Oh boy you're scaring me. Tell me more and how you know it. I've just been going by reviews and video samples on Youtube. What I need is a camera that shoots 1080p video that looks good in low light and can autofocus on faces.

The D5100 is on it's way but I could send it back unopened and get something else if that is the general wisdom here of what I should do. I definitely trust the judgment of the people on this forum more than I can say.

I just checked and my order shipped today. One of the issues going on is that I need to return my HVR Z7 for service and the last time it took several months to get it back from Mack camera repair. Since I use the camera constantly I need a camera to use while it's in for repair, and I also wanted a high quality still camera and something that would give me the shallow depth of field that I see in the DSLRs and have been lusting over.

Well...

I just put a D5100 back into the box and returned it today. Autofocus actually wasn't the deal-breaker for me. But it is basically unusable for video, even for static shots, as it is always hunting in/out.

I figured I could live with manual focus/shooting wide. And I did think the 5100's 30p video quality was the best I've seen yet from Nikon.

But being unable to set a manual exposure for video really bothered me. Nikon shifts the exposure immediately in steps, so anytime the camera senses a brightness change, you get a very visible jump in levels. Yes, you can lock the exposure by holding a button continuously but...really?

And for still photography, in head-to-head tests with my D7000 the 5100 consistently underperformed. Can't explain that, as they supposedly have the same sensor and engine, but I saw it, and for me at least it was dramatic.

The clincher was looking over the specs on the upcoming Sony A35 (August, I think). I just looks like a much more potent tool for video and probably is within reason of the 5100's still capability, while being a bit more compact.

You can usually return opened items, so check your merchant's terms and give it a test run if you can. I'd be interested to hear what you think.

On my HVR-Z7 I use auto exposure most of the time, but I have it set to respond very slowly and gradually, and I often use the AE +/- setting to hold the exposure on a face at a certain level. I didn't think that the autoexposure thing would bother me, but I hadn't thought about it making instant big jumps between levels. I can see where that would drive a person mad.

After reading your post I did a little exploring on the web and found that auto-focus works either by sensing contrast or sensing phase. That the Sony cameras sense phase and that most still cameras like the Nikon auto-focus by sensing contrast. That the phase sensing autofocus is smoother but requires redirecting some of the light towards the auto-focus phase sensor so it gets this smoothness at the expense of some low light ability. That the phase sensing method employed by Nikon gets to a nice focus relatively quickly but that it kind of overshoots then undershoots then comes back to the middle. This gives an autofocus that always seems to be searching rather than smoothly following focus. The upside is that it doesn't take anything away from the low light sensitivity. Yeah, it sounds like the phase sensing way is better for video except that I hate to do anything that costs low light sensitivity.

From what I'm reading, it seems like there is no way to set shutter speed or ISO in the video mode of the D5100 either. It's sounding more and more like I will be returning this camera unopened...and I was so excited...bummer.

Here is the review from Digital Photography Review on it's video performance. They have a number of samples you can watch online or download.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/page18.asp

Those samples look great! It sounds from the article like you do have quite a bit of manual control over video if you simply set up your shot as you would for a photo, then engage live view and hit the video record button.

What I am after with this camera are three things:

1/ interviews in natural light with a simple dc-bias powered electret microphone set from microphonemadness.com

2/ great looking stills.

3/ great looking b-roll.

That's it. I'm not looking to follow action or do dramas or anything. I just want to go to a product or service shoot, shoot a talking head with available light, and get some great looking stills and b-roll. I want to basically do the same thing for church and non-profit stuff: Shoot interviews and testimonials and shoot stills and b-roll to go along with the talking heads.

I want to shoot mostly locked down camera stuff at 1080p that I can zoom in a little (up to a 1/3 for a 720p project) and for some slight movement that will match the Ken Burns effect animated stills.

I want stuff that I can slide into templates that are ready for either stills or video and will do the same slight Ken Burns zooms and pans either way.

For anything beyond that I will still have my camcorder and lighting and audio setups.

It sounds like the Panasonic GH2 would work for you better. I have two, which I use for theatrical recordings, and they're perfect. I sold my Canon 7D to pay for both bodies to eliminate the problems with recording times (I've recorded up to 2 hours non-stop on them) and moire, which is essentially gone on the GH2s.

I also just used one of them in a run and gun situation, recording a benefit scavenger hunt race, and with the autofocus set to track faces, ISO and aperture set to auto, it was as easy as you can get with a DSLR. Giving the AF100 a hard look now.

What I don't like about electronic viewfinders is the delay. What you're seeing is always a quarter second or so late. No big deal on video, but I find I'm always missing the moment on stills.

"What I don't like about electronic viewfinders is the delay. What you're seeing is always a quarter second or so late. No big deal on video, but I find I'm always missing the moment on stills."

That I have to agree with - the noticeable lag on the EVF with the GH2 does bug me. But the inability to see anything in the viewfinder when shooting video on the Canons was worse. As was the sub-par 1080p resolution and horrendous aliasing.

I bought the GH2s very aware that I was buying into the Micro 4/3rds format - I think that mirrorless technology, in its infancy now, is the future. And Canon has shown no signs of manufacturing a mirrorless system.

I agree mirrorless technology is the future. I spend so much of each day looking at electronic screens though that I like looking through an optical viewfinder. There is something satisfying about it that probably is just silly, but appeals to me none-the-less. I also like hearing the shutter noise that isn't just a recording. Same thing: probably silly but I just feel the sound and the feel of a mechanical shutter.

As far as the aliasing goes, I think that is related to the fact that both the Canons and the Nikons just drop pixels rather than sampling a bunch of pixels and averaging them (which would cut down both noise and aliasing). It's one of those problems that I can work around.

I found this video describing how to set aperture for video. Apparently if you use aperture priority mode and set your aperture before going into live mode, it will hold the setting:



As far as holding the exposure (which seems to be especially important since otherwise it will jump to incremental values rather than changing smoothly), you can set the the button that a lot of people think you have to hold to latch to hold whatever auto exposure level you are at so that at least it doesn't change. How to do this is described in this video:



It doesn't seem so bad thinking about it. Go to aperature priority, set your depth of field, then go into live mode and lock your exposure. From there, manual focus, push the photo button half way down to lock in a single autofocus setting, or use the full time auto focus. I'll probably try the camera out at least when it arrives and just send it back if it turns out to be too frustrating to handle. There are definitely some really pretty samples on Youtube and Vimeo shot with this camera.

I use a nikon 70-200mm single touch zoom on my z7 via a MTF adapter

www.mtfservices.com

I must manually focus this lens on the z7 so its out of date autofocus is not an issue for me and I was able to get one very cheaply. It is picking up cobwebs at 300 metres and it gives the 35mm full frame equivalent focal length of 1400mm. It is as sharp as the Zeiss lens that came with the z7.

I was thinking of getting a D5100 to expand the setup -- but now I will just watch this thread!!

Thanks for the heads up

I just got the D7000 to shoot stills and video while shooting dance in Europe and after a great deal of experimenting found it to do everything I needed it to do. I too was looking at the D5100 , mainly because of the articulated screen, and really wished the 7000 had that (perhaps Nikon will have a 7100?), but it wasn't a deal breaker for me. Some of the reasons I went with the 7000 over the 5100...

More auto focus points of reference
Sealed and more rugged body (very important for the schlepping i do)
The 7000 has complete manual control in video mode

The last point was debated in my mind until I actually ended up shooting in manual mode more often than not...I found the auto focus going in and out quite a bit as I was shooting dancers coming in and out of frame and with the changing lighting conditions of stage lighting.

I would recommend that anyone buying either of these camera bodies buy the bodies without the "standard zooms, and purchase faster glass to put on your bodies, such as an f2.8 17mm-55mm, or f2.8 70mm-200mm zoom...you will expand your capabilities greatly and have more dramatic bokeh in shots that require it.

I never really considered the 7000 because of the higher price and because it doesn't do 1080p at 30 fps which is my main format. I got the kit with the lens because it was only $50 more with the lens. What lens do you recommend? I'd like something that was fast, had stabilization and that would go from really wide to maybe ten times in.

The 2 lenses mentioned are good...the 17mm - 55m zoom is your portraiture and close zoom...the 70 - 200mm will bring it in, but with video you will need to have a good set of sticks to keep it steady. I shot on a lighter weight set of sticks in Europe on seating risers, and the long lens picked up lots of vibration when zoomed in. If you are needing good audio, either go boom mic or invest in one of the mini shotguns made for DSLR's...the on-board mic sucks for anything except as a dubbing reference. If you want this to shoot primarily video, you might want to look at the Canon D60 which has many more video settings and slightly better mega pixel rating. I'm shooting for DVD and the HD 1,280×720 / 30 fps setting works great for that.

I know the 7000 is more expensive than the 5100, but the quality of the body was light years above, and the sealed body was a real incentive when I knew I would be shooting outside a good part of the time. I looked at a 5100 at a best buy near me and it felt like a toy compared to the 7000. I'm rough on my equipment and like it to have a chance of surviving one of my shoots! I also got a shooting glove/strap that fastens to the tripod mount and wraps around your hand on the right side of the camera so it is always attached...much more secure than a camera strap and always ready to snap it up to take a shot.

Well the D5100 came yesterday and I brought it along on a shoot today. I used my Z7u for most of the shoot, but took some stills and five video clips with the D5100.

I must say I really like this camera. Thank you so much for your negative words Andy. It made me really look up how to deal with this camera and I had it pretty much figured out before it arrived. If you hadn't prodded me to investigate, I am absolutely sure my experience wouldn't have been so positive.

Basically, in aperture priority mode, you can set your aperture and it will hold there when you switch into live view. From there I can move the little focus box to where the subject is, then depress the camera shutter button down halfway to get focus. If the auto-exposure is too dark or too light, I can add or subtract with the +/- button and the function wheel. If the exposure auto-adjusts while you are shooting it does so in steps which are too abrupt rather than smoothly. Getting around this is pretty simple. You can just set the exposure button to hold from the menu and after that, all you have to do is depress it once when you are happy with the exposure. If you don't use the hold function, you have to hold the exposure lock down while you shoot, which is sort of a pain. On the lens is a VR (vibration reduction) switch which is Nikon's version of image stabilization. Handheld shots with this engaged looked great. There is also a switch for auto-focus on the lens. There is a screen preview magnification function which lets you digitally zoom way in (preview only) for setting manual focus. The footage I shot today looked fantastic. If I hadn't brought my main camera I would have been just fine. All in all I'd say it's a keeper. If I hadn't read Andy's posts and explored a little before I got it though, I can easily image that I might have sent the thing back in disgust. What you have to do to use this camera is not obvious at all. Thanks again.

Both this and my regular camera have their places. With my Z7, I can just shoot and adjust as I go. With the D5100, I really have to set up each shot. That would be the same with any D-SLR camera though, not just the Nikon. Right now though I have a lot of commercial stuff set up where setting each shot is exactly what I want to do. Also, on this stuff, I am doing about half and half stills and moving pictures. If I wanted to use my regular camera, I'd still need something for stills.

The stuff I shot today really looks good. The fact that you can get this level of picture out of a camera that costs less than a grand really blows me away!

I bet you know the question that's on my mind --
0-255 or 16-255?

There are two colorspace options: sRGB and Adobe RGB. sRGB looks like the 16-255 that we both like so much. I'm not sure exactly what "Adobe RGB" is, but I have a feeling I won't be using it.

Edit:

I've got the footage on my timeline right now and while the settings may say "sRGB", it sure does look like cRGB. Darn, no big deal. A correction filter fixes it and I have to move it into another format anyway, but what the heck!

Edit 2:

Yeah, it's definitely cRGB. I don't care what the menu settings say.

Those sound like printer profiles for stills. Probably doesn't affect movies.
(Adobe RGB prints more vivid for solid colors and CG).

Cineform's HD Link seems to cut the video but not the audio on some clips a little short. I had one small read error on my SD card, but it is quite possible that this class 10 (233x) SD card isn't quite as fast as it's label. The footage is about the same on the timeline as what I've seen with AVCHD footage. It's h264 in a .mov container. I just have a Core2Duo processor on my laptop, so I always convert any footage that isn't mpeg2 off the camera into something easier on the processor. Run through a cRGB to sRGB correction filter, the footage matches my Z7 quite nicely (except that it is 1920 instead of 1440 pixels across).

Photos look great. It switches back and forth between shooting stills and videos very easily.

sRGB and AdobeRGB in the options are colour space profiles. AdobeRGB has a larger colour gamut than sRGB (sRGB is a monitor/internet oriented colour space). This option should only have any impact on JPEG images, not RAW (NEF in Nikon's case).

Laurence,

Glad to help! I'm always happy to add a little negativity to the SCS boards... :)