D5200 Anyone got it ???
- Thread starter ChipThome
- Start date
Samuel H
Major Contributor
^ As tough as finding real skin in California or Miami... 
**********
Thanks a lot for the test QuickHitRecord, I'll look deeper into it when I get home this evening. I've also received some other files, so today is when I'll start to get a better picture of how Flaat looks on the D5200 (still no rechnical tests, though, but those should come in soon enough too).
So far I can say:
* it doesn't look bad at all
* Flaat helps, there's clearly more DR than with all the other options that I've seen compared side-by-side
* I do see some posterized shadows, like in the D800, but I need my better monitor and some scopes to see how bad they are; at first sight, the issue looks pretty similar to the D800: Flaat_12 is useful, Flaat_13 probably not, it doesn't uncover any additional detail, it just helps you see the detail (and the noise) of Flaat_12 more clearly (and you can do that in post too)
* this doesn't necessarily mean that DR is the same in the D800 and in the D5200 (I'd need the technical tests for this), but that's probably the case
EDIT:
* there's a lot more noise in the pushed-up shadows with Flaat, but the midtones are just as clean as with the regular profiles, and very much usable up to ISO 3200
**********
Thanks a lot for the test QuickHitRecord, I'll look deeper into it when I get home this evening. I've also received some other files, so today is when I'll start to get a better picture of how Flaat looks on the D5200 (still no rechnical tests, though, but those should come in soon enough too).
So far I can say:
* it doesn't look bad at all
* Flaat helps, there's clearly more DR than with all the other options that I've seen compared side-by-side
* I do see some posterized shadows, like in the D800, but I need my better monitor and some scopes to see how bad they are; at first sight, the issue looks pretty similar to the D800: Flaat_12 is useful, Flaat_13 probably not, it doesn't uncover any additional detail, it just helps you see the detail (and the noise) of Flaat_12 more clearly (and you can do that in post too)
* this doesn't necessarily mean that DR is the same in the D800 and in the D5200 (I'd need the technical tests for this), but that's probably the case
EDIT:
* there's a lot more noise in the pushed-up shadows with Flaat, but the midtones are just as clean as with the regular profiles, and very much usable up to ISO 3200
Last edited:
QuickHitRecord
Veteran
From my tests, I find that the D5200's horizontal noise is present across all profiles. In ungraded footage, it only becomes distracting to me at ISO 3200. But if I am trying to recover shadow detail, I wouldn't want to work with footage shot in anything above ISO 100(!). Here's a levels boost on the D5200 (ISO 200) to illustrate my point. The image on the right is pulled from the GH2 (ISO 320) with the same levels boost applied. I find this noise pattern to be more random and less distracting.
I have not been able to eliminate the D5200's horizontal noise in-camera. If anyone has this figured out, I would love to know how to do this.
I have not been able to eliminate the D5200's horizontal noise in-camera. If anyone has this figured out, I would love to know how to do this.
QuickHitRecord
Veteran
I'd also love to know how to post an unscaled image here.
EDIT:
EDIT:
Last edited:
BobbyMurcerFan
Well-known member
Looking at this lens cap test, it seems that ISO 400, 800, 1,600 are optimal and that the inbetween ISO's have a lot more noise.
http://youtu.be/yPqUrAbRZt0
http://youtu.be/yPqUrAbRZt0
D5200 has the shadow banding issue in stills as well, so it appears to be a sensor issue 
http://connect.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3377555
edit - Nikon is looking into it apparently
http://connect.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3377555
edit - Nikon is looking into it apparently
Last edited:
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
Keep in mind you're using the best of the best driftwood settings on the GH2, whereas we haven't hey begun to dig into the 5200 yet. It may be that the GH's are better in the shadows, but the 5200 in the highlights. We'll see.
John Caballero
Veteran
That is much like the noise pattern was in the GH1.
squig
Veteran
Every Canon DSLR has vertical fixed pattern noise which is even more distracting. Take note that the white balance settings affects the FPN as seen in the lens cap test. I graded that footage and added some film grain and only found flaat 13 and 6400 ISO flaat 12 too noisy. I hope Nikon does a better job of tuning the sensor but this doesn't look like a noisy camera. Try shooting 16mm or slightly underexposing the BMCC then you'll see what a noisy camera looks like. A noiseless image just looks like video to me.
Looks like mine is arriving today so I'll be able to get started on my tests.
Looks like mine is arriving today so I'll be able to get started on my tests.
Danielvilliers
Veteran
We would need uncompressed hdmi output or a hack to get higher bitrate to really see the result of boosting shadows, because as efficient as the codec can be, at 24 megabit it is going to take a significant amount of detail of the deepest shadows.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Samuel H
Major Contributor
So, I've been looking at the clips that QuickHitRecord and ReelFilmGeek sent me. Very useful. Thanks a lot!
So far it seems that Flaat for the D800 will work just as well on the D5200. At least skin is perfect, and the lifted shadows are behaving in the same way (which is not what I wanted, but it is what I expected). I still need to check the light-response function, but if that one is not wiggly I'll just rename the thing "Flaat for Nikon" and let it be.
* SKIN: it looks awesome. Right on target. This is the Magic Bullet Mojo "correct skin" marker, over ungraded D5200+Flaat footage:
* SHADOWS: it behaves just like the D800:
- Flaat_13 is useless, but Flaat_12 is useful (only for those situations when you need as much DR as you can get)
- the heavily pushed-up shadows show nasty posterized noise (so, if you can live with Flaat_11, choose that one instead of Flaat_12)
- using a more aggressive profile doesn't uncover any additional detail, but it does make it the shadows more usable; if your final image needs to show those shadows somewhat-well-exposed (as in the shot that macgregor pushed up in post to uncover detail), it is better to use a more aggressive profile in-camera than pushing up the footage in post (using an external recorder reduces the difference, "in-post" becomes a not-so-bad option); for example, this is Standard, Flaat_10, Flaat_11, all pushed up linearly +64 (so you can see where there's detail and where there's not) and graded with a simple curve to match the exposure of Flaat_12:
same detail, but better colors and less noise when you push up in-camera
(and yes, I should have used a luma curve instead of an RGB curve, so that saturation was not increased in the "in-post" samples, but I always forget, and I don't have any more time for this today)
(all of these are 100% crops, if they don't look like that follow the URL of the image and you'll see it 100% in my server)
So far it seems that Flaat for the D800 will work just as well on the D5200. At least skin is perfect, and the lifted shadows are behaving in the same way (which is not what I wanted, but it is what I expected). I still need to check the light-response function, but if that one is not wiggly I'll just rename the thing "Flaat for Nikon" and let it be.
* SKIN: it looks awesome. Right on target. This is the Magic Bullet Mojo "correct skin" marker, over ungraded D5200+Flaat footage:
* SHADOWS: it behaves just like the D800:
- Flaat_13 is useless, but Flaat_12 is useful (only for those situations when you need as much DR as you can get)
- the heavily pushed-up shadows show nasty posterized noise (so, if you can live with Flaat_11, choose that one instead of Flaat_12)
- using a more aggressive profile doesn't uncover any additional detail, but it does make it the shadows more usable; if your final image needs to show those shadows somewhat-well-exposed (as in the shot that macgregor pushed up in post to uncover detail), it is better to use a more aggressive profile in-camera than pushing up the footage in post (using an external recorder reduces the difference, "in-post" becomes a not-so-bad option); for example, this is Standard, Flaat_10, Flaat_11, all pushed up linearly +64 (so you can see where there's detail and where there's not) and graded with a simple curve to match the exposure of Flaat_12:
same detail, but better colors and less noise when you push up in-camera
(and yes, I should have used a luma curve instead of an RGB curve, so that saturation was not increased in the "in-post" samples, but I always forget, and I don't have any more time for this today)
(all of these are 100% crops, if they don't look like that follow the URL of the image and you'll see it 100% in my server)
Last edited:
squig
Veteran
First observations. I haven't recorded anything yet this is all from viewing the LCD.
I can confirm that the rolling shutter on the LCD is bad. I have the D5200 and the 5D MKIII both mounted side by side on my shoulder rig and I noticed the difference straight away.
The D5200 LCD produces truer colours than the 5D LCD (shame the rolling shutter kills it).
I compared the standard and neutral profiles from both cameras and the D5200 produces truer colours (on the LCD). I'll record the same scene and see if that makes a difference. The neutral profile on the D5200 looks flatter dialled down than prolost and flaat 10. Standard with the contrast down or neutral with the contrast at 0 looks on par for flatness with prolost.
I'm already missing kelvin WB control!
I can confirm that the rolling shutter on the LCD is bad. I have the D5200 and the 5D MKIII both mounted side by side on my shoulder rig and I noticed the difference straight away.
The D5200 LCD produces truer colours than the 5D LCD (shame the rolling shutter kills it).
I compared the standard and neutral profiles from both cameras and the D5200 produces truer colours (on the LCD). I'll record the same scene and see if that makes a difference. The neutral profile on the D5200 looks flatter dialled down than prolost and flaat 10. Standard with the contrast down or neutral with the contrast at 0 looks on par for flatness with prolost.
I'm already missing kelvin WB control!
Hey Squig! I'm so excited that you got your cam. I can't wait to see what your findings are.
ps...I'm sure I'm not that only one. Cheers Buddy!