I wanted the D5300 but the 70D makes more sense!

K

Ken1212

Well-known member
I will start by saying I love Nikon Cameras and started shooting DSLRS with Nikon. My first purchase was the D90 a great still camera but not so much for video. When the D3100 came out it was a winner for video improvements, great quality and 1080P, bought it. Then the D5100 came out with an articulated screen, I had to have that and bought it. I held back on the D7000/D7100 because no articulating screen, a must have feature for video as I use sliders and other gadgets. I was ready to upgrade and very excited about the D5300 feature till I saw the 70D while doing research. I just made a 70D purchase and waiting for delivery from B&H. 70D doesn't have 1080/60p or headphone input, the D5300 has 1080/60p but no headphone.

What sold me on the 70D is the servo focus for video with touch screen, pull and rack focus. I paid for the 70D with 18-135mm STM lens $1555 with a $300 rebate for a cost of $1255 after mail in rebate compared to about $1400 for D5300 and 18-140mm. Too bad that Nikon is dragging on upgrading features, I am not sure if they are having a hard time catching up to technology or just holding back. I can see why Canon is holding back on some features so they don't hurt many of their higher end cameras, but my question why is Nikon so late at catching up or holding back especially that they don't have a pro video camera lineup to protect like Canon? Maybe they are too trying to protect Canon's video lineup:Drogar-Dum(DBG):


The D5300 is a great camera with many feature but is not a 70D. The 1080/60p is a great addition but not enough to go Nikon this time for video, the wifi is awesome but the 70D has that already. Will Nikon get the message and fix their video aperture problem, I don't want to exit live mode to change my f-stop in the cropped sensor models. The 70D seems to be the best choice for video, top that 1/8000 shutter, 7fps, faster buffer, touchscreen, AE bracketing ±3 (2, 3, 5, 7 frames at 1/3 EV, 1/2 EV steps), built in flash commander and more.

Nikon has come a long way with video but would like to see them pick it up if they are serious about maintaining their base and adding to it. It's about features and options but don't offer it two or more year late. I hope the D7200 will answer many of the questions at hand.
 
Last edited:
I own the D3100, D5200 and D7100 from Nikon and I'm totally drooling over the autofocusing abilities of the 70D too. I have strongly considered trading in my cameras/lenses for the 70D and similar glass, but as time goes on, I hear more and more people having issues with the focusing system, it's not perfect, unfortunately. There are several videos on youtube where the camera defocuses for no apparent reason. So autofocus still isn't QUITE ready for primetime on DSLRs for video.

I do LOVE the quality of the video that comes out of my D7100. I use the "flaat 11" picture style, then I sharpen and color grade in post and I've gotten some simply stunning video from it. The 70D is not as good in the photography department as the D7100 though, which is the one thing that's held me back from making the trade (and now the focusing issues).

Personally, I wouldn't bother with the D5300. I'd just jump right to the D7100 or 70D. Sure, you get the flippy screen and the 60p HD, but unless you're doing slow-mo work, there's really not much of a reason to shoot at 60p because it just looks weird (to me, anyway). I shoot everything at 24p because I like the filmic look. 60p just looks fake to me, it's TOO smooth, which is an odd thing for a videographer to say, I believe. :)

I don't think you can go wrong with any of the modern day cameras though. D7100, D5300, D5200, 70D, they're all wonderful cameras and will do everything you want them to do and more. I would encourage you to check out the focusing issues on youtube and in articles around the web before you jump on the 70D train. Of course if you DO get the 70D, I will be jealous. Every review I watch makes me want that camera more and more. But I will stick with the D7100 for now and manually focus, until the next generation of canon dual-pixel AF comes out, or Nikon comes out with something similar (and I agree, I wish Nikon would FIX the issue with the aperture in live view, it is a pain, but it's not a deal-breaker for me). The D800 doesn't have that problem, but that's considerably more $$ than the 70D or D5300.

Good luck with your decision. :)
 
I actually ordered the 70D and just waiting for delivery from B&H. The D5300 is going to be a nice camera, but nothing like the 70D. I have several Nikon lenses and might add the D5300 as a second camera specially that the 70D doesn't have 1080/60p for slow motion (I primarly shoot 24p but I like higher frame rates for slow motion shots). I doubt that Nikon is going to introduce an articulated screen in the D7200. I buy the camera mainly for video and an articulated screen is a must. But honestly for me to get serious about Nikon again Nikon must step up the plate and compete with things like touch screen and servo focus. Nikon is a great company and has so much to gain and little to loose by giving us videographers the features we need, they shouldn't hold back and stay behind on video features as technology is moving very fast. There is a huge market out there for videographers and right now Canon has the lions share.
 
The nikons are a lot better in terms of image quality. But if you need autofocus, the 70D is awesome. So, depending on your needs, one will be better than the other.

I don't have a use for AF, and I care about image quality above all, so for me the Canons make no sense (except the 5D3+RAW). YMMV.

Also: not having killer AF is not "holding back". It's just not having that tech available yet. Not allowing clean HDMI-out, not including a headphone jack, etc: that's "holding back". Not providing a better codec in-camera falls somewhere in between: it should be done by now, but it does require a different image processor, and it takes time to design it. Not shooting RAW, also somewhere in between, since it is not suitable for the average user, but is definitely easy for them to implement.
 
Last edited:
It is a bit dumb to claim that Nikon is holding back compared to Canon, the worst company in this case. So you get super autofocus but still have moire/aliasing hell and barely 720 p resolution 5 years after the 5d mark 2. If the D5300 uses the same tech as the 5200/5300 it will have no aliasing/moirer problem, true HD riavling gh2 (do search to see my test d7100/gh2 sharpness test), DR in the 12 stops and Lowlight that would rival the 5d mark3. You want further enhancement, just add a Ninja to 422 high bitrate codec with peaking, false colour and zebras, making it in a very small package a very very good camera with very very good image quality and super pro camera functionality.

There are only 2 caveat of the D5200/D7100. One is the fix pattern noise, but it cleans up very well with neat video or just crush the blacks to about same level as other camera brand DR. The second is no earphone jack to monitor sound but at least compared to your super 70D, you can monitor it through an hdmi device like and external monitor or a Ninja.
 
I sent Nikon an email the other day begging for them to give us RAW video, or at least pro-res in-camera. EOSHD seems to think that the Nikon D7100 can do RAW due to its more powerful CPU. I don't know why Nikon doesn't work with someone like Vitaly or ML. I mean would people be so head-over-heels in love with Canon if it didn't have ML? Sure, the 5DM3 is a great video camera, but it also requires a significant amount of work in post. The D800 and D7100 have better DR, sharper video, equivalent low-light and so much less moire/aliasing. If Nikon open-sourced their firmware, or at the VERY least made a toolkit so that people could access the true power of the processor, I think Nikon has at least a decent shot at taking over the DSLR video market. It costs Canon NOTHING, but the ML guys add a SERIOUS amount of features that you can't get in other DSLRs at ANY price. If Nikon had something like that, in conjunction with their superior processing power and sensors, they could take away a significant portion of the DSLR video market from Canon within a year or so.

I think we're quite a ways from a D7200. I expect a D300s replacement first (unless they just kill that line, which is about 50/50 I'd say). They really don't NEED anything between the D7100 and D600/610, they are basically the same camera with different sensors (fx/dx) and focusing systems. I don't know where they'd squeeze a D300s replacement in there, even. Basically the only thing they could do to improve upon the D7100 is more FPS, or perhaps "fix" the aperture issue and use the same system as is on the D800, so I suspect the D300s will just be the last of that line.

I saw a test a while back, where they put the D7100 and 70D pointed at a shirt with a fine pattern on it and the D7100 had no moire whatsoever, but the 70D was absolutely unusable in that particular shot. I haven't experienced any moire problems with my D7100, but then I don't have any shirts like that guy had, either, it was a moire machine. I was rather shocked, tbh, that the 70D had so much, even with its AA filter built-in. I guess I shouldn't have been, considering that every Canon DSLR has serious problems with it.

If I could design a D300s replacement, it would have the same sensor as D7100, but a new focusing system to compete with the 70D, flip-out 3.2" screen (and find a way to weather seal it), gps, wifi, touchscreen, 8-9 fps, 1080p@60, RAW and pro-res recording in addition to the h264, clean hdmi out, zebras, peaking, etc. OR, just design it from the ground-up to rule the APS-C video market and leave the D7100 for photographers. Then the next D800 replacement could be the same system for the full-frame market, built from the ground-up specifically FOR video, but also takes stills, instead of a still camera that takes video. If I were the CEO of Nikon, I'd just turn the D800 replacement into a video DSLR and the D800E replacement into the super high megapixel photography camera, because that's how it's working out anyway. All new D900 designed specifically for videographers with a 18 megapixel sensor (no line skipping) and D900E for photographers with 36 megapixel sensor with no OLPF. D900 would do 4K video. D900E would only do 1080p@60. Of course that's about as likely to happen as pigs taking flight. ;)

I think ultimately, APS-C will die as people either go to M43 for the size/portability or step up to the full-frame for the best quality/features. There's just not going to be a market for APS-C at some point in the future, especially as prices for fabrication of FX sensors continues to drop.
 
Danielvilliers said:
It is a bit dumb to claim that Nikon is holding back compared to Canon, the worst company in this case. So you get super autofocus but still have moire/aliasing hell and barely 720 p resolution 5 years after the 5d mark 2. If the D5300 uses the same tech as the 5200/5300 it will have no aliasing/moirer problem, true HD riavling gh2 (do search to see my test d7100/gh2 sharpness test), DR in the 12 stops and Lowlight that would rival the 5d mark3. You want further enhancement, just add a Ninja to 422 high bitrate codec with peaking, false colour and zebras, making it in a very small package a very very good camera with very very good image quality and super pro camera functionality.

There are only 2 caveat of the D5200/D7100. One is the fix pattern noise, but it cleans up very well with neat video or just crush the blacks to about same level as other camera brand DR. The second is no earphone jack to monitor sound but at least compared to your super 70D, you can monitor it through an hdmi device like and external monitor or a Ninja.
Click to expand...




How dumb is it that you have to exit live view to change your aperture with APS-C sensors, that's what I call dumb. I have strictly used Nikon since the roll out of the D90, their first HD Camera, few months later the 7D came out and was I sorry I bought the D90 for video when I saw what the 7D does. That's about 5 years ago, I gave Nikon 5 years to do it right. There is absolutely no comparison between Nikon and Canon when it comes to APS-C sensors, Canon beats Nikon all the way on all fronts when it comes to run and gun type of shoots such as weddings. Nikon is at least 2 to 3 years late in catching up to Canon on the Video side, that's exactly why after 3 camera bodies and about six lenses I am going to Canon.

The 70D allows you to rack focus with a touch screen, do you see the value of that at all! The 70D allows you to change all of your exposure controls including aperture while you are recording using the touch screen, do you see the value of that at all ! Nikon simply needs to wake up and smell the coffee if it truly cares about the videography market. They have come a long way as far as picture quality since the D90 but they still don't get it when it comes to features, they have done this now 5 years and should know better.

As far as the picture quality the difference is minuscule when you are shooting small budget videos to tip the scale. If I was shooting a film or big budget shoots I wouldn't use neither camera and would be using something like Red or Canon C500. I am not speaking out because I hate Nikon, to the contrary I am doing it hoping they will get a clue and start playing the game right by giving us what we need, that's exactly why I posted this here and not on the Canon page. The 70D after $300 mail in rebate with the 18-135mm STM lens is costing me $1255, the D5300 is going to be about $1400 with the 18-140mm lens, so canon also wins on price. Now don't get me started with Magic Lantern to show you how far behind is Nikon when it comes to video,
 
Last edited:
* The AF in the 70D is the result of very long research efforts, if Nikon hasn't done that already then there's no way they can bring it out soon. I guess they must have done something, but they clearly are behind Canon in this respect.
* Recording RAW video does not require lots of processing power, the only thing you need is the will to do it, it is the easiest kind of video you can record, as long as your card can write fast enough.
* If the D800 could do RAW video, I would buy one right away. It wouldn't be as clean as that from the 5D3 (the D800 does some line skipping) but it would have much better DR. And it's a killer stills camera.
* I don't think APS-C will die, but I do aggree that DSLRs with APS-C sensors are on their way out. My NEX-5N is APS-C, and no m43 can touch that sensor. I see less of a future to m43 than to APS-C, and I'm not the only one.
 
baronmax said:
I sent Nikon an email the other day begging for them to give us RAW video, or at least pro-res in-camera. EOSHD seems to think that the Nikon D7100 can do RAW due to its more powerful CPU. I don't know why Nikon doesn't work with someone like Vitaly or ML. I mean would people be so head-over-heels in love with Canon if it didn't have ML? Sure, the 5DM3 is a great video camera, but it also requires a significant amount of work in post. The D800 and D7100 have better DR, sharper video, equivalent low-light and so much less moire/aliasing. If Nikon open-sourced their firmware, or at the VERY least made a toolkit so that people could access the true power of the processor, I think Nikon has at least a decent shot at taking over the DSLR video market. It costs Canon NOTHING, but the ML guys add a SERIOUS amount of features that you can't get in other DSLRs at ANY price. If Nikon had something like that, in conjunction with their superior processing power and sensors, they could take away a significant portion of the DSLR video market from Canon within a year or so.

I think we're quite a ways from a D7200. I expect a D300s replacement first (unless they just kill that line, which is about 50/50 I'd say). They really don't NEED anything between the D7100 and D600/610, they are basically the same camera with different sensors (fx/dx) and focusing systems. I don't know where they'd squeeze a D300s replacement in there, even. Basically the only thing they could do to improve upon the D7100 is more FPS, or perhaps "fix" the aperture issue and use the same system as is on the D800, so I suspect the D300s will just be the last of that line.

I saw a test a while back, where they put the D7100 and 70D pointed at a shirt with a fine pattern on it and the D7100 had no moire whatsoever, but the 70D was absolutely unusable in that particular shot. I haven't experienced any moire problems with my D7100, but then I don't have any shirts like that guy had, either, it was a moire machine. I was rather shocked, tbh, that the 70D had so much, even with its AA filter built-in. I guess I shouldn't have been, considering that every Canon DSLR has serious problems with it.

If I could design a D300s replacement, it would have the same sensor as D7100, but a new focusing system to compete with the 70D, flip-out 3.2" screen (and find a way to weather seal it), gps, wifi, touchscreen, 8-9 fps, 1080p@60, RAW and pro-res recording in addition to the h264, clean hdmi out, zebras, peaking, etc. OR, just design it from the ground-up to rule the APS-C video market and leave the D7100 for photographers. Then the next D800 replacement could be the same system for the full-frame market, built from the ground-up specifically FOR video, but also takes stills, instead of a still camera that takes video. If I were the CEO of Nikon, I'd just turn the D800 replacement into a video DSLR and the D800E replacement into the super high megapixel photography camera, because that's how it's working out anyway. All new D900 designed specifically for videographers with a 18 megapixel sensor (no line skipping) and D900E for photographers with 36 megapixel sensor with no OLPF. D900 would do 4K video. D900E would only do 1080p@60. Of course that's about as likely to happen as pigs taking flight. ;)

I think ultimately, APS-C will die as people either go to M43 for the size/portability or step up to the full-frame for the best quality/features. There's just not going to be a market for APS-C at some point in the future, especially as prices for fabrication of FX sensors continues to drop.
Click to expand...



I agree that Nikon should make their firmware an open source, I am sure someone out their would help bring on new features. Nikon's image quality is excellent, they got that one right and always improving it.

The features you listed on a D300s replacement would make Nikon the king of DSLRs for video. Sadly they know it but are slow to action, that's why they are always behind, Canon pioneers and leads and Nikon trails. 1080/60p is been out for a while now and will be introduced by Nikon with the D5300 which should have been rolled with the D5100 to take the lead.

My issue with them is primarily features. I would have jumped on the D600 or D800 if either had an articulating screen. Now auto video focusing and tracking with a touch screen is huge for us run and gun videographers, for example I can not see how any serious wedding videographer would continue using Nikon now that we have a 70D. Nikon must act and act fast. I have got used to Nikon's menu and feel, but once I adapt and get used to canon's it will take Nikon a lot more than 1080/60p to get me serious about Nikon again. Once ML cracks this camera it will be hard to go back.
 
Samuel H said:
* The AF in the 70D is the result of very long research efforts, if Nikon hasn't done that already then there's no way they can bring it out soon. I guess they must have done something, but they clearly are behind Canon in this respect.
* Recording RAW video does not require lots of processing power, the only thing you need is the will to do it, it is the easiest kind of video you can record, as long as your card can write fast enough.
* If the D800 could do RAW video, I would buy one right away. It wouldn't be as clean as that from the 5D3 (the D800 does some line skipping) but it would have much better DR. And it's a killer stills camera.
* I don't think APS-C will die, but I do aggree that DSLRs with APS-C sensors are on their way out. My NEX-5N is APS-C, and no m43 can touch that sensor. I see less of a future to m43 than to APS-C, and I'm not the only one.
Click to expand...



Nikon has been in the camera business racing canon for decades and should know better. I do agree though that adding raw would be a game changer for Nikon. Canon has a big camera lineup that they have to protect but what is your excuse Nikon? Don't know how to, go get some help it's out there.
 
I know it would take a lot of technological advances, but if Nikon would just LISTEN to videographers, they could design a perfect DSLR video-making machine. The D7100 and D800 already have dual card slots, if they're not fast enough for raw video, give someone the tools to allow us to RAID 0 the cards. They already do backup, which is similar to RAID 1, all they have to do is change the parity from mirror to stripe. That would give MORE than enough speed to do full HD 1080p raw and would be overkill for 422 Pro Res. I think the bigger issue would be how to read them, which would require new computer software written for both mac and windows, but there are plenty of smart folks out there who would probably be willing to do it for free.

I understand why a company wants to keep all their R&D in-house and secret, but the power of open-source is virtually unmatched. A company is silly NOT to take advantage of that, if they are in a position to do so, as I believe Nikon would be without much of an issue. It's not like Nikon has this amaaaaaazing interface that everyone wants to get their hands on or something. Their interface is pretty average, imo. Open-sourcing it could take it to a new level and they could finally compete with Canon in the video realm.

Ultimately, I think still cameras are going to change RADICALLY in the future. What we're going to see are very high-resolution video cameras (5K or greater), with software inside that allows the camera to "pick" the best frames and present them to a photographer so he/she can choose the pictures they want. There will be no true STILLS cameras in the future, everything will be centered around video and frame-grabs. Some of the mirrorless cameras have this technology inside, like the Nikon 1 series. It takes a short video and then presents the best images (frame grabs) to the photographer so that they can choose the best one(s) and the rest of the video is discarded. Of course the software is nowhere near precise enough, nor does it understand what people want in certain situations, but I think as processors get more powerful, this is where we're headed. The cameras that shoot ONLY stills will be used by specialists and people who just want to do things manually, but everyone else will be shooting short videos and choosing frame grabs. I expect that we're still 5-10 years away from this, but it's coming.
 
The Canon 70D has a DxO score of 68, with 22.5 bits of color depth, 11.6 EVs of dynamic range, and a low light ISO of 926. The Nikon D5300 will likely have a DxO score of 84, with 24.2 bits of color depth, 13.9 EVs of dynamic range, and a low light ISO of 1284. That's 2 extra stops of color depth and dynamic range! I'm surprised those measures of sensor quality (and hence indirectly image quality) matter less to you than touch-to-focus.
 
You know, I bet a lot of DSLR videographers would be more than happy to help Nikon make an amazing video camera and all Nikon would have to do is like give them a copy of the final camera when it's done, which they could use as a tax write-off anyway. It makes no sense to me why these companies refuse to get any outside help. I get the whole "protecting trade secrets" thing, but if you can produce a product that is head and shoulders above anything else out there, it makes a lot of sense to talk to your customers and find out what they want.

In reply to my email the other day, Nikon basically said "thanks, but no thanks" when I gave them suggestions about how to improve their future cameras. I am by no means an expert videographer, but I do have a really good idea what *I* would want in a camera and it's likely similar to what a lot of other people would want too. If Nikon would LISTEN, they could make something TRULY great that could beat the pants off of Canon. It almost seemed to me like they didn't really care what I had to say.

If image quality is the main concern for the OP, Nikon D7100, D610, D800, D5200 or D5300 would likely have been a better choice than 70D. If autofocus was the main concern, then the 70D is a no-brainer.
 
noirist said:
The Canon 70D has a DxO score of 68, with 22.5 bits of color depth, 11.6 EVs of dynamic range, and a low light ISO of 926. The Nikon D5300 will likely have a DxO score of 84, with 24.2 bits of color depth, 13.9 EVs of dynamic range, and a low light ISO of 1284. That's 2 extra stops of color depth and dynamic range! I'm surprised those measures of sensor quality (and hence indirectly image quality) matter less to you than touch-to-focus.
Click to expand...

The 70D is not a perfect camera, I don't know if such a thing exists. However, when I am evaluating cameras to purchase I take into account many variables including picture quality. I feel the same as you do about Nikon's great ISO, colors and dynamic range but that doesn't mean the 70D is bad it just means Nikon is a little better. What I need to compliment Nikon's picture quality is ease of use and convenience in run and gun environments, you do that by speeding the process not by introducing hiccups to delay my work. By exiting the live view to change aperture and coming back to live view to find out I still need to tweak it a little more, by then you might miss your shot, if the full frame had articulated screen I would have went that route.

If the features in the D5300 were released with the D5200 I would Have jumped on it and held my ground with Nikon. Instead Nikon introduced an external wifi adapter and 1080/60i. Now with the features on the 70D I can not justify Nikon any more. I will get decent footage from the 70D, have nice features like rack focus, change exposure setting while recording all with the touch of a screen, add to that superior photography features at the same time compared to the D5300. Canon seems to be on track and knows exactly what and when to release new features (even though I don't like how they are holding back too, but they have a pro lineup to protect unlike Nikon), Nikon seems to be always a step behind on features. I am a Nikon fan and not counting them out but they need to step it up.
 
baronmax said:
You know, I bet a lot of DSLR videographers would be more than happy to help Nikon make an amazing video camera and all Nikon would have to do is like give them a copy of the final camera when it's done, which they could use as a tax write-off anyway. It makes no sense to me why these companies refuse to get any outside help. I get the whole "protecting trade secrets" thing, but if you can produce a product that is head and shoulders above anything else out there, it makes a lot of sense to talk to your customers and find out what they want.

In reply to my email the other day, Nikon basically said "thanks, but no thanks" when I gave them suggestions about how to improve their future cameras. I am by no means an expert videographer, but I do have a really good idea what *I* would want in a camera and it's likely similar to what a lot of other people would want too. If Nikon would LISTEN, they could make something TRULY great that could beat the pants off of Canon. It almost seemed to me like they didn't really care what I had to say.

If image quality is the main concern for the OP, Nikon D7100, D610, D800, D5200 or D5300 would likely have been a better choice than 70D. If autofocus was the main concern, then the 70D is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

I agree. In fact when I bought the D5100 couple years ago I went to Nikon's website to leave a review and in the review I stated how much I like the D5100 but wish Nikon would step it up with video features and compared it to the T3i. Guess what Nikon did!!!!!!! They didn't approve the review and never posted it, they sent me an e-mail declining the review, why because I simply stated with the T3i you don't have to exit live view to change aperture..

At this price range the 70D is the king of all DSLRs for run and gun right now.
 
Ken1212 said:
I agree. In fact when I bought the D5100 couple years ago I went to Nikon's website to leave a review and in the review I stated how much I like the D5100 but wish Nikon would step it up with video features and compared it to the T3i. Guess what Nikon did!!!!!!! They didn't approve the review and never posted it, they sent me an e-mail declining the review, why because I simply stated with the T3i you don't have to exit live view to change aperture..

At this price range the 70D is the king of all DSLRs for run and gun right now.
Click to expand...

I would probably have to agree, if I were doing nothing but run and gun, I would likely trade my D7100 for a 70D. I just know I would miss the beautiful images I get from the 7100 the second I traded it in. For me, it all comes back to the 70D not quite being ready for primetime with its focusing system. It's damn close, but not QUITE there yet. Hopefully in the next iteration of DP AF, Canon will make it work perfectly. I will keep hoping that Nikon will come out with something similar in the mean time because a camera store is never going to offer me anywhere near what I paid for all my gear and glass, so I'd basically be starting over and that's really not a very appealing thought. I'm really not expecting Nikon to bring anything similar to the table for at least another year, if not longer, which sucks.

The D610 and D5300 have been incredibly UNDERWHELMING. I'm fairly sure the D610 was released just to address the oil/dust issues that plagued the D600, but Nikon will never admit fault. I don't know what the heck they were thinking with the D5300. The D5200 isn't THAT old of a camera. They should have held back and released something truly groundbreaking instead of slapping wi-fi and GPS on the 5200, removing the OLPF and calling it a day. Once again Nikon had the opportunity to trounce Canon, but fell short. I have ZERO desire to upgrade my 5200 to a 5300 and if a new person came up and asked me which camera to buy, I'd point them to the 5200 or 7100, depending on their budget, if they wanted APS-C and Nikon brand, but I'd recommend the 70D over both for most people.

Nikon has disappointed me lately. They need to pull their head out of their ass and start innovating instead of trying to play catch-up with Canon. Their future DEPENDS on it. But really, I would be surprised if Nikon is still around in 5 years if they don't do something drastic. They're far too middle-of-the-road with most of their hardware.
 
Ken1212 said:
The 70D is not a perfect camera, I don't know if such a thing exists. However, when I am evaluating cameras to purchase I take into account many variables including picture quality. I feel the same as you do about Nikon's great ISO, colors and dynamic range but that doesn't mean the 70D is bad it just means Nikon is a little better. What I need to compliment Nikon's picture quality is ease of use and convenience in run and gun environments, you do that by speeding the process not by introducing hiccups to delay my work. By exiting the live view to change aperture and coming back to live view to find out I still need to tweak it a little more, by then you might miss your shot, if the full frame had articulated screen I would have went that route.

If the features in the D5300 were released with the D5200 I would Have jumped on it and held my ground with Nikon. Instead Nikon introduced an external wifi adapter and 1080/60i. Now with the features on the 70D I can not justify Nikon any more. I will get decent footage from the 70D, have nice features like rack focus, change exposure setting while recording all with the touch of a screen, add to that superior photography features at the same time compared to the D5300. Canon seems to be on track and knows exactly what and when to release new features (even though I don't like how they are holding back too, but they have a pro lineup to protect unlike Nikon), Nikon seems to be always a step behind on features. I am a Nikon fan and not counting them out but they need to step it up.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry Ken1211, but 2 stops of dynamic range and 2 stops of color depth is an immense difference in image quality. Even a novice photographer can easily see that big a difference. The Canon's paltry dynamic range is particularly shameful. The RX100 with a 1" sensor has a better dynamic range! I can't understand why anyone who cares about image quality would buy a Canon these days - every other major camera manufacturer has cameras with better image quality.
 
^ That's the difference if you're shooting RAW stills. Video clips a big chunk of that DR no matter what you do, so the Nikon still has slightly better DR but the difference is a bit less than one stop, best case. But still: better DR (though not by two stops), similarly good color, decent codec (plus possibility of external prores), and, above all, NO ALIASING/MOIRE. If you care about image quality above all, Canon doesn't make sense nowadays. But some people also care about other things, like AF or ergonomics.
 
noirist said:
I'm sorry Ken1211, but 2 stops of dynamic range and 2 stops of color depth is an immense difference in image quality. Even a novice photographer can easily see that big a difference. The Canon's paltry dynamic range is particularly shameful. The RX100 with a 1" sensor has a better dynamic range! I can't understand why anyone who cares about image quality would buy a Canon these days - every other major camera manufacturer has cameras with better image quality.
Click to expand...



I need an easy workflow, right now I mainly DSLRs for weddings along with Panasonic HMC80, and I always use lights if I need to. At $1255 for the 70D after mail in rebate including the stm 18-135mm it was a no brainier. I might end up picking the D5300 too because it has the 1080/60p. But I hope Nikon doesn't keep us exiting live view to change aperture to tune the shot, we will wait and see.

Frankly sooner or later I would like to buy a full frame and when I do that I am going to spend more money on higher end lenses and commit to only one brand. If I was to make that decision today it would definitely be the 5D MkIII, why because it's a great camera and I can do raw using ML. So Nikon how about RAW video!!!!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top