Nikon d5100 vs Canon 5d ii / iii

R

rc444

Well-known member
Hello DVXusers,

While there is plenty of footage comparing the GH2 to the 5D Mark II and III, I haven't been able to find any video footage of yet comparing the d5100 to the Canon 5D II or III. Does anyone know of any links/videos that compare the d5100 w/ 5D? We all know the unhacked GH2 is right up there with the 5D, but how exactly does the d5100 fare with the Canon full frame?

Also, does anyone know how the d5100 compares to the Driftwood hacked 176mbps GH2? (This would exclude any recent 'lite hacked' GH2 camera comparisons below 100 Mbps) While the d5100 appears to have the best ISO / DR, the #1 decider for me is how well it compares to the 5D and Driftwood GH2.

Cheers
Rc444
 
The D5100's video will be the same as the D7000, minus the exposure controls. That said, I own a D7000 and just bought a GH2 the other week strictly for video. So much crisper details, with or without a hack. Plus, with higher bitrates, you can bring up detail in the shadows instead of a blocky mess:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijvkuli04HE

The only things I miss from the D7000 are being able to use flat profiles (locked to the presets), the lack of HDMI out for monitoring/focusing while recording 720/1080p (fixed at 1080i/60, but the EVF + focus assist make up for it), and the build quality (almost gagged the first time I picked it up after spending $750). Everything else on the GH2, as far as video is concerned, is a step or 3 up from the D7000. Especially the ability to use sub-$100 F/1.0 lenses. :3 The M4/3 mount and the GH2's ETC (sensor crop teleconverter) gives you an almost infinite array of lenses to use, and many are extremely budget friendly.

Now, as a stills camera, the D5100/7000 are just as far ahead in pics as the GH2 is ahead in video. That's why I didn't sell my D7000. Absolutely love the look of its RAW files, while the GH2's are nothing to write home about. They make a great combo.
 
Thanks Blue Bomber and thank for your helpful clip.

It sounds like the GH2 is better for video than the d5100/d7000. However, I watched your clip of the GH2 footage and noticed that the shot inside the bus was crisp, just like you said, however it was immediately obvious that the clip was really dark. Was this a deliberate choice to shoot the bus dark, or is this a tell tale sign of the GH2's much criticized low light/bad ISO issue?

There's no question the GH2 is sharper, however I am left with a lingering doubt after seeing your clip and that doubt says that the GH2 appears to be awesome for day shooting, but not so good for shooting dark/night scenes. Hence my reason to want to purchase the d5100 , which appears to be more forgiving for shooting night/dark scenes? Is my hunch correct?

As a filmmaker Blue Bomber, does the GH2 do a better job than the Nikon with night/dark shooting? Is the much criticized ISO/low light difficulty of the GH2 simply an overrated internet myth, like the famous 'megapixel' debate? Or would you recommend the GH2 only for shooting
day scenes?

Cheers
David
 
Last edited:
That wasn't my video, but the guy who was shooting it was basically trying to give an example of the available dynamic range in the GH2's footage. The left was the original, while the right was with the shadows lifted and a light grade. He exposed for the details outside the bus, showing the potential dynamic range that's available to the camera. On a DSLR, you wouldn't be able to do anything close to that. You'd just bring up a bunch of compression artifacts in the dark parts. The GH2 holds onto a good amount of information, even though bringing it up will bring up noise (like with a RAW photo). From my D7000, the GH2's abilities and potential have blown me away.

The GH2's high ISO is outstanding once hacked. The only DSLRs that can beat it in that respect are full frame DSLRs, which have a huge sensor in comparison, so they can gather light better and hold back the noise longer. With a good hack, the noise becomes extremely fine grained instead of a lumpy chroma nightmare. You can use noise reduciton programs to bring back the image to a usable point. Here's a quick test I did the other day:

00014 5D (0-00-02-02) comparison.jpg


FYI, that's a speaker in the background to the right, not super chunky noise. ;)

I'm shooting some drifting this weekend using Driftwood VY Canis Majoris, which is probably the best high ISO hack available. Still deciding if I wanna go ETC mode and do a trial run of my Rainbow 8-48mm F/1.0 C Mount, or go safe and use my regular Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8. The noise would be more noticeable on the small lens because of ETC, but that lens is also faster.
 
Thanks again for that clip, Blue Bomber :)

Both clips look *amazing* and demonstrate the GH2's prowess when used with the right tools.

As an aside, unless someone owns a Genesis or Red camera, prosumer cameras will always trade one evil for a lesser evil it seems. This does not stop good films being made however. They just need to be shot differently. My first short film in 2005 was shot with a crappy Z1P, but because we edited it in 10 bit, it looks amazing. My second film we shot with a 60D. Sure, it had low light problems, but what we were able to do in post rectified that.

I must have looked at about 10 clips now comparing the d5100 with the GH2 and I've come to this conclusion. As this clip below suggests, both cameras give different looks. It's not so much about whether which is better than the other, rather, it's which look you want. So if you want the more detailed look, the Nikon. If you want a more softer crispy HVX-202 look, then the GH2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jayS5woOK0

One thing which will be the litmus test when I buy my camera in 2 weeks is just how fiddly the GH2 hacks are. If the hacks for the GH2 are as complicated as installing Linux, it would appear the GH2 is only a camera that be customized by the most discerning propellor heads. I'm prepared to give the hacks a go with the GH2 (if I buy it), though I am curious if the same results/clips BBs shown could be achieved by simply editing the GH2 footage in 10 bit uncompressed with FCP?
 
Last edited:
That video is certainly not representative of what the GH2 is capable of. In fact, I'd say if you switch the footage around, it would be correct (considering I own both cameras). The GH2 is significantly sharper than the D7000, to the extent that the D7000's 1080p looks more like upscaled 720p than true Full HD. Even with the sharpness and contrast settings turned all the way down on the GH2, I couldn't get a soft image like that if I tried. The D7000 is more flexible in its preset adjustability, especially with flat profiles, but it can't come close to the level of sharpness of the GH2, even with it's sharpness maxed out (which is ugly) using stopped down primes.



Hacks are a piece of cake. Just download the hack you want and the original firmware form Panisonic, load them both into Ptools, and export the revised firmware. Then copy to your SD card, insert into camera, hit the play button, and sit by while the camera hacks itself. ;) I've tried a few hacks, and am testing "Canis Majoris Night" right now, since I'll be shooting tonight from 8pm-1am or so. It's supposed to have the best low light capability of all hacks out there so far (there are also daytime and soft skin variations).

The hardest part isn't applying the hack, but finding a compatible card that will work with the hack you want to use. The higher the bitrate, the slimmer the choices are. When a card fails to keep up, the camera will either stop the recording and tell you, or it'll lock up. Testing cards before a shoot is mandatory. The best tests are with either high ISO and high motion, or full frame shots of moving grass or tree branches and leaves. This will push the bitrate as high as you'll ever see while recording, and let you know if the camera can handle it. They're also amazing to look at, with little to no evidence of compression, and a supremely sharp image. You'd need to run the test for at least a few minutes to conclusively verify if the card can handle the bitrate.

The #1 compatible card for hacks is the Sandisk Extreme Pro 64GB 95MB/s UHS-1 SDXC card. It can record at the highest bitrates without batting an eye. #2 would be the Sandisk Extreme HD Video 30MB/s Class 10 series, though they're hard to find nowadays (replaced by the 45MB/s UHS-1 cards). The reason why a 30MB/s Class 10 card would be faster than a 45MB/s UHS-1 card is because the GH2 doesn't support UHS-1. The speeds will be significantly slower than rated when using UHS-1 cards, almost cut in half. Which is also why the 95MB/s card is #1. It would run around 45MB/s.

The 64GB version of that card is the favorite because it supports "spanning". SD cards' file systems only support 4GB max file sizes, so when you reach that while recording, the camera will end one file and start a new one. Whether this happens seamlessly or it stops the clip is determined by the ability to "span". The 64GB card has the highest success rate of all other cards in this respect. Some think it could be the type of memory used, or its configuration, compared to lower capacity cards. Either way, it works.

This isn't to say you have to go out and drop $150 on the ultimate SDXC card out there to use a hack. There are many hacks available that will work on any Class 10 card, and some that even work with Class 6 cards, so you can stay within whatever budget you choose. I'm in search of the highest quality available, giving videos the most flexibility in post, so I got the 64GB version (hooray for free 2day shipping from Amazon! :D ). It shows 47m for 1080p24, and 2h10m for 720p60, to give you an idea of what an extremely high bitrate hack will run you as far as available recording time. Lucky for me, I'll be using 720p for slow mo tonight, and only recording short clips, so the card should last me all night. :)



BTW, the GH2 records 8-bit, in what's most likely 4:2:0. Upconverting it to 10-bit or 4:2:2 will not bring any additional detail. Though you can recover a good amount of shadows and a slight bit of highlights, what you initially see is pretty much what you get. It's best to get as close as possible to what you want in-camera, or at least get the highlights near what you want, as highlight recovery is very minimal. The most you can do is bring the footage into 5DtoRGB (freeware) to help clean up the footage a bit, and give you a little bit more latitude.
 
Last edited:
Thanks BB,

I am completely sold on the GH2:) Nothing can change my mind now. It's Panasonic all the way! I look forward to posting some videos when I buy the camera so I can share moviemaking stories rather than technical talk now that the decision is made. It is $NZ2,099 for the single lens kit, quite a bit more than the Nikon for $NZ1,400 for a double lens kit, but the extra cash will be worth it. By the way BB, what's your take on the Panasonic G3? I've read it has the same Venus sensor and same manual features/histogram as the GH2, but films in 1080i/720p rather than 1080p like the GH2. The footage below though looks identical to the GH2, if you exclude the fact it was probably shot in auto rather than manually focussed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhH9MTnoLig (The G3 is $1,400 for the twin lens kit)
 
The G3 has nice video, but probably won't get any hacks. It's limited to 1080p 25/30, and says 720p 60 is available, though the senor output is 30fps. Not sure what that means. The big thing is that it doesn't have manual exposure controls in movie mode, so you'll probably end up with stuttery video during the day unless you stop down the lens or get an ND fader. On the bright side, it seems to be half a stop better in high ISO noise, and WB seems to be slightly more accurate (no more greenish cast on auto).

Also, if you plan on manually focusing your lenses, you can save a good amount of money by just getting some old Nikon or Canon lenses and adapters. I've got a bunch of lenses from my D7000, so I've really only spent $200 on lenses since (a couple of super fast C-Mount zooms). You can get some fast old Nikon AI-S primes for around $100 on eBay. They're quite small compared to modern lenses, and some are pretty lightweight.
 
Blue Bomber said:
The G3 has nice video, but probably won't get any hacks. It's limited to 1080p 25/30, and says 720p 60 is available, though the senor output is 30fps. Not sure what that means. The big thing is that it doesn't have manual exposure controls in movie mode, so you'll probably end up with stuttery video during the day unless you stop down the lens or get an ND fader. On the bright side, it seems to be half a stop better in high ISO noise, and WB seems to be slightly more accurate (no more greenish cast on auto).

Also, if you plan on manually focusing your lenses, you can save a good amount of money by just getting some old Nikon or Canon lenses and adapters. I've got a bunch of lenses from my D7000, so I've really only spent $200 on lenses since (a couple of super fast C-Mount zooms). You can get some fast old Nikon AI-S primes for around $100 on eBay. They're quite small compared to modern lenses, and some are pretty lightweight.
Click to expand...

Cheers BB. There isn't many GH2's left in NZ except for the specialist shops which charge $2,600 for the twin lens. Methinks I might stay with Panasonic and get the G3 twin lens for an interim measure and then keep the lenses and upgrade to the GH2 body when funds permit. I read a v detailed article on DPreview which said aperture can be controlled on the G3 but some parameters such as ISO and shutter can't. Somewhere else said you could do an AEL lock on it however like the Nikon. I've already downloaded the G3 manual - only way to truly know before buying...
 
Here's a link to a comparison I did between the Nikon D5100 and the Panasonic GH2:

http://www.personal-view.com./talks/discussion/1195/nikon-d5100-compared-to-panasonic-gh2#

As others have pointed out, the D5100 is a superb stills camera, with stunning dynamic range and 14-bit RAW sensor output. In my view, its major limitation is the lack of a real-time histogram, which makes it difficult to use in manual exposure mode. In practice, I almost always use the D5100 in aperture priority mode, and have found I can rely on its light meter to set the ISO for the proper exposure. Yes, that's right, auto-ISO mode, not auto-shutter speed. The D5100's usable ISO range is so wide that you can usually set both aperture and shutter speed to your preference, and allow the camera to adjust exposure solely via ISO.

Shooting video with the GH2, I always set shutter speed to 1/60 and ISO below 1600, and must then adjust the aperture for correct exposure. Although I have complete manual control over exposure, I find the GH2's limited usable ISO range often forces me to use a wider aperture than I'd prefer. That's the situation where the D5100's wide dynamic range gives it an edge, and its semi-manual auto-ISO operation becomes an advantage rather than a drawback.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top