You are aware that DPR has incorporated EODHD content into camera reviews (see Canon 5D MK III review link below) and has plans to do the same in the future?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/25

Oops. I bet you wish you could edit your previous post.

I am absolutely aware and funny thing is that EOSHD part in the review is the worst highly opinionated diatribe part of the review.

If you want to see more balanced review of 5D Mark III, see Philip Bloom review,

https://vimeo.com/39292404

Philip Bloom (unlike EOSHD) is a real pro. EOSHD i(Andrew Reid ) actually is nobody. He is not a professional of any kind. He is just a guy with a website ... That's all

By the way, funny you didn't comment on what I said about EOSHD previous history (Canon T2i being just as good as Sony F3 acording to him, false rumors, annoyed Panasonic employee on his forum, sued by Red for defamation, etc. etc).

Of course you miss the point again. DPR is happy with EOSHD's contribution because he's knows video, just like Philip Bloom. They both get production cameras to test, and publish side-by-side videos on their websites. If DPR didn't trust Andrew's opinion they would not use him, period.

If you want to name call, do it above in your own topic, not as a reply to mine. I'm just trying to provide useful info, stuff that DPR may have missed, for the others

Besides, it's all right there in the videos below. The D5100 would bever have performed the way the D5200 does in the below videos. Not even close. If you want to blindly accept that the D5100 and D5200 are equivalent in video image just because DPR says it's so, feel free.

GH3 vs D5200
https://vimeo.com/59832019

5D3 vs D5200
https://vimeo.com/60135187

I have no interest in debating this. Sorry.

EOSHD is not a reliable source. Anyone who claims T2i is just as good as F3 (which EOSHD once did, before the cameras was even released) isn't a reliable source.

EOSHD usually reviews lowend stuff. He has never reviewed any professional video camera. Can you point to any of his professional shoots? I have never seen any.

How are you comparing someone like EOSHD (a random blogger) with Phillip Bloom?

Surely you can type in eoshd.com in your browser. He's tested the Canon 1D C, BMCC, the 5DIII Magic Lantern RAW update, you name it he's shot with it. It's all there on his website.

But you are missing the point. The D5200 and T3i are separated by 1 point by DPR. So in spite of the:
* new sensor with over 3 EV better DR, color depth, high ISO
* New Toshiba 24 mp vs the same Canon 18 mp from 2010
* a 39 point AF system from the D7000
* no moire/aliasing in video mode, something has been a thorn in the side of Canon shooters
* uncompressed HDMI out
* usable AF Continuous in video mode

DPR readers are supposed to believe that the T3i and D5200 are essentially equivalent DSLRs, even when there are m43 cameras rated higher than the T3i on DxOMark?

If you want to accept this as fact because DPR says so, feel free.

"He's tested the Canon 1D C, BMCC, the 5DIII Magic Lantern RAW update"

None of these are professional video cameras. Two of them ARE dslrs, and the third one is not even close to what can be called a professional video camera.

Also, I asked you to post what exactly he shot professionally -- for a job -- (even on low-end camera?). I have never seen anything.

Yes, D5200 has a better sensor (according to dxomark -- not everyone even believes in dxomark) than T3i, but the sensor alone doesn't make the camera. DPReview isn't reviewing sensors. They are reviewing the cameras.

"Designed specifically for the unique demands of the motion picture industry, the Canon EOS 1D C..."

The EOS 1D C could not be a more professional camera.
It's a $12,000 4K video camera. Of course it's a professional video camera.

Stop wasting everybody's time because you don't understand the gear EOSHD is reviewing.

EOSHD has comparison between the:
* RED Epic vs Blackmagic Cinema Camera
* Phanton Flex
* Sony FS700
* Canon C300

All you need to do is browse the older entries.

But once again you are missing the point.

The D5200 has a significantly better sensor, and 39 point AF system from the D7000. To argue that those two things - IQ and AF system are only worth one point is ludicrous.

Anyway, nobody cares. This thread is already pushed down the front page by What the Duck news items. Convenient....

EOSHD is an amatuer. You have not given me a single example of what EOSHD has produced professionally.

You know what EOSHD does for living? He runs a web site. That's all. He is no Phillip Bloom (who worked for Sky for 17 years and has been freelance professional filmmaker for just as many years).

What exactly is EOSHD resume? He runs a website. That's all. Phillip Bloom thinks EOSHD is a clown. EOSHD got himself sued by Red for defamation, and he has a habit of posting false rumors.

As for 1Dc, it's a DSLR first ad film camera second. It records 8-bit video like other low-end cameras. It is not a professional video camera.

marike6 : "Anyway, nobody cares. This thread is already pushed down the front page by What the Duck news items. Convenient...."

Conspiracy theories! I knew you had issues, but now I know what you are: A Nikon fanboy. No wonder why you were constantly popping up in other non-Nikon cameras reviews criticizing those reviews for not being critical

You have no idea what you are talking about. None. You are just making the same points over and over again.

You seem to think attacking EOSHD is a replacement for actually contributing a relevant thought about any of these cameras. It is not.

DPR has used Andrew Reid for his expertise in the past, and plans to use him in the future. So obviously they don't share the same ridiculously negative and unfounded opinion of his contributions to video camera reviews.

As far as fanboys, I use cameras that I enjoy shooting with whether it's a K-30, GH2, X-Pro1 or D800. I had similar questions about DPRs review of the K-30 below. I couldn't care less if you think I'm a fanboy.

If you want to blindly accept everything that DPR writes in a review even when it directly contradicts logic or differs from other review sites, leave me the f out of it. Try thinking for yourself for a change. You might like it.

Lastly, get off my d...

@ET2 - Andrew Reid specializes in DSLR video, which is effectively what his entire website is about, and why Dpreview is interested in his opinions. He doesn't look to be a professional film maker, but that is the beauty of the new breed of film makers, as they have the power of film making in a $700 camera, versus spending thousands on traditional equipment. You sound like you are not understanding the flexibility that DSLR film making is giving the industry and individuals alike.

Don't you get it? If your not Dino De Laurentiis or Marty Fricken Scorsese, you have no business reviewing, having or giving your opinion about the quality of video you are seeing with your own two eyes! Too funny!

"Andrew Reid specializes in DSLR video, which is effectively what his entire website is about, and why Dpreview is interested in his opinions."

Exactly, what he does for living is run a web site. There are others who specialize in DSLR videos but they do pro work with DSLRs too .. not just run a website.

And marike6 is a Nikon fanboy (regardless of what he said above). Looks like his poor fanboy feeling got hurt because DPR did not award his camera greatest thing since slice bread award

@ET2
Don't own a D5200 or any APS-C DSLR and I certainly don't need DPR to spoon feed me information about any of these cameras.
Reviewers in all industries make mistakes, have biases, lack expertise in some segment of the market. This is precisely why DPR uses Andrew Reid from EOSHD or DxOMark to contribute to their reviews.

The D5200 is a far better video camera than the D5100 (it's not even close), in spite of DPRs equivalent rating of the two cameras. If you agree with their assessment regarding the D5100 and D5200 video capabilities you'd also be wrong. But nobody knows what you think because you're too busy with silly name calling like a schoolboy. Go out and take some pictures for your empty gallery, come back and contribute something other than name-calling, trashing others, and kissing DPR's behind...

@ET2

You grow the f up. You're the one embarrassing yourself calling people "clown" and "amateur" in spite of the fact that DPR has hired EOSHD. Oops. Bet you'd like to have that one back.

I'm just trying to start a discussion about the review to which you've contributed zero except flaming me and EOSHD.

This topic has gone on long enough. Go take some photos. I've already asked you nicely to get off my back. I'm not going to say it again.

Dude, nobody cares what you think of EOSHD.

Let it go...

@ET2 - I'm not sure why you keep putting so much stock into the Red.com lawsuit against Reid, as it was dismissed. That means that there was not enough evidence to support the case. I don't think that Reid claims to be a Pro film maker. As I said before, he specializes in DSLR video. Seems as if you don't know the difference yourself. And, at the end of the day, one thing is for sure. You knew who Reid was because of his blog, but doubtful he knows who you are. From visiting his site, he seems to be very interactive, posting different articles almost every day. That takes a lot of work to keep that going on a regular basis, and that's something that I'm very familiar with. Maybe that's where your insecurity comes from? Either way, who cares? Move on with your life.

EOSHD definitely knows who I am because he tried to ban me on his forum (unsuccessfully) after I pointed out that no one should take his 2013 GH3 update at NAB seriously as his previous rumors (2011, 20102) were all false too. I also reminded him about his last two year false rumors and Panasonic employee drama on his forum. She was real mad because he was posting false rumors.

Guess what? I was right. This year rumor were false again. No GH3 update at NAB.

He deleted my posts and tried to ban me (without success) . Boo hoo

So yes .. he knows who I am

He is a hypester. See all the hype he is generating about MK III raw even though there are some serious issues (card issues, 30 minute to just convert 1 minute video etc etc). A day or two ago he was trying to mock Phillp Blom on twitter for not drinking his raw coolaid.

All these personal attacks against EOSHD kind of miss the point. He more than backs up his claims with side-by-side videos:

D5200 vs 5D III Shootout
https://vimeo.com/60135187

D5200 vs GH3 Shootout
https://vimeo.com/59832019

In both of these videos the D5200 either outperforms or hold it's own the two more expensive cameras. Yet DPR because of lack of attention, failure to test, or lack of expertise, rated the very mediocre for video D5100 the same as the D5200, and the moire monster T3i / 600D significantly better than the D5200 for video.

Silly rants against Reid aside, he tests these cameras, and is not just talk as he posts videos for all his readers to watch. The fact that he's not a DP or Cinematographer is meaningless. Are DPR reviewers professional photographers? Of course not.

Anyway, this topic has gotten far off track on personal nonsense. Point is if DPR wants to create a database of reviews for users, they should be a bit more careful with their tests, IMHO.

I will take DPR over EOSHD anyday, and 60i, no live aperture control are reason enough to rate the video lower than the competition.

There are better cameras for shooting video, including cameras with continuous AF which may not be needed by pros, but it's needed for general consumer market that this camera is aimed.

It's not a good camera for shooting video for general consumers (the intended market)

I would say DPR were too generous if anything

Just seeing what DPreview has in their comparison tool, nothing more. And I was surprise Nex 7 is doing so well with it's 50 f1.8

@kecajkerugo wrote "To me such cameras will sooner or later be replaced by the mirror less stuff."

DSLRs outsell mirrorless cameras by 3-to-1 or more. There is no comparison as far a popularity. Each of the D3100, D5100 or T3i outsell both the NEX-7 and OMD combined. In fact there is not a single mirrorless camera that sells anywhere near what a D3100 or T3i sells. We keep hearing about the death of DSLRs, but it's the mirrorless vendors like Sony and Olympus that are in trouble, not Canon or Nikon.

As far as IQ, the D5200 has better all around IQ (DR, color depth, high ISO) than any of three of the cameras you listed. The D5200 has class leading IQ, virtually identical the Nikon D7100.

As MarkInSF says, for the larger Pentaprism finder. But also for the more robust build quality, magnesium alloy vs plastic, and also for the better handling (cameras like the D5200 and T4i are almost too small to balance properly with some of the larger lenses like the f2.8 zooms.

For me the 100% coverage viewfinder with it's new, better display and the better controls would be more than enough reason to spend the extra for the D7100.

Thanks for that figure straight from your ass.

Sub command dial and flash with commander mode is what makes the decision clear, in my view, for advanced amateurs.

Looking at those tests, considering they have praised high ISO performance - they don't look anything like as good as the Pentax K-30 in their own comparisons. Perhaps they consider the K-30 in a higher user/price bracket?

I couldn't agree more. I once had a Sony SLT A33 and loved the articulated screen. I miss it on ny Canon 5D Classic now. Those screen are a great ergonomic improvement sometimes.

I usually prefer a viewfinder, but for tripod work, it's often a godsend with a good tiltable/swivelable display

Personally I am a big fan of articlulated screens for both photo and video. Many people are unconvinced simply because they haven't understood that an articulated screen offers additonal possibilities with absolutely no drawback since these days there is no significant risk of failure, and a theoretical such risk is offset by the better protection of the screen turned inwards when not it use. Of course, if live view was faster and therefore more usable for photography, that would go a long way in making articulated screens more obviously compelling on DSLRS, as they are on mirrorless and super zoom cameras..

Articulated LCD with combination of LV or even focus peaking is one of best "inventions". One thing that I think a lot of Olympus and later Panasonic loved about their cams.

I dont think its for amateurs, great thing for macro shots for example, or when you want "from ground" perspective. Certainly more comfortable than lying on ground or using angle finders.

Articulated screens should be on EVERY Nikon made. I can't understand why they are not. It opens up creativity to a whole new dimension for stills and video.

Erm, where do they describe it as "mediocre"?

@Hugo808,

That would be in marike6's mind, where the rest of the post originated. But, you misquoted him. He wrote, "Mediocre", with a capital "M".

DPR covered the pro and cons thoroughly with these cameras. Read the reviews. These fanboys get really annoying

I tend to agree, lowering a rating due to lack of touch screen seems silly. If the T5i gets a Silver as wel with it's 5-7 year old sensor techl, you know the rating scheme is BS. In general, the rating scheme is inconsistent and pointless. I think most people just skip to the conclusion or use the image comparison tool. I also wouldn't be surprised if they are offered money in return for certain ratings.

marike6 likes to harp a lot about dxomark, but D5200 scored like 84 points. There are like dozen cameras on Dxomark that score within 5 points of that score. 5 points on dxomark is only 1/3 stops. The image quality differences isn't as big in practical term.

K-30 got 78% and a silver award, while D5200 got 79% and a silver award. In the DPR scoring system, 71-80% translates as "Very Good to Excellent". How is that mediocre?
Furthermore, the awards are unrelated to the scores, but are given to cameras that the reviewers think deserve a special mention, for one reason or another. Again, how is that interpreted as mediocre?

There's much more to a camera than just a sensor. The camera with the best sensor (as tested by DxOMark) isn't necessarily the best camera all things considered.

Why not concentrate on what the camera can do for you, whether it meets your needs, instead of worrying about fairness and rating points? This is like sitting in an airport and when they call the Platinum, Diamond and Gold members to board everybody gets up. It doesn't mean anything.

@justMe wrote: "The Award Medal Color doesn't matter".

Of course the medal color matters, which is why cameras being sold on Amazon are now using DPR Gold Award in their camera's ad.

The point is the rating system misrepresents two top entry level DSLRs. The only time people on DPR pay attention is if a camera gets Gold Award, and nobody reads the percentage so you have the D3200, D5200,K30, and T3i all lumped together as Silver Award winning cameras (read: mediocre, average).

Name me one Entry Level DSLR with a Gold Award?

The point is an entry level DSLRs must be judged in their own category, not against MILCs (see LiveView AF speed) or Pro DSLRs (changing aperture in LV) or a high end Hybrid (video features vs GH3). For entry level DSLRs, the K30 and D5200 are two of the best made period, but DPRs rating system misrepresents that fact.

@ET2

An EVF like in the A57 is nowhere near as nice to use as a 100% Pentaprism OVF like in the K30. Because DPR says so, does not make it the case. Learn to think for yourself.

Anyway, I have no interest in debating this with you. You'll notice I replied to justMe.

When I started to read your message I thought you were being serious. IF there is one company that constantly clearly upgradesits next model, to me it is Nikon. And no: I do not use Nikons.

Barry,
it's called product segmentation.
But I assume you know this.
If Nikon had all those features including the 24 meg sensor then there would be no need for the D7100.
The person buying this camera is most likely starting with the kit lens and will be probably be upgrading to the 55-300 or 70-300 in the future, both of which do not pose a problem to D5200 users.

The use of older lenses is great if you have some very high end lenses from a previous camera, but if you own high end lenses, the D5200 is probably not for you. Nikon currently has a plethora of consumer grade lenses at pretty reasonable prices that out perform all of the older consumer lenses...50 1.8g, 28 1.8g, 35 1.8g, 16-85g.

As far as limited wireless flash, this is another high end feature to differentiate the lineup.

I'm sure Nikon knows what year it is, and the camera performs as well and in some cases better than it's competition (High ISO, Dynamic Range, resolution)...

For wireless flash - Command Mode as it's called on the Nikons the far better option is to simply purchase a wireless trigger. I use a set of Yongnuo RF-603Ns. They work wonderfully, were only about $30, and there's no need to fire your built-in flash like in Commander Mode.

As far as progress, if consistently having class leading IQ, i.e. D5100, D5200, in inexpensive bodies isn't progress, I don't know what is.

A few points.
Wireless flash isn't a high end feature it's on every other makers model range in this price segment. I have 35mm film SLR's that have it.
Auto FP/HSS is standard on every DSLR regardless of price across all the other makers.

I understand that you need to differentiate between models, but this is 2013 time has moved on and it's expected now. I'd take those 2 over the 39 point AF system that's for certain.

The reviews were done at different times.

I don't see what's confusing.

I mean, if dpreview criticizes the price of the recently released Olympus E-P5 (and they might), do you dig up dpreview's praise of the $2,000+ price tag for a Nikon D100 in 2001 and say, "Look! dpreview is inconsistent! Here they are happy with $2,100 for a 6 Mp camera, and look what they say about the E-P5."

Most of dpreview's reviews have an innovative feature, which you'll find just beneath the name of the camera on the first page. It consists of the month and the year, and is customarily known as the "date".

"defeaturing" generally costs more. You have more configurations to validate, and more complicated builds.

But to address Mr. Horton's question, not likely. The toolchain you need to hack Nikon cameras is complex, and the hacking community is small.

D3200 does not use Sony sensor. The sensor is physically smaller and looks totally different too

Dear HowboutRAW, I'm not comparing D5200 and D7100. I don't have both cameras so I cannot compare. I'm just explaining the reason why DPreview has classified D5200 has class leading high noise performance.
D5200 is leader in its class called "advanced beginner".
And D7100 is leader in its own class called "enthusiast-targeted".
Different classes, understand?
It was DPreview who created these classes, not me. :)

very strange, and disappointing...AF fine tuning is a must! ... even my nex-5N has it!

Why would a mirrorless camera need AF micro adjustment at all? There's no separate optical path for the focus module.

I said the same many time too. FTW and me live in the same place and dive resort on a coral reef in the Philippines, we have eternal problems with slow wireless Internet connection, and surfing is sometimes a real torture here. For us, as for many others worldwide, direct links to the preview would make sense and help us to see what we intend to see at first.

@ seagull, this is not the review page, you find back on this page and you have to press the link "Read our 20 page review of the Nikon D5200", to end on the review, this is the comment and presentation page only. The review is one more page to open. So, you start on DPR main page, there you see the review is posted, then you end on this page to find the final link to the review, that is nonsense. WHY not right away to the review page????

I also feel your pain but there is a workaround for recently posted reviews. On the main menu bar, visible on every page including the home page, the second drop-down menu is Reviews. Hover over it, and you will see a drop-down list showing the latest reviews. Simply click the name of the camera whose review you want to read, and you will be taken directly to the review itself.

Thanks.

Yes Pentax make nice cameras but based on how many times they have been bought and sold and their market share, their future is suspect at best.
If they were a stock, they would be hold or do not buy...

Only problem with the above logic is that small Pentax is now Ricoh, which is twice as large as Nikon. And readying half a dozen bodies already ...
But yes, to be cautious makes sense; being cautious and playing safe has saved many photographers from taking remarkable shots. :)

So, you agree then...
Pentax, or Ricoh, or Hoya, and whoever is next.
The fact that Ricoh is large has no bearing, it is the size and funding of the camera division not the size of the company that matters.
That said Ricoh also builds great cameras and now combined they can probably break 4% total market share.

I Love Pentax cameras, they are great, but the simple question one has to ask when buying one of these mid level cameras is.

Am I planning to upgrade in the future
Am I planning to grow my system
Am I planning to use aftermarket accessories
Will I ever want full frame

I the answer is yes to any of these, then Pentax should not be your choice.

@Zvonimir "... Pentax is now Ricoh..." is a little bit of a stretch I think. The Pentax imaging division was first sold to Hoya, who further stripped off the company and sold the camera division to Ricoh (for $185 million), who merged it with their own dying camera division to form a new company, Pentax-Ricoh. I believe Pentax has 3% or less of the world camera market and Ricoh something like 0.2%, so I personally don't see how they can compete with the likes of Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, Olympus, etc...

Nikon and Pentax both have "good and cheap lenses".

The Nikon 35 1.8 and 50 1.8 are both $200 and superb. The Pentax equivalents, 35 2.4 and 50 1.8 are also excellent. The Sigma primes 30 1.4 and 50 1.4 are each $500, and the better Sigma zooms like the 17-50, 17-70, etc are not all that cheap.
For zooms the choice is to either use a variable aperture Nikon zoom like the 18-105 or 16-85 or spring for the Sigma 17-50 2.8 or Tamron 17-50 2.8 (with built-in AF motor). None of the Sigma telephoto zooms, i.e. 70-300 are as good as the Nikon 70-300 or 55-300.

Other than f2.8 zoom, I don't see the point of buying a Nikon to use Sigma glass? Same with Pentax. DA* primes are the way to go with the K-30.

The K-30 has a beautiful 100% Pentaprism VF and terrific ergonomics and handling. Lower res at 16 mp and 12-bit DNG vs 14-bit NEF the Nikon, AFAIK.

The D5200 has class leading IQ (DR, color depth, high ISO) and video quality. The K-30 IQ is great, but video quality is average.

It might be worth pointing out that the lack of moire which the D5200 claims is due to soft video. Moire is the result of resolution. You can avoid moire on a sharp video camera with a softening filter, or by putting the shot slightly out of focus, but you can not "sharpen up" cameras like the D5200 in shots where moire is not a concern.

But Amadou, most of the cons are video/LV related, so maybe you need to have a second opinion on that. Good job overall, I'd say, though.

@bobbarber
Avoiding moiré is of paramount concern in the DSLR video world. And for many, the trade-off of softer but less heavily processed footage that you can 'sharpen up' in post, for the appearance of crisp video, is one they're willing to make.

Thanks guys. The reason I ask is because Andrew has written extensively about the D5200 comparing it quite favorably to the Canons and the GH3. Moire and aliasing are a huge problem on not only HDSLR cameras, but quality mirrorless video cameras like the NEX cameras.

As far as soft output, virtually all FF and DSLR cameras including the Canons and RX1 are slightly soft even with in camera sharpening turned up vs GH2/GH3 and BMCC. But the proper way to shoot a DSLR (because of aliasing and ugly in-camera sharpening) is to turn sharpening to zero, and add USM in post.

But you are quite right, low-light has been improved. And the fact that D5200 low-light is significantly better than the D5100 / D7000 (and competitive with the 600D, 7D and even 5D III) and that moire/aliasing are so dramatically improved make it an extremely desirable camera in the for the Vimeo HDLSR budget videographer crowd.

Thanks for talking the time to answer my question, and for the review.

Don't fully agree. My aging A500 is very fast in LV (just as fast as when using the OVF) and still qualifies as a DSLR. The same goes for the whole A3xx and A5xx series. None of which have PDAF pixels on the main sensor.

+1. After I read their somewhat tired and puzzling now standard line about LiveView (again. it's in every DSLR review after all), I didn't bother reading the rest.

The point is not what an MILC does, but that for a DLSR with a big, bright 100% finder, or even the D5200's 95% finder, LV is redundant to the VF, and as such it's a secondary consideration. Certainly not warranting of a "Con" on a DSLR review.

The point is that there are cameras (at a similar price and with similar feature sets) that can and do focus quickly in live view mode. It's irrelevant whether they're DSLRs or not - they're competitors.

If we criticise mirrorless cameras for failing to match DSLRs for continuous AF performance, we have to ping DSLRs that fail to match the S-AF speed of the latest mirrorless models.

If we believe that some of our readers are considering mirrorless cameras and DSLRs then it makes no sense to ignore what's happening with the other type of camera.

R Butler wrote: "It's irrelevant whether they're DSLRs or not"

It's not irrelevant. The whole point of a DSLR is it has TTL viewing and 99% of professionals or enthusiasts are going to be opting for the OVF vs shooting with the DLSR out in front of your faces. Watch the basketball game tonight and see how many photographers below the basket are holding their 1DXs and D4s out in front of their faces shooting with LV.

DPR is making a mountain out of an insignificant molehill by detracting points to DSLRs for LiveView AF speed. Does any D7100 buyer really care that it's a bit slower than a Lumix GX1 camera in LV?. DPR seems to care, but I can guarantee you that not a single DSLR user cares all that much about a secondary feature like LV.

Right...

...because everybody wants to be the guy under the basket, or compares themself to the guy under the basket, or when they take a nice picture, ask themselves, "I like the way this turned out, but would the guy under the basket use my camera?"

Thanks for voicing the unspoken thoughts of the silent majority, marike6.

@bobarber

What are you even talking about?

Im starting to believe that you are kinda loosing touch with reality.

Just because something is "big thing" right now in world of camera/IT journalism doesnt mean its really big thing and customers or readers care.

In real world, video is small addition, just another function for most photographers. LV is mostly thing to manual focus, hardly way to really shoot photos with dSLR, unless absolutely needed.

Sure some will evolve into hybrid videographer/photographer, but those ppl really dont care if D5200 even exists.

Blaming mirrorless for poor C-AF is about as clever as blaming dSLR for slow AF in LV.

Its like if you wanted generic Skoda to win 24h LeMans just because its "car too".

Issue is in lens itself. PDAF lens are not made for super-fast refocusing in small increments which is must for CDAF. Thats reason why 4/3 lens are so slow on m4/3 bodies. It cant focus faster than any LV on dSLR because lens cant.

And as you probably know, all current Nikkor lens are made to work mainly on PDAF system. Like all m4/3 lens are made to work on CDAF.

CDAF lens could in theory work on PDAF system, but due flange distance, it cant happen. :)

Tho no problem with creating hybrid lens that could do both with right adapter. It would just defy mirrorless system a bit (cause it would be big). I guess we might see something similar in future.

"LV is mostly thing to manual focus, hardly way to really shoot photos with dSLR, unless absolutely needed."

That's a chicken/egg case. It's hardly used because most implementations are severely lacking. For example in speed but also functionality (having to leave LV to change aperture for example). If you're not going to criticize it, it;s not going to get better.
At one point in time, AF existed in some cameras but was hardly used by most photographers. That didn't make it less useful when everyone was able to experience the expanded opportunities once the feature was introduced and more polished by all manufacturers. But let's not forget, that it was mostly dismissed as well when introduced.

As for how to improve, on sensor PDAF for one. There are already FF sensors with on sensor PDAF pixels.

TrojMacReady wrote: " It's hardly used because most implementations are severely lacking."

It's hardly used, particularly handheld, because DSLRs are too large to hold out of front of your face like a P&S. And switching from PDAF to less robust contrast detect AF makes little sense when you have an OVF.

And as Mescalamba mentioned, DLSR lenses are designed for PDAF, and do not have stepping motors like MILC lenses. So to criticize a camera body like the D5200 for slower LV when the entire Nikon system of lenses are designed for PDAF is kind of unfair.

Not to mention that such a focus on DSLR LV is misleading to beginners because it gives credence to handheld LV shooting.

@ Mescalamba - When I walk around Pike Place Market (a popular tourist spot), I see people using cameras in a way that it sounds like neither you or I would, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening.

The D5200 is not a camera aimed at professionals or even solely at experienced DSLR users.

I've not mentioned video in any of my comments but, since some readers will (quite reasonably, whether you approve or not), attempt to use live view to shoot stills, it's entirely proper for us to tell them how it will perform.

It would be wrong for us to give that too much importance in our conclusion but we can't just ignore the fact that one of the D5200's features is not up to contemporary standards.

Without meaning to suggest anything about the two styles of cameras' respective futures:

If, in 1885, I'd had to review an Ordinary ('Penny Farthing') next to a Rover Safery Bicycle, it would have been madness for me to ignore the greater risk of falling off the front of the Ordinary, just because existing skilled riders could use them and were happy with the risks.

If readers might plausibly be choosing between two items, it's the reviewers job to highlight strengths and weaknesses. We're not saying you have to use that feature, we're not even saying the D5200 is terrible for not doing it well but, if you use live view, it is a fact that the D5200 is not as fast at focusing as some of its peers.

I commonly see friends, family and other people who just got a DSLR or rarely shoot one use it like a P&S and get annoyed because of the slow LV. For the D5200, the problem is more of an issue as the articulated screen is a major selling point over other Nikon models.
Anyway, both Nikon and Canon are behind in this regard. What's funny is that a T5i, even with its on sensor PDAF and STM lens, is still slower in LV than Olympus/Panasonic with purely CDAF. Nikon and Canon need to work on their CDAF implementation since its not just the case of PDAF only lenses.

" it's hardly used, particularly handheld, because DSLRs are too large to hold out of front of your face like a P&S. And switching from PDAF to less robust contrast detect AF makes little sense when you have an OVF."

I do it very often to utilize the benefits of good LV and a flexible screen. Think shooting from the hip, chest, above your head in crowds, up from ground level without getting dirty etc. Even one handed at times. It's too simplistic to dismiss LV for static MF work only when you haven't experienced fast and flexible LV enough. When entering dimly lit environments, LV and a fast lens gives a bright preview for easy shooting when your eyes need up to 20 minutes to see the same. Helped me a lot too.
I already mentioned the existence of on sensor PDAF too.

Again, that is false. Of course it can be labeled a con because technology that has been on the market and technology that is currently on the market, proves there are alternatives, even when using an OVF.

Plus, it's not up to the reviewer to keep in mind what the possible solutions or limitations are. That's the responsibility of the camera maker when he's marketing the camera to be very useful with LV, highlighting it in adds and with the addition of a flip out screen. It's the responsibility of the reviewer to highlight practical flaws of technology and implementations used. And that's what Dpreview did.

I use live view all the time and I'm old enough to be able to thread a Nikkor reel in the pitch black. So these guys are using sound thinking in this regard. Some people enjoy discovering and using all the features on their camera, otherwise why buy a camera with features?

As a not very inconvenient workaround, you can set the camera to live view (which raises the mirror) and then capture the exposure.

No that is not right. I'm guessing you are looking at JPEG. Have a look at RAW, leave it on 650D it doesn't matter, it's the same sensor as the 600D.

The 600D is a terrific camera, but D5200 has some of the best IQ of any APS-C camera on the market. Sharp, detailed RAWs, high DR, and quite good high ISO ability. Enjoy.

We've removed the word primarily, since the point is true for anyone trying to use live view to any degree.

The presence of a flip-out screen strongly suggests that Nikon expects people to use live view and is likely to give would-be buyers the impression that it's a credible means of shooting with the camera, so it's entirely fair to point out that it's an area in which the D5200 falls behind the competition.

Trafalgar square is a good place to watch almost everyone using live view on their DSLR. Yes it is strange but a lot of people considering this camera as their first DSLR will be coming from cameras with no viewfinders.

@R Butler
The articulated LCD of this camera has nothing to do with it, the line that I quoted from the review has become a stock phrase in virtually every DSLR review written by DPR. And frankly, such an emphasis on Live View for still shooting in a DSLR review is not warranted and doesn't inspire confidence that the reviewer is completely understanding how such a camera is used 95% of the time for stills. It's a bias that's based solely on a comparison to MILCs not on the fact that there are actually users who shoot DSLRs with shaky arms outstretched in front of their faces like a phone or P&S.

As far as the competition, ALL DSLRs fall behind MILCs in LV because they are not designed to be used like P&Ss. The LV is mainly added for video because the OVF blacks out during video shooting.

Go back far enough and Phil Askey reviews would question why anyone would want Live View on a DSLR. Actually, how about when the camera is on a tripod.

If you can walk into a shop and leave with either a D5200 or a Panasonic G6 for similar money, it's entirely reasonable to highlight areas in which one does or doesn't match up to the other.

We're not making any assumption about how many people would choose to use live view - we're pointing out to any that might, that it's worth being aware of a shortcoming. We aren't giving a lot of weight to that concern, but it deserves to be mentioned.

Ultimately, as others have pointed out, it's not uncommon to see people shooting stills in live view, even if you wouldn't dream of doing so.

Easy...I shoot with a Sony Alpha a580, it's not a mirrorless or SLT, in fact is the last traditional DSLR from Sony with OVF and it's a beauty to shoot in Live View...I found myself shooting, more and more in Live View cause it's that great...plus in manual mode you kind of have a "focus peaking" mode on the spot you're focusing on...is very easy to focus manually...its another thing that keeps me on Sony's camp right now, a swivel and a great Live View = many more options and less compromising, something that the a77 and a99 as semi and pro cameras do have...many Sony shooters including me, ask why Sony opted for SLT with such an amazing camera in their stores...

I can understand why DP says that, cause there're many cameras in this particular range that have a great live view, specially form Sony...

I disagree with this post on two counts. marike6 has claimed to be an experienced user of MILCs on other threads, but I question that.

1) One of the best features of the touch-screen on MILCs, the Panasonics that I have used at least, is focus selection and shutter release. You can tap a finger anywhere in the frame and both choose your point of focus and get virtually instantaneous shutter release. Anyone who thinks that MILCs are not used this way in the real world, hasn't been paying attention. It is an extremely useful feature, and much quicker than any focus selection and shutter release method on a DSLR that I've seen. It is fair, as R. Butler points out, to let readers know that DSLRs like this that claim live view do not have nearly the same functionality.

2) Manual focus is another area where OVFs can not compare to MILC. MF on DSLRs is most effective in live view, but you do not get instantaneous shutter release as with MILCs (through the EVF or not).

Yep, indeed all that money their advertisers get from us!
Or is DPR a charity now? Wise a...

I like mirrorless. My beef is with the price.