According provided by Nikon D5300 camera (body) many thanks to Andrei Chernikh.
Nikon D5300 review
The camera was introduced on 07.11.2012/XNUMX/XNUMX Nikon D5200 and a year later, on 17.10.2013/5300/XNUMX, its update was released - Nikon DXNUMX. The cameras turned out to be very similar, but still, if you dig a little in their parameters, you can find many significant differences.
Nikon D5200 and D5300 use different matrices from different manufacturers: on board the Nikon D5300 has a Sony IMX193 sensor (proof link). Nikon D5200 uses the same Toshiba TOS-5105 HEZ1 sensor (proof link 1, proof link 2) A complete list of sensors used on all Nikon central control centers can be viewed here. In addition, the Nikon D5300 missing OLPF filter (proof link), which makes it easier to achieve a sharp, detailed image (and the appearance of moiré due to the absence of such a filter no longer worries anyone). I rummaged through all the instructions for Nikon D5300 and did not find any mention of the lack of a low-pass filter there (proof link).
Now I am seeing a tendency to remove the OLPF filter in modern cameras with a huge amount megapixels. Nikon D800E no longer has such a filter, D810, D7100 и Nikon D3300.
Likely Nikon D3300 uses the exact same sensor as the Nikon D5300. This is indirectly indicated by the main characteristics of their matrices (proof link 1, proof link 2, proof link 3) And it’s very strange that on the official page с Nikon D3300 nothing is said about the fact that the camera also lacks an OLPF filter. This is most likely done to make users feel a more serious difference between the D5300 and D3300. But born in the USSR you won’t be so easy!
Swivel display Nikon D5300
Nikon D5300, D5200, D3300, D7100, D7200 create pictures of the same maximum size of 6000 x 4000 pixels, which equals exactly 24 MP. In the characteristics they often write that the cameras have 24.1 (24.71) or 24.2 (24.78) MP, the difference of 100-200 thousand pixels is associated with the special structure of the pixels and sub-pixels of the sensor (details here).
Battery compartment and memory card slot on the Nikon D5300
Due to the new matrix, Nikon D5300 can use the range ISO 100 to 12.800 units and expand it to the value of Hi1 (equivalent to 25.600). In the same time Nikon D5200 uses ISO from 100 to 6400 units and expand it to a Hi2 value (equivalent to 25.600). Nikon D5300 has become first camera Nikon DX, which can use real ISO 12.800 (not advanced 'hi' modes). For this indicator, the D5300 and D3300 overtake the 'older' model Nikon D7100. There are also serious suspicions that Nikon D7100 uses the same sensor as Nikon D5300, but due to the older processor it cannot use ISO 12.800. It's funny, but all three cameras - D5100, D5200The D5300 uses a maximum ISO threshold of 25.600 and still cannot jump over it.
Online many with CAPS LOCK pressed say that the noise level in the pictures taken with the Nikon D5300 is several times less than the noise level of cameras of previous generations. In any case, I want to note that with the noise reduction functions turned on, when shooting in JPEG, a really good result is obtained, and the Nikon D5300 is one of the quietest cropped cameras of all time (until some D5400 is released). At the same time, I can bet that at ISO up to 3200 units, no one difference with D5200 won't notice :). At ISO, starting at about 9000, the image is filled with a red veil. This is a rather specific noise, which often gives a picture a warm tint, but at the same time 'eats up' the color, and the included 'noise reduction' removes details. I observed the exact same nature of the noise in the model Nikon D3300. At the same time, on my ancient Nikon D700 the color at ISO 25.600 just 'fades out', but does not have an additional color cast.
Nikon D5300 with lens Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 35mm 1: 1.8G SWM Aspherical
Nikon D5300 has a built-in wi-fi module. If you connect your tablet or smartphone using Nikon WirelessMobileUtility, you can view the captured photos and videos, and copy them to your mobile device. And, of course, you can control the camera remotely - this is a useful function, you can think of many examples of its use.
I installed Nikon WirelessMobileUtility (WMU) on my Android phone using PlayMarket app service without any problems. To connect a mobile device to the camera, it is enough to turn on wi-fi on the camera, and on the mobile device, in the wi-fi connections menu, select the Nikon D5300 access point. The interface of the program is very simple, only one problem - there is no Russian language. When displaying an image in Live View mode, the picture slows down a little, and it's also a pity that the remote control only supports focus point selection and shutter release - the camera controls all other parameters by itself (and this does not depend on the selected mode on the camera control dial). I still could not get the camera to shoot video using WMU (even with the 'Remote control' -> 'Remote shutter release' -> 'Movie' option selected). Also, the application does not allow you to view an already shot video on a mobile device, you can download it and only then view it. When downloading a video, WMU does not understand that it is a video and offers 'Download current picture'. The fact that the thumbnail contains a video can only be guessed by the 'mov' icon. Perhaps WMU for iOS is better at thinking.
One acquaintance told how he used the remote control function of the camera using Wi-Fi. He was on vacation somewhere on the ocean, crowds of crabs crawled out onto the shore, but people constantly shied away and hid back in the water. He mounted the camera on a tripod, waited for the crabs to get out of the water and remotely shot many interesting shots of marine animals :)
When viewing photos on the camera, you can note those photos that will be automatically transferred to the smartphone the next time you connect via wi-fi.
As one sage said: World, Labor, Wifi.
A slight difference in the controls
Externally, the D5300 has a slightly different design. On the D5300, the shooting mode button (the button sets continuous shooting, remote control or interval shooting) is now located near the lens mount button, and in that place is now the GPS receiver. All other controls are exactly the same as on the D5200.
Minor cosmetic updates in the design. Find 10 differences.
The new camera uses an Expeed 4 image processor, while the D5200 uses Nikon Expeed 3. It's funny that Expeed 3 also works on Nikon D4, and Expeed 4 on D4s. It was possible with a clear conscience not to create the Nikon D5300, but to call the new camera D5200s :).
But here's the bad luck - the D5300, like the D5200, can shoot at a maximum speed of 5 fps, but when using the RAW (RAW + JPEG) format with 14-bit color depth, the Nikon D5300 drops to 4 fps. The difference between 4 and 5 frames is immediately noticeable during real shooting. Why was it necessary to install a new generation processor that can not cope with such a volume of data? Nikon D5200 shot without problems with the same 14-bit color depth in RAW format at 5 fps. At the same time, in the Nikon D5200 RAW files were always recorded with 14-bit color depth, and in order to realize 5 fps in the Nikon D5300, it was necessary to add the ability to set 12-bit or 14-bit color depth in the menu. Turns out that the new camera is slower than the old. Of course, there is no difference when shooting in JPEG, but still, I have already written more than once that Nikon cannot solve the problem of shooting in RAW format with 14-bit color depth. Remember the legendary Nikon D300 и D300sthat went down to level Nikon D40, and began to shoot at a speed of 2.5 frames per second, and also Nikon D7100, which even in 1.3x mode resets the shooting speed when using 14-bit color depth.
I want to criticize the camera’s features in Live View a little more. I tried to make a video for my note 'interesting property of the aperture on the Nikon CZK' and in Live View mode, when I enlarged the selected image area for fine-tuning the focus, I came across that the camera is very (very, very, very!) very slow with the image output. For shooting, I used Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII ED SWM VR IF Aspherical and ISO about 4000-5000. In any case, the camera processor does not cope with the tasks. I saw the exact same problem on the Nikon D3300.
Nikon D5300 with lens Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII ED SWM VR IF Aspherical
If you disable features such as' Aut. distortion control ',' Active D-Lighting ',' Under. Noise for long. Exposure. ',' Under. Noise for high. ISO 'then in frame buffer fits:
- 7 frames in RAW 12bit format
- 5 frames in RAW 14bit format
- 12 frames in JPEG format
- 6 frames in RAW 12bit + JPEG L Fine format
- 5 frames in RAW 14bit + JPEG L Fine format
If you enable all these functions, then it is placed in the buffer:
- 4-5 frames in RAW 12bit format
- 2-3 frames in RAW 14bit format
- 7-8 frames in JPEG format
- 4-5 frames in RAW 12bit + JPEG L Fine format
- 2-3 frames in RAW 14bit + JPEG L Fine format
The number of frames in the buffer is practically no different from the Nikon D5200.
Nikon D5300 with lens Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70mm 1: 3.3-4.5 (MKII)
The viewfinder has slightly increased, the Nikon D5300 has a magnification of 0.82x, the D5200 - 0.79x. If I did not know about this difference, I would never visually notice it.
In addition, video has improved: Nikon D5200 can shoot at maximum quality of 1920 x 1080 60i / 50i, D5300 can shoot at 1920 x 1080 60p / 50p (progressive). In modes 1280 X 720 and 640 X 424, you can select the same quality for both cameras. Personally, I don't care about video at all, and it's unlikely that an ordinary amateur camera user will notice improvements from 60i to 60p (I'm already silent about the theoretical understanding of the difference). But for advanced fans to shoot a high-quality video, and even then process it, 60p will be just right :). I want to note that Nikon D5300 does not make a slight crop at the beginning of video recording, as was the case with Nikon D5200.
Nikon D5300 uses new 3.2 inch display 1.036.800 pixels (720 pixels wide x 480 pixels high x 3 RGB sub-pixels), while the Nikon D5200 uses a 3-inch at 921.600 (640 x 480 x 3). I immediately felt the difference in the size of the display, although the numbers 3 and 3.2 inches differ slightly. As a result, when viewing thumbnail images, the D5300 displays 80 thumbnails and 72 thumbnails on the D5200 display. The new display has proportions 3: 2 (like the pictures from the camera) and when viewing black stripes do not form at the edges, as was the case with the Nikon D5200 (and many other cameras).
All the time while I had a camera, it was bad weather outside, and I never got to the studio, so, alas, there were not many test frames. Here link to the archive with the originals - 399 MB, 15 photos in .NEF format (RAW) When shooting, the lens was used Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII ED SWM VR IF Aspherical с protective light filter Hoya HMC UV (c) 72mm.
UPDATE 1
Examples of photos on HELIOS-44M 2/58 and camera Nikon D5300 with readers of Radozhiva shared by photographer Vladlena Lapshina:
Nikon D5300 is even a little lighter than its predecessor. The D5300 weighs 530 grams versus 550 on the Nikon D5200. You won’t feel the difference in any way. Usually Nikon D5300 sell with a lens Nikon DX VR AF-S Nikkor 18-140mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED SWM IF Aspherical, and D5200 with Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor, although the camera equipment can be anything. The camera also uses the new EN-EL14a battery, which helps to get more frames on a single charge than the EN-EL14 used in the Nikon D5200.
Nikon D5300 with lens Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D (MKII)
Of course, in addition to the wi-fi module, a GPS receiver was installed in the camera. Photos for which the shooting location was obtained have a satellite icon.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Results
Nikon D5300 is the best amateur camera from Nikon right now (not to be confused with advanced amateur cameras like Nikon D7100) at the time of this writing. The camera has great potential! You just need to take and shoot. On the other hand, I am an adherent of the idea that it is better to get an older camera, for example, Nikon D5100but with a better lens, such as Nikon DX VR AF-S Nikkor 18-140mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED SWM IF Aspherical. Who believes that wi-fi, GPS, the absence of a low-pass filter on the heap with ISO 12.800 and 39-point focus system help in achieving good shots, he will definitely look at the Nikon D5300 :).
When choosing a Nikon SLR camera and a lens for it, I advise you to look in the 'Which Nikon camera to choose?'.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
"The D5300 weighs 555 grams versus 530 for the Nikon D5200."
Probably the weight is worth swapping.
Fixed
Arkady, you did not say about the built-in motor. I’m already literate now (and thanks to your site too) and I know that it is there, but many do not know and ran for d3300-)
a person allowing himself a new 3300 does not get tired of taking 35 / 1,8, 85 / 1,8, 18-105, Tokin 12-24 2 versions and other new motor lenses. more than enough of them, without jumping with old iron.
And also 70-200 / 2.8G, instead of the screwdriver 80-200 / 2.8D xD
Buy 80-200 fourth version.
An extremely controversial model, with a different optical design than MK I-III, unfinished, and therefore quickly left. And the old D-shny MKIII is still being produced. It's strange, isn't it? And MKIV is the most expensive aftermarket
But is there a screwdriver? the couple on the Nikon website is incomprehensibly written
Occasionally, you need to take the initiative at least a little bit in search of answers to your questions https://radojuva.com.ua/2012/03/nikon-lenses/#af-nikon well, and if there is no initiative, then it’s enough to show logic, since there is no motor in the d5200, then it is not in the d5300 either :)
This is not a question for you))) I doubted the words of a person with the nickname “I’ll be brief” and did not ask. It's a pity the text does not convey intonation. But thanks for the answer anyway, although I guessed it))
Where does the “little motor” come from? You at least look at the bayonet in the photo above the review - where did you see the “screwdriver” there? Or did you put the motor on, but forgot to put on the “screwdriver”? :)
In the first photo of the review, where the bayonet mount is visible, it can be seen that there are no screwdrivers (motor)
Bliiin, I'm sorry. For some reason I sincerely thought that there were motors on the Nikon 50 series. And Arkady (well-well-well) with his photos in the review with af lenses only added confidence. Well, I think that since CAM Arkady boldly fastens the lenses to 5300 af, he won’t focus his hands with pens -)) Once again, all my litter. From now on I will be extremely attentive, and not just brief .-)
"From Nikon 50 series" this useful device is only in the D50. But in fact, this is a completely different device from a different line and a different time. Today, even the 7000th series risks being left without a motor.
That's it, I sell D3s and take the D5300. If the ISO is both 12800, then why pay more? :)
You will have to change the profile again.
"An old anecdote about the search for Feng Shui and the movement of furniture in a brothel"
In no case, otherwise automatically lose the title of Alpha male.
Relax passans :) I was joking. I will not change anything, because ISO 12800 with the D5300 (even with its 24 megapixels) cannot be compared to ISO 12800 on the D3s. At ISO 12800, detail is not lost at ISO 12800, and there are no problems with color, and the ductility of RAW at ISO 200 is the same as at ISO 3. In general, Nikon does not yet have a carcass that surpasses DXNUMXs in noise (apparently all this is a consequence of the letter “s” -superior, which means superior) Even Arkady's tablet confirms this, here: https://radojuva.com.ua/2012/12/best-nikon-fx-camera-quality/
The only thing that interests me is how D4s behaves with noise, because it is not on the list of Arcadia, it would be nice to make this list more complete. Good luck to everyone and good staff. Thanks to Arkady, the review is wonderful, the camera too.
The plate has been updated. So, comrades lyceum students, D3s is no longer a “knight of the night”, since DF, and especially Sony A7S, have gone further. A7S probably means absolutely superior. Jokes aside, synthetic tests cannot always show the real picture when working with a camera.
And D4S is even cooler.
Even my veteran "fuji-bead", quietly makes D3s in dynamic range. ;)
The all-knowing dhomark gives out a working ISO for D3s as much as 3253. The best indicator for Nikons is for DF 3279. When for D4s 3074 (I would use that). By the way, D5300 has 1338 for HH, in my opinion, the best ISO. If you knew where in the Nikonov rating the same dhomark put your D3S, they would throw it out without hesitation. (23)
Do you really believe all these sites like DxOmark? If yes, then go ahead to shoot weddings on the D5300 at ISO 12800 :) Or for heaving or propping or whatever ...
At first you wrote “Even Arkady’s plate confirms this, here:”, and after its update, another conversation started “Do you really believe all these sites like DxOmark?” Where is the logic?
pfft ... I hope I never jump before the wedding bombing.
Well, about “bombing weddings” ... Not good of you. Although I was not offended ... With such equipment as I have, they are not allowed into the subject, but still I am a photographer, because I make money by photography. For now, I'm just feeding on the reportage. I sell the suckers a wedding reportage. But the day will come - I will save up some money - I will buy d300s and begin to sell the object to the hucksters - I need to get hold of the current equipment.
What are you offended at? To pin up a trehsotkovich here is a sacred cause, he is an alpha, he will endure.
with all the advantages of 300s, however, given the desire of the owners to sell it for 25-30 thousand rubles, I would recommend looking in the direction of d700 or d7100. A little more expensive, but for a number of points it’s still better.
although if there are 300s for 18-20 thousand with acceptable, up to 60000 frames mileage, this is also a good option.
And I assure you - not everyone who makes photography is a photographer. Well, unless, of course, you do not take into account purely formal signs;)
I really do. If they are lying about something, then at my very amateur level ...
At the expense of weddings, your colleague Lynx answered. I have a living. Photo is for the soul .-)
Trekhsotkovich, you will laugh, but I screwed the battery handle on D40 + 35 1.8g and I bomb the weddings with might and main. The main thing I carry all the time on a monopod is a small umbrella for reflection. The people are satisfied.
Vasilii I will not laugh, because I used to run with an umbrella and a fifty dollar wound on D300s. And everything was great. The only thing over time I got tired of carrying an umbrella, and now it lies on the shelf, I only use it for 3 * 4 photos :) I believe that your customers are happy, because you can make very good shots with your kit if you have straight hands, and most likely you do it once the people are happy. I wish you success! In your case, we can proudly say “NOT THE CAMERA”. Good shots to you.
Thanks for the kind words! I wish you more good shots too. I plan to buy D300s in the near future - they say that it's like changing from a Zaporozhets to a Mercedes. In general, there is something to strive for :),
I bought the camera at the end of May, and in October a strange glitch appeared, in MAPS modes the camera stopped responding to the wheel (there is a reaction, but some strange - the next value appears and is reset to what it was), in the tyrnet I found only one mention of this glitch (the girl passed it by itself), can anyone come across, the dealership said most likely a firmware glitch, it's a shame the camera is new, and I'm very careful with the technology. But in fact the camera pleases (the previous D200).
Carry it to a service center. Either a firmware glitch or a twist is likely to fail, let them change it under warranty.
Sniffed and snorted, put the wheel when the next value lights up (not fixed) and turn off the camera, then turn it on and the value changes so that only the firmware glitch.
Reset with buttons with green marks.
Unfortunately, this is an unambiguous glitch of the firmware, the reset specified by you or through the menu, removing the battery or changing the lens cannot be treated, or it will either go to the firmware service itself.
Fedor, why the service? After all, flashing is an extremely simple operation (if you have a computer and the Internet). Instructions for off. site.
Yes, but there is no factory firmware or update on the site, so if the factory firmware has gone off, only to the service.
I will not argue anything, but when I bought my 5100, the firmware was 1.01. Then the 1.02 update came out. And I updated the firmware (not paying attention that the camera is under warranty), taking it from the official site. Agree that it is not logical to create new firmware, lay it out for access by all owners and expect them to run to the service. At the time of the release of the new version, millions have bought the camera. So what? Everyone rushed to the service? There is no such thing as “factory firmware”. There are versions.
The concept of factory firmware is the first firmware when the product goes into commercial sale and therefore it is not on the Nikon website, just as there is no firmware version 1.01 for your device (this is the factory firmware), there are only updates 1.02.
I managed in due time (October 2013) to download v1.01 for D5100 from offsite. The "boxed version" was also 1.01. After 1.02 was released, I tried to switch back from 1.02 to an older one - oddly enough, it worked.
Arkady, many thanks for the review! Please tell me, is the color in the photo of this camera better than that of the D5100? And at least a little closer to the old CCD cameras, such as the D80?
I have not seen the era of CCD matrices, but I would also like to clarify for myself: why are CCD matrices better than CMOS matrices? According to DxO, the matrix of the same D5300 significantly outperforms the D80 in all respects: color depth, dynamic range, and working ISO. Then what is the “secret” indicator for which CCDs are better? If the colors that the camera gives in the photo without processing, then using wider DD and depth - you can make any colors at your discretion, IMHO. Or am I somehow mistaken somewhere? Arkady and Vadim, please explain to me.
As a rule, jpegs on cameras with a CCD matrix are better. Also at low ISO in those days it was much easier to pull out a picture than with CMOS, now this is not so, but the charm remains :)
But when I took off both CMOS and CCD, I really noticed that the photos on the CCD, which is equal to the jpeg, by default look like they have already been edited. Pretty nice.
Now I myself use the old d200 and d50 at the CCD. Yes, iso working up to 800, in d50 another 1600 normal more or less. Nevertheless, high ISO is rarely needed, but a good picture on a low ISO is often defaulted.
All these “better” and “worse” are very subjective.
for that kind of money it’s better to take 5100 and good glass
I advised this in conclusions :)
Arkady, what kind of glass would you recommend for 5100 in return for a whale dark Nikon 18-105 as a staffer. It is used mainly for traveling and shooting city landscapes. I’m looking at Sigma 17-50 2.8 and Tamron with the same focal points, but according to Tamron the reviews aren’t very much about back-front tricks, but we don’t have much choice. Well still Sigma 17-70 2.8-4. I’m afraid only the focal ones will not be missed after 18-105. What is your opinion on this?
I will stick in instead of Arkady to warn him as having gone through the difficult procedure of buying Sigma lenses for the D5100. Sigma with a huge spread in quality, in addition to clearly pronounced front-back focuses, it has instances with jumping focus. As a result, I managed to buy only one specimen of 5100-18mm F / 250-3.5 that works stably and sharply on the D6.3, and even then I think only because it has a large depth of field and an acceptable error. Attempts to choose high-aperture copies of Sigma in stores, including the expensive ART series, did not lead to success - even with 4 copies of one model, I could not find consistently hitting the target. They say that it is possible to adjust these Sigma lenses somehow in service centers for a carcass, but in our region there are no such opportunities.
Tamron, too, has no less complaints about the quality, although I did not take it myself. In addition, they write that on the cheap zooms Sigma and Tamron, hole 2.8 is practically inoperative in terms of sharpness, judging by the numerous photos on the network - it is. In general, I concluded for myself that henceforth I will only take Nikon from serious optics, but only in case of emergency, since all high-aperture Nikon-zooms are very expensive. In the meantime, there is no money, I will use excellent Nikon-fixes 35 / 1.8, 50 / 1.4 and 85 / 1.8, and inexpensive dark zooms from Nikon and others. The legendary Nikon 70-210 f / 4 came from Japan today, I will take it and test it so I will write it down in the relevant topic.
PS From Arcadia, I would also like to hear an opinion about a relatively inexpensive staffer for crop. But it seems that after his Tamron 18-50 / 2.8 fell apart, Arkady also came to the conclusion that it is better to have a relatively dark but Nikon-zoom. :)
I wrote that I consider Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1: 2.8 EX DC OS HSM to be the best low-cost full-time standard zoom, there is a recommendation for it https://radojuva.com.ua/2013/01/what-camera-nikon-shoud-i-buy/ For those who have a bitter experience with sigma, I recommend learning to test the technique before buying.
Thank you, Arkady and Alexander for the answers and advice.
Bought 35 mm and 50 mm Art.
To them - USB Dock.
After adjustment - not the slightest problem with the FF / BF.
And IMHO is better to take Nikon D7000, which now costs the same as D5300. Then a whole fleet of good old and relatively inexpensive lenses will open up, which are inconvenient to use on younger bodies, and sometimes completely impossible (at least because of possible front / backs on fixes, which are treated with adjustment on D7 ***). After I took the D7100, I realized how painful and inconvenient it was for me to navigate the settings menu with the D5100. Now the D5100 is gathering dust in the box and has not decided whether to sell it or leave it as a spare camera ...
Damn, I’m fumbling when I get on the menu in the d5100, it had to be so inconvenient to do, it feels like it was so far-fetched, I didn’t hold professional cameras in my hands, but the logic suggests that the menu should not be so clumsy and uncomfortable.
Sergey, the fact is that on the same D7100 in the menu you hardly have to climb at all. I set all the necessary parameters and modes in advance, programmed the buttons, and then 99% only with buttons and wheels, as well as their combinations. It takes a relatively long time to study, adjust, remember and get used to, but then any action is done in 1-3 seconds, and not in minutes. The screen is off, the battery is saved ... On the D5100, while you reset the modes, the frame will go away, it was a shame.
I have a d5100, but to be honest, I have not faced huge problems when setting any parameters. The shutter speed or aperture is adjusted with the wheel, and changes in one and a half seconds on the screen. While filming reports, I have not yet encountered such situations when I did not have time to change something important in the settings for d5100, but at the same time I could have time to do it on a more advanced camera. It's all about practice - the more often you shoot reports, the easier it will be to work with the d5100, and with any other camera. For me in my reportage, the disadvantage of the d5100 is its low speed and a small buffer. Here the difference with my canon 50d is obvious - it is more convenient to click a quick report on the canon. Of course, the lack of an upper b / w screen is also upsetting, but not so much that it annoys me. The d5100 has another plus - a swivel screen, which the cooler cameras do not have (except for nikon d750, canon 60d and 70d).
But, of course, the subject of discussion is a subjective substance, and if you are fundamentally uncomfortable, then nothing can be done. I'm just sharing my observations :)
About not convenience.
1. little can be put on the Fn button,
2. Auto ISO turns on only in the additional menu, sometimes you need to quickly turn it off and it takes some flattery and picking it takes time (I would do so the car ISO was configured in the additional menu, i.e. with what and to what and with what shutter speed, but if you need to disable it so that could be done in the main menu)
3. The flash is sometimes needed in manual mode and the power in manual mode is also set in the additional menu, although when TTL is on, you can set the flash correction and in manual mode only in add. the menu and it’s annoying why not to create in the same place where the correction for TTL
By the way, in the D5100 menu there is a 6th item with an unpretentious name “My Menu”, in which you can add bookmarks yourself and place items in any order. They allow you to manage the most frequently requested functions, having everything at hand in one menu item. Moreover, the camera remembers the last cursor position in the menu. Of course, this is not comparable to the additional mechanical buttons Fn, ISO, WB, QUAL, but it helps me a lot
I don’t know if you bought 5100? I’ve been using it for 2 years. For the photo, I think the difference is huge you won’t see it, but the video is different.5300 is better, I would have bought it myself purely because of the video.
It's a pity that in the review, so little has been lost about video recording, and specifically the D5300 trim ridge, chi practical diaphragm ... and also ISO.
The aperture was discussed in a previous article for all Nikon cameras when shooting video. https://radojuva.com.ua/2014/11/aperture-during-video-nikon-and-angry-haruhi/ ISO when shooting video can be changed manually, for example, using the FN button. If something was different in this respect from the d5200, I would include it in the review.
Arkady, and to put it bluntly, it turned out to be a shameful chamber. Even on the Internet, people affectionately call them whistles. 24 Mega on the crop. Well, what is there to say at all after that ?! Of course this is 24 mega from Sonya, not from Toshiba. But still. The worst D5200 will probably be current. But it all started with the wonderful D40. Here's your progress ...
To put it bluntly, when 1999 was walking outside the window and Nikon stamped his d1 mastodon, they could not even dream of a camera like the d5300. But, of course, I understand that you, as the owner of a d40 with 6mp, can write something else about 24mp. I do not praise 24mp on crop, but still with 24 mp without aa filter you can squeeze something yes :).
After such unreasonable criticism, I’m ready to take the D40, my D7100 with the same 24MP without a filter, wind them on say 50 / 1.4G, remove several identical angles from a tripod in different conditions, resize to 6MP and compare the results. Which of the owners of D40 in Nizhny Novgorod is ready to participate in the experiment? And then spend even 4-6 tr. sorry for the illiquid carcass.
And the fact that such talented people as, say, Arkady can shoot on D40 so that I never dreamed of using modern carcasses - I have no doubt about that. But this is not the merit of the camera.
And why reside?
I’ll predict the ending of such a comparison: a Nikon D7100 with a Nikkor 50mm f1.4G glass will produce significantly better results than a Nikon D40 under equal conditions. The Nikon D7100 even in JPEG produces wonderful frames that immediately capture details in the shadows and details in the bright areas of the frame. Nikon D40 will have to pull RAW in the shadows for a similar result, and I don’t think that in this case the 6MP RAW will do its best, a ton of noise will appear in the shadows and the D40 will lose this experiment. The D7100 is a wonderful camera, it has only one minus: the autofocus curve is much worse in the dark than the D300s and D3s (well, if you still find fault with the D7100, the metering type is not displayed in the viewfinder, and the ISO / WB / QUAL buttons are not conveniently located constantly poke a finger into the nose) otherwise the D7100 is just wonderful for leisurely shooting of everything and everything. The D40 is also good, but it doesn’t forgive mistakes, IMMEDIATELY need to make a good shot, not hoping for processing (as Arkady does for us in test shots).
So DXOMARK also believes that newer cameras shoot better than old ones. With the same glass. Of course, with good lighting and the subsequent publication of a 640x480 picture, you can even shoot with a mobile phone ...
PS And we will not say anything about improved performance characteristics ...
Guys, take a look at what the 7100 is capable of with an ordinary Nikon 24-85mm f / 3.5-4.5G ED AF-S VR https://www.flickr.com/photos/114035636@N05/12224613093/sizes/o/ I did not expect such detail.
Class detail !!! But the Nikon 24-85mm f / 3.5-4.5G ED AF-S VR is not an ordinary staffer as you called it, I now have this glass, and it is hellishly sharp on any aperture and focal length.
Moreover, the picture is halved. The original was 6000 x 4000.
So I have this glass now. He consciously took the full frame to the crop. I like. Here http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/sichkar-vic/ I think that a good photographer can get more with this glass than I can. And I like to have “tools” with a “margin” :)
1. It is impossible to shoot a good commercial shot with an old camera on whale glass!
2. the presence of a cool camera and a fast lens does not give a XNUMX% guarantee of a masterpiece, but makes shooting easier, allows you to expand the scope of post-processing (especially Nikon!).
3. You can even shoot masterpieces on a home-made film camera, but they will be in demand only after the death of a photographer. don’t worry, you all definitely don’t belong to such geniuses.
4. There are very, very few people who shoot masterpieces! but taking more or less correct photos is already in order. Moreover, among the owners of a nickel, there are the smallest numbers of them (perhaps purchasing it automatically turned off the function of “creative shooting” in the brain ... just bomb!
5. yes, I shoot badly! and unlike some "geniuses" I see it and am not afraid to admit it!
I agree with everything, but we are discussing cameras here and not the skill of a photographer, right? So why drive vain on camera just for the reason someone doesn't have one? I do not have a D750 yet, although I really want to, but I do not criticize this carcass. The photo quality on the D5100 suited me more than, I just didn't like the controls. I do not consider myself a “genius” - a simple amateur, although I try to learn more or less correctly to shoot, Arkady's photographs from the reviews help in this.
Alexander Malyaev, if you didn’t like the controls on the D5100, why do you dream about a D750 with the same not-so-comfortable controls? Kakbe, if you want tight management with finances, then people take D300s (it’s already very outdated) or D700 (still another fotik to this day) with wonderful management (and at this time also the lowest price for these used carcasses) And taking D750 you scratch your entire nose changing the ISO :) Although you can get used to the D5100. I have the D5100, so I don’t have it, no, I’m clinging to the street with 50mm 1.4G, because the D300s give a bit worse picture, and the D3s are very heavy and people look around.
The D750 has one-to-one control as on the D7100, but on the D7100 it suits me - I never scratched my nose. ))) But the D750 is a completely different class, I haven't grown to it yet. The D5100 has few buttons and wheels, but it is lightweight and with a swivel screen.
You just got lucky. TRekhsotkovich has a lot of problems with this device; - the focus is lost and the shadow from the on-camera flash in half a frame.
... it's better to take an old (but not used ear!) Camera ... of a higher class! For example D7000 or D800 ...
Does a used D800 take off better than a new D5300? )))))
Better than used D800 and D5300 only takes PHOTO :)
Golden words, Alexander. They were said many times, in the comments on Radozhiv, but they are still relevant :)
I wonder what will happen to 7100 on aperture 11 or 13? At d40, the diffraction threshold is 13, and for an amateur carcass d7100 which threshold is 8 or maybe less? Is it clear that d5.6 will break at 6.3 or 7100 40? Or do not modern photographers need other apertures?
The image will be slightly soapier, that is, there will be a deterioration in micro contrast. But when resizing to a 40MP D6 photo, it will still be pixel-sharp. And the D7100 has a diffraction threshold of f / 7.1, but IMHO is not worth bothering about this. What aperture is needed for the scene - this should be set, while if there is an opportunity to get by with a more open hole, then this should be the goal.
Alexander, a little higher I gave a link to this photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/114035636@N05/12224613093/sizes/o/ Camera 7100 and aperture 10. To be honest, I did not see “soap” and deterioration of micro-contrast. What is your opinion?
Yes, of course you will not see it with a 4-fold resize. And even without resizing, you can notice “soap” at aperture 10 only when comparing two identical images with different apertures per pixel. Indeed, in this case, "blurring" from diffraction is a fraction of a pixel, and the influence of, say, the lens and exposure on the picture is much more significant.
You can visually play around and see the approximate effect of diffraction, say here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/ru/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
And the photo is generally like. ))) And the picturesque appearance, and sharpness, and colors.
There will be nothing. Diffraction does not fall like a snowball on the head, it gradually goes sooo and at 7100 with a good lens, the aperture 13 is still very working.
https://500px.com/photo/85672533/geranium-pollen-by-evgeny-yarkiy?from=user_library
Here is an example, aperture 10 and 100% crop, camera 7100.
Arkady! Please clarify the screen. Nowhere, no one writes in the descriptions or in the comments. The question is to increase the size to 3,2 inches. Is this the physical size of the screen or the size of the output image? After all, a huge black bar appeared in no way used on the new screen. And the output image (judging by the photos of this camera) has not increased a bit.
It goes without saying that this is the physical size of the screen matrix. That is, it has become larger, and the substrate has also increased, the black stripe is just part of the decor.
When will Nikon do the magic type lathering for hackers on the canon system?
When they change the processor to another, it is impossible with the current one.
“Most likely Nikon D7100 uses the same sensor as Nikon D5300”
"Nikon D5300 has a Sony IMX193 sensor on board"
The Internet is burning that the 7100 has a Toshiba HEZ1 matrix TOS-5105 -https: //nikonhacker.com/wiki/Camera_Matrix
I know for nikonhacker, but more than once I found inaccurate information from them. So far, I believe that the Nikon D7100 uses the same matrix as the Nikon D5300, when there will be intelligible data, for example. with chipworks, then I will change the information in the review.
By the way, are you by any chance the wrong Oleg who writes to me on social networks?
not) in social networks nirazu did not write to you))
Google, everywhere they write that Toshiba is in 7100, and nowhere is there any mention that Sonya is there
and nowhere is there any sensible confirmation. They write mainly because d7100 and 5200 are of the same age, and in 5200 they are reliably Toshibovskaya.
It's strange ... but I just met some info yesterday somewhere (but about the reliability, I'm afraid, you can also doubt) that the D7100 has Sony's matrix - the same as the D3200, and the D5200 has Toshibovskaya
(Even the permissions to look are kind of different)
Moreover - here I myself doubt which matrix in the D5300 is like in 3200 (7100) or like in 5200 .. (i.e. Sony or Toshiba)
And it seems like Toshiba is cooler (although again - apart from such emotional statements, I have not met any facts - even the dynamic range, it seems, is 13,7 - the same ..)
Time has passed ...
So is it known during this time who has which matrix? (D3200-3300, D5200-5300, D7100)
I made a mistake -
“That the D7100 has Sony's matrix - the same as that of the D3200” - not the same, of course
It seems that the D7100 has a matrix from Sony, and the D3200 has a matrix from Nikon (the third version with 24MP ..)
Confused Nikon producers completely ..
Canon has a "not sour" novelty 7D mark 11. According to its characteristics, it makes most of the cameras today. I would like your review as soon as possible. Arkady of this "gun" RESPECT to you for your work!
I heard that Toshibov matrices on Nikon are very prone to the rapid appearance of hot pixels. if this is true, then it is quite understandable that Nikon left them so soon ...
Unfortunately, I confirm.
d60 for 4 years at the most exorbitant ISO pleases with cleanliness.
And the d5200 was already from the store with a couple, noticeable on the iso800. The higher the sensitivity, the more "fever". In the photo, fix them - one spit, they are real there - a pixel. But in the video (I shoot with this particular camera at an amateur level) - they stretch by 3-4, and it is quite difficult to hide them on video tape, you have to build a mask every time.
Good afternoon, Arkady and company))). Thank you for the site, very informative. I took d5300 as the golden mean for all occasions, home, family, holidays, friends, mountains, hiking, sea and so on ... but! But it dragged on, life was divided into the time of photographing and waiting for this time.
Naturally, while I wait, the filter mountains of photoinf. Karoch more and more often think about the transition to more serious chot. An opinion is needed. What is acutely lacking, which I have already encountered at first: built-in alignment, exposure metering on Soviet lenses, a good viewfinder, quick access to some functions (although in general I adjusted everything, I work in the manual), screwdrivers, and so on for little things ... Advise 2- 3 models for narrowing the circle. I think to look among used ones. Naturally, the quality was not worse.))) Maybe someone has something to offer or an exchange option. Thanks in advance.)
IMHO, D7100, or swing at a full frame, but which one - you already need to look at finance ...
Konstantin, do you consider the Pentax K-3 variant?
Please comment - why?
I looked at 7100 initially, I regret that I didn’t take it, but if it’s complete, what is it aiming at ?, how much I would like to spend it reluctantly, the head will swell on the Orum))). And the eternal question is, how much better quality than the 7100 or 7000?
Well, it's hard to overestimate a full frame, it's a large bright viewfinder, it's easier to focus, a wider angle of view through the lens, the working ISO is higher, the sharpness is higher, only sometimes under certain conditions the depth of depth of field may not be enough and you will have to move further and then crop (crop the excess) ... from a budget full frame - D700 / D610, but you think, read, compare ...
Thank you, I understood the direction.)))
I would like to clarify the issue of shaking in 24 megapixel crop matrices. Why is there so much noise? Why didn’t the filmmakers have such a question?
Just with a pixel size of the matrix 5200 \ 5300 = 3,8 μm, the pixel area = 15-16 μm
and for a film of 400 units, one crystal = 0,2 μm2
So where should there be more shake ??? Why, while sitting on the tape, no one shouted: “Why did you make such a fine-grained film for us ?! Do not! We have SHEVELENKA !!! ” )))
the films on the film did not have an electric current and electric field - therefore, the films did not have noise on the film
Technologies are different ...
or is it not about that noise ... (I was thinking about the brightness noise from lack of light ...)
And now it is not at all clear what it is about ... litter
People can not decide! Take d7000 or d5300, it confuses at 7000 low working iso compared to 5300.
в5300 is the same 5200 at a new price (20-30 percent more expensive)
If after 5100 the 5200 camera really was a real breakthrough (practically a new device in the old case), then the 5300 against the background of the 5200 just fades .. Is the battery new? The filter was removed (the effect of which can still be seen with optics from UAH 20 and with a tripod)? Have you added Wi-Fi? ... That's almost all ...
At your site, I would look at 5200 and not at 5300. if you so please, this is the same 5300 at a price 20-30% lower ..
If we compare the D7000 and D5200-D5300…. Well, at least D7100 took s for comparison ..
The D5200-D5300 is in no way inferior to the D7000, only the D7000 does not have such a screen.
I would not hesitate to buy a D5200 and would not take a steam bath
Thanks for the advice! Tell me, is it true that the whale 18-55vrII does not wash the background?
not true
The detailing is really higher, but the background washes as it should wash - that's all right
Those. if you choose between 18-55 vr2 and 18-105vr as a whale for 5300, vr2 is better adapted to it, understand correctly? 18-140, I do not consider since expensive !
Thank you in advance for your answers!
vr2 is better anyway.
This is a really great lens - which allows even the matrix from D5200 (24 megapixels) to open (unlike many previous whales)
The circle is really good.
Of its drawbacks - bringing it to work (button and opening) - vacuum cleaner)))
But in general, if there is an opportunity for both D5200 and 5300 (where 24 Mp) - this lens is really suitable for these matrices - normal
But, I emphasize, precisely in terms of detail ...
By blurring the background, of course, the larger the focal length, the better.
18-105 in any case, the background will be better blurred (and in general the lens is one of the highest quality whales)
Those. if you choose between 18-55 vr and 18-55 vr II, then certainly vr II
But if you choose between 18-105 and 18-55 vr II and 18-105, then it's still better to take 18-105.
All IMHO. All the same, you choose.
It means detailing, if you do not look at the focal
detail is better with vr II
But the larger the focal length, the narrower the DOF = the stronger the blurred background ... Therefore, it is better to blur 18-105
Including a blurred background is mainly needed for portraits…. Excessive detail is not needed there - on the contrary, softness is needed there ...
Therefore, it is better to take a less detailed one there - i.e. 18-105
All clear thanks