Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 28, 2015, 9:25 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
deadshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hertfordshire UK
Posts: 759
Default Is it just me and my p.c. D5300 ?

I've been thinking of upgrading from my D5100 to the D5300, so I have looked at a comparison of the two cameras on" Image Resource Comparometer." I cant see any advantage despite the fact that the D5300 has done away with the low pass filter and upped the pixel count to 24 mp from my 16 mp, I was expecting a reasonable improvement ,so is it just me and my pc?. I know the extra pixels will make cropping better but I usually frame what shot I want, to avoid cropping where possible.
__________________
D5100 +18-200mVR Nikkor lens.
SB400 Flash, ML-L3 Remote.
SB 700 Flash
Holster + Shoulder Bag.
Beike carbon 4 section tripod/monopod
Gorillapod SLR Zoom + BH1 ball head
Panasonic FZ1000
Panasonic FZ200
Nissin D i40 Flash
+ SLR Gorillapod
deadshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 28, 2015, 9:40 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
MarceloLI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Long Island - New York
Posts: 2,083
Default

It is not you neither your pc, and your observations are answering your questions.

If you really want to improve your IQ, AF or do a substantial upgrade you should consider a Nikon D7100.
MarceloLI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2015, 10:07 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
deadshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hertfordshire UK
Posts: 759
Default

Thanks for the reply MarcelolLI,
the problem is I dont want to go heavier or larger. Perhaps I'll wait for the D5500 you never know.
The touch screen doesn't interest me much though..
__________________
D5100 +18-200mVR Nikkor lens.
SB400 Flash, ML-L3 Remote.
SB 700 Flash
Holster + Shoulder Bag.
Beike carbon 4 section tripod/monopod
Gorillapod SLR Zoom + BH1 ball head
Panasonic FZ1000
Panasonic FZ200
Nissin D i40 Flash
+ SLR Gorillapod
deadshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2015, 1:39 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

The D5300 is only an incremental upgrade from the D5100.

You should also know that the individual pixels in a 24MP image are smaller than the pixels in a 16MP image, and that image noise is individual errant pixels, so image noise in a 24MP image is less noticeable than it is in a 16MP image.

You can't really compare the images on Imaging Resource's Comparometer, because in order to eliminate downsampling, you need to view images at their original resolution, and the original resolutions of images from the D5100 and D5300 are different (6000 x 4000 vs. 4928 x 3264.)

A better way to compare sensors is DxOMark, but even it doesn't factor in the difference in the size (relative to the size of the whole image) of the errant pixels.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Jan 28, 2015 at 1:42 PM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2015, 4:10 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadshot View Post
I've been thinking of upgrading from my D5100 to the D5300, so I have looked at a comparison of the two cameras on" Image Resource Comparometer." I cant see any advantage despite the fact that the D5300 has done away with the low pass filter and upped the pixel count to 24 mp from my 16 mp, I was expecting a reasonable improvement ,so is it just me and my pc?. I know the extra pixels will make cropping better but I usually frame what shot I want, to avoid cropping where possible.
At the camera club I belong to, discussions regarding new equipment typically start out with a question: I want to improve the quality of my photographs and have been thinking about replacing my (fill in the blank) with the latest version.
My response is: what would you actually like to improve? Or as TCav would ask What would you like to do that your existing camera doesn't allow you to do now?
The image quality, or Auto Focus capability, shooting in low light(High ISO image quality), being able to print larger images,etc.?

Only you can provide the answers. You also have to take into account wether or not your existing lens is up to the task. One thing is certain, the higher megapixel sensors used these days show a lenses' limitation very quickly.
Would you be better off investing in one or two lenses, replacing the18-200mm VR, as opposed to camera body?

Food for thought.
Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 29, 2015, 1:03 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
deadshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hertfordshire UK
Posts: 759
Default

Thanks for the replies TCav and Zig-123, good advice.I agree with what you say entirely..
My trusty old 18 200 is I think a good example of its genre but is now 9 yrs old.I dont want to go back to swapping lenses again but what has happened is Nikon has brought out a new couple of lenses, the 18.300mmf6.3 and the 18.140mm, so I started off looking at their reviews on Dxo etc.Both of these got slightly higher marks than my lens. So I thought if I'm going to change my lens perhaps I might improve their performance with with a newer body.These lenses were reviewed on the D7100. But again an increase in weight I'm trying to avoid. My local dealer 45 min drive away said that he rarely sells the 18.140mm because it is overpriced and not in his opinion very well made for the money.
Hence me looking at image resource comp. which does show differences in noise/sharpness in various set ups,perhaps not as much as full size but seeable.
I've got a big birthday coming up this year.My avatar is me in my garden in London at the end of WW2 as a clue.
I think what I have to do is go to the dealer and play with these outfits then probably staying with what I've got. 😕
__________________
D5100 +18-200mVR Nikkor lens.
SB400 Flash, ML-L3 Remote.
SB 700 Flash
Holster + Shoulder Bag.
Beike carbon 4 section tripod/monopod
Gorillapod SLR Zoom + BH1 ball head
Panasonic FZ1000
Panasonic FZ200
Nissin D i40 Flash
+ SLR Gorillapod
deadshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 29, 2015, 7:23 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Lenses don't change with the camera they're attached to. The field curvature, distortion, chromatic aberration and vignetting that a lens suffers from will be just as apparent on a 24MP sensor as it is on a 12MP sensor. Where it will change is when it's used with different size sensors. In that case, those optical aberrations will get worse as the size of the sensor increases.

So don't worry about which camera a lens is attached to in the DxOMark test results. (But I should also tell you that you can change the camera once you've selected the lens.)

What I will say is that the original Nikon 18-200 is about as good as a jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-none lens gets, and that, except for the extra reach, the 18-300 is not an improvement.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2015, 3:15 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Newark, New York
Posts: 82
Default

The weight/size is slight. And if you get a decent aftermarket strap it isn't a big deal. I also debated between the 5300 and 7100. The 7100 just had too many options over the 5300 to pass up. I really like the built in focus motor on the 7100. I've bought some nice older lenses at great deals. Which compensated for the added cost of this camera.
Weebee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2015, 5:32 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
deadshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hertfordshire UK
Posts: 759
Default

Thanks for the replies again, I hear what you are saying T.Cav .
Weebee I know the weight changes are not great but believe me ,when you get to my age, 79 every bit more is noticeable, especially when I go on long walks along the coastline in Cornwall (south west England), it's very hilly are rocky.
I even changed to a lighter built camera bag recently to get rid of a few ozs.
On some walks I left my Nikon behind and just took my Panasonic FZ200, which I bought purely to use on some of the windy/ sand swept beaches taking shots of 3 of my grandsons who love surfing. Getting down to these beaches involves some very high steep cliffs. Hence any thing lighter appeals to me. I see some professionals on the beaches sometimes, shooting the surfers with enormous lenses and full frame bodies,tripods,umbrellas etc. I'd love to do that but when I was younger and stronger , I couldn't afford to do it .That's life I guess.

Interestingly Weebee many many years ago I had an Uncle and Aunt who lived in Newark New Jersey, who then moved to Cranford, it was always my ambition to visit them but I never managed to afford it while they were alive, they were very good to our family,sending food parcels etc during W W 2.
__________________
D5100 +18-200mVR Nikkor lens.
SB400 Flash, ML-L3 Remote.
SB 700 Flash
Holster + Shoulder Bag.
Beike carbon 4 section tripod/monopod
Gorillapod SLR Zoom + BH1 ball head
Panasonic FZ1000
Panasonic FZ200
Nissin D i40 Flash
+ SLR Gorillapod
deadshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2015, 10:15 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Newark, New York
Posts: 82
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadshot View Post
Thanks for the replies again, I hear what you are saying T.Cav .
Weebee I know the weight changes are not great but believe me ,when you get to my age, 79 every bit more is noticeable, especially when I go on long walks along the coastline in Cornwall (south west England), it's very hilly are rocky.
I even changed to a lighter built camera bag recently to get rid of a few ozs.
On some walks I left my Nikon behind and just took my Panasonic FZ200, which I bought purely to use on some of the windy/ sand swept beaches taking shots of 3 of my grandsons who love surfing. Getting down to these beaches involves some very high steep cliffs. Hence any thing lighter appeals to me. I see some professionals on the beaches sometimes, shooting the surfers with enormous lenses and full frame bodies,tripods,umbrellas etc. I'd love to do that but when I was younger and stronger , I couldn't afford to do it .That's life I guess.

Interestingly Weebee many many years ago I had an Uncle and Aunt who lived in Newark New Jersey, who then moved to Cranford, it was always my ambition to visit them but I never managed to afford it while they were alive, they were very good to our family,sending food parcels etc during W W 2.

I can see your point. On long walks it can add up. I've been to Newark NJ a few times. Nice area actually. You ever been on this side of the pond?
Weebee is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:29 PM.