Nikon what they did with Canon cameras, we'ed have jaw dropping movie making machines.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Samuel: on hitting Canon more, I decided to delete any remarks about which cameras "win'' or any personal remarks to keep it as fair as possible. These are now just raw facts on how the two line ups compare for shooting video.
Click to expand...

No need for that but fine for me anyway. I guess my main point was that some items are more important than others, and Canon loses in the most important ones *for*me*.

Congrats on your successful and hopefully-well-paid lots-of-shooting.
 
Samuel H said:
What I want from Nikon is a picture profile that saves all the DR from the sensor in video mode. Or RAW video, if that's the heavy workflow it takes to get FF video with nearly 15 stops of DR (here). Get the D810, D750 or even D5300 sensor into a mirrorless body recording sharp 1080p60 RAW video to an SSD drive and I might sell my a7s.
Click to expand...

Nikon's current mojo as raw video? I don't care if the workflow means giving up sleep. Count me in.
 
IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
Very interesting, care to explain this some? "National TV" these days isn't usually SD, something doesn't quite make sense. Where exactly will this gig end up, who is paying for it, and what is your title on the production? I don't usually see a slot for radiologist on my call sheets, but perhaps I am overlooking something.

I've always been curious about this account "shared" between two people without any apparent industry experience, yet with "big" gigs now (or maybe it's not so big but meant to sound like it is - more likely). Who exactly is it doing the writing here?

I think it's natural to be curious about the source of information when threads like this appear.
Click to expand...

I believe Ebrahim Saadawi does work in a region where broadcasting is still in standard definition. Also regarding the genesis of DSLR video, the Nikon D90 incorporated 720P mjpeg video in August of 2008; the 5D MKII that we're all familiar with came out in September of 2008. If I'm not mistaken, CHDK came out with a hack for video mode in the Canon 40D shortly after the advent of VDSLRs, I think it was only 480P though.
 
Yes Egypt is still Standard Definition, even national TV. When you live anywhere outside the US and UK, you know how ridiculous the 4K argumemt sounds like. The speed of the internet connections, the quality of broadcasters, the resolution of screens, god I would say it will be at least another 5 years in third world countries to fully update to full HD, and 4K, well that's on the next millennium plan.

And it's fine for grumpiness, we all have it sometimes!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top