Personal View site logo
Nikon D7100 topic
  • 145 Replies sorted by
  • After a month of testing and use I returned my d5200 and replaced it with a d7100 today. First impression is that the d7100 has better resolution. I would say about 15% more rez. The moiré and aliasing are non existing with the video I shot indoors. But I still see the horizontal fixed pattern noise in the blacks at all iso levels and in M an S modes, using several in camera and custom picture profiles, along with several good Nikon and Sigma lenses. I can also see the FPN on the HDMI output with my Cineroid EVF and on my Panasonic and LG screens set to 1080p. This really sucks because it would no doubt be outputted to any external recorder that I may want to use. The FPN was one of two reasons for returning the d5200, plus its poor overall resolution. I had such high hopes of moving into an APS C size sensor beyond using a GH2 or GH3.

  • @rigs, can you shoot something that shows the FPN you're speaking about on the D7100? I've seen footage that looks pretty good IMO. Does this FPN show up at all times or just in certain areas of a scene?

  • @Aria here is a frame grab shot at 1600 iso f4 1/50th, PC set to -3 contrast +2 sharpness @ 24p, high in DX mode. Look in the black area for the FPN. It is much more pronounced in motion. BTW the 1.3 crop mode is very soft and kind of looks like the rez of the d5200.

    Here is the original clip

    1920 x 1080 - 3M
  • @rigs, thanks for the screen grab. It's hard to really say, but from what i'm seeing, I think this is a thing that cries out for adding film grain to obscure the horizontal pattern. I don't know that it would work, but it seems possible that it would decrease the obvious aspect of the FPN. Other than that the image looks pretty good. I'd be curious to see how some Some Film Grain effected it.

  • Pretty much the same banding people were complaining about with the D5200. I'll do some tests and see if Neat Video can get rid of it. It did well with the flickering from artificial lighting on my GH2.

  • rigs what picture profile were you using?

    The FPN has only been a problem for me when I've been abusive and even then I've fixed it by crushing the blacks, adding grain, or denoising. ISO 100, 400, and 800 have the lowest levels of FPN.

  • Here's the screen grabs from my sharpening test I tried 3 lenses, 3 picture profiles, IPB, and ALL-I codecs and I couldn't get the 5D to sharpen up as well as the D5200. I post sharpened both in FCPX to the same level. In camera sharpness was 0 on the 5D and 1 on the D5200 which are the optimum settings for each camera before they start to show halos/fringing. I shot the D5200 with a 35mm Summicron-r and the 5D with a 50mm Summicron-r, 60mm Elmarit-r, and a 90mm Summicron-r and they had almost identical sharpness. All lenses were @ f/4 and both cameras @ 100ISO.

    5D MKIII.png
    1920 x 1080 - 3M
    1920 x 1080 - 3M
  • Here is a test between the D7100 and a Hacked GH2.

    D7100 set up 24p, high, F4, ISO 640, 1/50, color temp 3030k, picture control Neutral base, sharpness +2, contrast -3, brightness 0, saturation 0, Hue 0. DX mode, Lens Sigma DC 17-70mm. Focal distance 17m.

    D7100 H264 original clip

    D7100 jpeg fine original photo

    LUMIX GH2 set up 24p, high, ISO 640, 1/50, color temp 3300k, picture profile smooth base, sharpness -2, contrast -2, saturation -2, noise reduction 0. Driftwood Cluster X "moon" Trial 5, Lens Lumix 14-140mm. Focal distance 14m.

    LUMIX GH2 AVCHD original clip

  • I wouldn't shoot @ 640ISO, it's too noisy, 800 is a lot cleaner. Neutral with the contrast down on the Nikons is a lot flatter than neutral with the contrast down on the 5D, it's almost log. Neutral with contrast on 0 or Standard with the contrast down has a lot less noise but is still quite flat. The sharpness needs to go down a notch, it's starting to halo. It's pretty close to the GH2 post sharpened.

  • D7100 looks soft, try to find a word bear on footage, makes me think it resolves as much as 5200

  • It sharpens up just fine

    D7100 sharpened.png
    1819 x 1027 - 3M
  • The Sharpened D7100 footage looks good and not degraded by sharpening in post. That's a good sign. People have to decide if a touch more detail that you'd find in the GH2 footage is worth giving up the extra Dynamic Range and better Color of the Nikon. We Can't have everything from cameras below $1,500.00. I'm still torn between the benefits of the GH3 vs. the D7100.

    Will your viewing audience be distracted by the sharpness level of the D7100? I highly doubt it. IMO there are far more important things to worry about in your footage. For one thing the Color, lighting, framing and composition of your shots. I don't think the D7100 footage is so soft that it would be a problem on most projects. Given that people have been viewing 5D2 footage in films and not really focusing on it's relative lack of detail. Not all scenes require ultimate sharpness. It seems that the D7100 sits in the middle where you can get good detail, Dynamic Range, Color, etc. It may not be the sharpness king, but does it have to be?

  • They might be distracted by the cadence of the GH3. The D7100 looks sharper in some parts of the image like the shadows and the GH3 sharper in others like in the small print which will be handy if your shooting a film about typography.

  • Here is a short piece I did while playing with the d7100.

  • By DxO's ratings standards:

    Nikon D7100 = 83 score

    Nikon D800 = 95 score

    Panasonic GH3 = 71 score

    Canon EOS Mark III = 71 score

  • Reposting the chart as the prior version had some image clipping on the D7100 specs...

    642 x 490 - 35K
  • Just thought I'd add my opinion to this topic re the D7100. I bought this camera a couple of days ago after lots of forum reading/viewing footage and comparing what's available and at what price. I've owned a GH2 (donated for the work done on the hack) and a 5D MK3 (which I returned after several days testing). I have to say that I'm very impressed with the footage from the D7100, IMO the footage is very similar in detail to the GH2. One thing I've noticed re the detail is the lower amount of 'mosquito noise' present in the highly detailed parts of an image, the GH2 footage was indeed highly detailed but IMO was also a little too clinical, the D7100 footage has plenty of detail without any post work and it seems to be 'cleaner' around all the highly detailed areas of an image. The issue with noise and banding IMHO is being blown out of all proportion, I have an FS700 which produces very clean video BUT, if you screw with the settings too much you can destroy the image. The D7100 IMO is VERY sensitive and I think it's comparable to the 5D MK3. bringing-up the black level to fish-out detail in the shadows will produce noise that ordinarily wouldn't be an issue, in my tests (under 'regular' lighting conditions) the images from the D7100 are very clean indeed. At low ISO settings the images are totally noise free BUT, and that's a big but, if you pull up the black level too much you will start to see noise/banding. I would also add that under VERY, VERY low light conditions you can see noise in the image even at ISO 100 BUT again the noise is very low (all things are relative) and you would be asking way too much of a £1000 camera to perform well in such low light conditions. In low light or anything higher the images are very clean indeed, at ISO 1000 there is only a small amount of noise and I'm comparing this full size ENG broadcast cameras. At higher ISO's watch you're white balance setting, this has a dramatic affect on noise levels, I found that taking a proper white balance (as opposed to using any of the presets or the auto WB) produces the best low-noise images. BTW, the colours are fantastic and overexposed areas of the image seem very well controlled...

  • I put it up against the GH3. Stock settings on both. Iso 200.

    14-140 on GH3 and 18-105 on Nikon.

  • Thanks for the comparisons... The GH3 does look sharper but to my eyes (IMHO) it has that clinical feel in the very high detail areas. I guess it's down to a personal preference...

  • The D7100 is really an interesting camera. It's a very pleasing look overall. Can't complain about the way it handles Color and DR. Decent detail level and smooth flow to the footage. Amazing given the bit rate isn't high like the GH3 or 5D3.

    I prefer the higher level of detail on the GH3 even tho I love the Colors of the D7100. With the flexibility of lens choice on the GH3 I think it will give users more options to tailor the look they can get. Still for low light the D7100 is a strong performer even if it's not at the 5D3 level.

  • @jasonp Nope. Not "pathetic trolling" just an error. Typed in "Canon Mark III" into DxO's search engine and the search result defaulted to 1D Mark III specs that I didn't notice. My bad. Mea culpa. Just shoot me.

    Still, the D7100 sensor looks good by relative comparison -- particularly at the price point.

  • @aria That's a fair comment... Was playing on the edit suite this morning, I still have footage from the GH2, 5D MK2 and 5D MK3 as well as the footage from my FS700 and the D7100. Funny thing is, you can make all the cameras look like each other or all the same just by tweaking the gamma curve and the sharpening level, I know it's all too easy to get carried away looking at detail and noise levels in the picture rather than just 'getting on with it'. Re lens choice, I got the 7100 because I can swap lenses between my FS700, I use the MTF services adaptor so I have manual iris control with my Nikon and Tokina lenses... Has anyone tested the audio on the 7100? I did a test yesterday, the audio is rather noisy unless you take the audio gain down to about level 4-5 and then boost the input signal to get the correct level on the meters, doing this gives very good audio that's well useable. Also noticed that the headphone amp has tons of volume, much more than the FS700!!