Interested in buying a Nikon D7100. Anyone use this for video yet?

i've been holding off on buying a DSLR ever since i bought a panasonic HMC-40 with a 35mm Letus Mini about 5 months before DSLR's became all the rage.

i want a dslr to get the proper depth of field, and to be able to get some better images by using some nice lenses.

i've been thinking about getting the Nikon D7100 simply because I already own a 18-55mm, 28mm prime, 50mm prime, 100mm prime, and a 200mm prime lens.

has anyone used the D7100 for video yet? if so, likes? dislikes?

Thanks!

There's a bunch of discussion about the Nikon DSLRs and video over at the DVXUser forums. I've been shooting on a D7100 for a year or so, and it can produce some lovely images. There are, however, caveats.

First of all: it's an APS-C camera. So the field-of-view (and depth of field) characteristics are akin to those of Super35 cinema, not full-frame SLRs. For my purposes this is ideal, but if you're seeking that ultra-shallow DOF 'DSLR' look, you'll want to look to larger sensors.

The main issues with the D7100 are handling and noise performance. Sensor noise is always an issue with this camera: there's a considerable amount of fixed pattern noise in dark areas of the frame. You will notice it, you will dislike it, and it may ruin the camera for you. However, NeatVideo does a terrific job of removing or at least significantly reducing the noise in most situations. I've had one case where it struggled with removing noise from hair, but for the most part I've been delighted with the noise performance after processing with NeatVideo.

The problem is that running your film through NeatVideo is spectacularly processor-intensive. Depending on your intended use and workflow, this might be a deal-breaker.

Otherwise, the pictures are pretty good. I like the D7100's colour rendition - I find Canon DSLRs distinctly magenta-skewed for skin tones. The Nikon skews yellow, perhaps, but I find it easier to produce an image that pleases me. Low-light performance is about what you'd expect from a very high-res recent sensor: good, but not great. ISO1600 is OK (modulo NeatVideo); ISO3200 is pushing it a bit; ISO6400 is usable only if you're truly desperate. I've seen no appreciable moire or aliasing artefacts, and the camera is pretty robust. Mine worked flawlessly on a tough trip across the US last year, spanning thunderstorms and Death Valley in midsummer.

Handling is my biggest complaint. All DX Nikons suffer from the inability to change aperture without coming out of 'Live View', meaning you can't change aperture during a shot. Personally, I don't find this too much of a problem, but opinions vary. However, the D7100 has some annoying idiosyncrasies that vary from all other video-shooting Nikons. Significantly, auto-ISO and exposure lock don't work. On other Nikons (notably my previous D7000 and the D5300, which uses the same sensor as the D7100) you can enable auto-ISO and assign it to the AE-Lock (Toggle) button. To pull an exposure you thus tap that button to unlock ISO: the camera floats the sensitivity to find a metered result using your current aperture and preset shutter speed, then you tap the button again to lock ISO. In run-and-gun situations this is pretty great, and I use a variable ND filter to provide a little control during shots.

The D7100 is manual-only. You can set the AE-Lock button to show you a metered exposure, but you then have to toggle back and manually dial in those metered settings. Which is annoying enough even before you realise that changing ISO is a two-handed process (middle button on the left of the screen and dial on the right).

Despite this being different behaviour to every other Nikon DSLR, Nikon have confirmed that this is 'intended behaviour' - which I think doesn't so much mean they meant it to work like this as that they're not going to fix it in a firmware update. I'd buy a D5300 every time just for this, let alone for the rotating LCD screen. Lack of a headphone jack kills that for me, sadly.

Upshot: I like the pictures from the D7100, but the post-processing requirements are a pain and the handling means it's never truly pleasant to work with. I'm happy enough with the material I shot with it last year, but I don't see myself heading into another major project with the same body. You end up more-or-less eyeballing exposure off the LCD. Once you get used to it it's surprisingly reliable, but it's never reassuring and a constant cause of operator stress on shoots. If you're working with a small (or non-existent) crew, you need all the help and reassurance you can get. The D7100 won't offer any.

Right now, I'd buy a Panasonic GH4. I used a GH3 as a B-camera last year so I already have some m43 glass, and a Metabones SpeedBooster allows me to attach my Nikon lenses with smooth aperture control, similar depth-of-field characteristics to Super35/DX/APS-C sensors, and a stop more effective light transmission. The GH3 has great handling let down by an indifferent sensor and crappy displays; the GH4's 4K picture looks sensational downscaled to 1080, has spectacularly good displays (focus peaking! Zebras!), and retains all the handling advantages. It's not a low-light monster (ISO800 usable; 1600 in a pinch) but unless that's a specific problem for you, it's hard to look past it.

Sony's A7s is also work a look, however. Full-frame sensor, I think you can get Nikon F (/G) to Sony Alpha mount adaptors, and it really is a low-light monster. 4K recording is external-only, sadly.

I was a big supporter of Nikon's DSLR video efforts with the D7000. The D7100 is sharper and avoid moire issues, but in every other way it's a step backwards, and in the 18 months since it appeared we've had no solid evidence that Nikon take video seriously.

Holy cark, that was longer than I expected.

TL;DR version: D7100 was an oddball choice for video a year ago. This year, buy a Panasonic GH4 or Sony A7s, and adaptors for your Nikkor glass.