The short answer is that it's a device put in front of the sensor to very slightly blur the image in order to eliminate an effect known as moire, in which images with close-together series of lines cause a strange pattern in the image. (Google it if you want a better explanation.)
On high-resolution cameras, this is less of an issue, so some 24-megapixel and higher recent models have no filter and have changed the processing firmware (I believe) to account for that.
So, no, it's not something that can be readily done to a D5100 and it probably would be a bad idea even if you could do it.
>What is the optical low pass filter? What does it do? Would it >be on a 5100? If it is, can it be removed? Would one want to? >
Prior to Nikon's release of the D800E, the D7100 and now the D5300, all of Nikon's dslr camera sensors had a low pass filter and an infra red reducing filter attached. Without the IR filter photos would have a magenta cast to some dark areas, especially some synthetic fabrics. The low pass filter, as Jon already mentioned, slightly blurs the image to remove any moire effects that might occur when photographing some finely detailed fabrics or things like screens on doors or windows. The low pass filter is a fine, thin sheet applied to the surface of the sensor. It's built in and not like a filter you can unscrew from one of your lenses.
While the IR filter must stay, the low pass filter can be omitted during the manufacturing process to improve resolution.
In the case of the D800E the filter was not removed but other methods were used to negate the effects of the low pass filter and improve resolution. It appears that so far moire has not been a problem so Nikon and other manufacturers like Sony are removing the filter.
According to the information at Adorama there are three models. One comes with no lens (body only) and bult-in WiFi $765.00, just Body Black and Red versions, and one non-wifi paired with a new lens 1395. And they also just announced and brand spanking new Lens that cost $1696+, it was 58mm
I am a bit confused as to why Nikon bothered to release this camera. What was so wrong with the D5200 that they felt the need to release a D5300? Built in WIFI and GPS? Wouldn't it have been cheaper to simply say to D5200 owners, "for a limited time, you can get a free WIFI and GPS unit for your camera", and be done with it? No OLPF? Does that justify the considerable expense of introducing a new model and depreciating an already remarkable 24mp DSLR?
So I am wondering if the D5200 had some fundamental flaw (oil on the sensor, etc) that justified a new, replacement model being introduced.
>I am a bit confused as to why Nikon bothered to release this >camera. What was so wrong with the D5200 that they felt the >need to release a D5300? Built in WIFI and GPS? Wouldn't it >have been cheaper to simply say to D5200 owners, "for a >limited time, you can get a free WIFI and GPS unit for your >camera", and be done with it? No OLPF? Does that >justify the considerable expense of introducing a new model >and depreciating an already remarkable 24mp DSLR? > >So I am wondering if the D5200 had some fundamental flaw (oil >on the sensor, etc) that justified a new, replacement model >being introduced.
Hi Beemerman2. As a D5200 user, I can say that at least my copy has no issues whatsoever with oil, dust, etc., and it does an exemplary job creating highly detailed images with lenses like the Nikkors 16-85 and 35 f/1.8. As far as removing the OLPF, from what I've read of the D7100 (which I was considering as well), you need good optics and good photographic technique to really notice a difference in detail/image sharpness. If I were to upgrade, I would be more interested in the new D610 (full frame) than the D5300, because I believe the image quality differences would be more substantial between the D5200 and the D610, than between the D5200 and the D5300. In any case, Nikon makes very fine cameras (and lenses!), and quite a good Creative Lighting System as well!
When I was researching cameras to get back into the hobby, one of my top three was the Canon 70D. It has GPS, WiFi, articulating screen, and some whiz bang AF system. If anything! This is probably what this is meant to answer to.
In the end, the D7100 won out due to no swivel screen, partial magnesium construction, weather sealed body, etc.
If I was an average consumer looking for the most tech packed into a camera I could get I would have gone Canon. The features of the 5300 seem likely to be aimed at that segment. The modern middleish class tech buff who doesn't necessarily know what they need, or care, but know what they want.
>I am a bit confused as to why Nikon bothered to release this >camera. What was so wrong with the D5200 that they felt the >need to release a D5300? Built in WIFI and GPS? Wouldn't it >have been cheaper to simply say to D5200 owners, "for a >limited time, you can get a free WIFI and GPS unit for your >camera", and be done with it? No OLPF? Does that >justify the considerable expense of introducing a new model >and depreciating an already remarkable 24mp DSLR? > >So I am wondering if the D5200 had some fundamental flaw (oil >on the sensor, etc) that justified a new, replacement model >being introduced.<Quote<<<
Yup your "old" D5200 is obsolete! Just throw it away and get the latest/greatest Or, maybe you could just lease the D5300 untill the D5400 comes out next year
Actually for me, it could be a big upgrade. I will be testing a Nikon D5300 tomorrow.
H.264/MPEG-4 Advanced Video Coding HD 1,920x1,080 / 60 fps HD 1,280x720 / 60 fps 20 minutes at highest quality 29 minutes 59 seconds at normal quality
3.2 in. diagonal Monitor Resolution 1,037,000 Dots
Live View Lens servo Autofocus (AF): Single-servo AF (AF-S); full-time-servo AF (AF-F) Manual focus (MF) Live View AF-area mode Face-priority AF Wide-area AF Normal-area AF Subject-tracking AF Live View Autofocus Contrast-detect AF anywhere in frame (camera selects focus point automatically when face-priority AF or subject-tracking AF is selected)
Sat 19-Oct-13 09:28 PM | edited Sat 19-Oct-13 09:30 PM by pjonesCET
other than the 24 mp sensor. The Built in Wifi is the difference. I have both the GPS and WiFi addon for my d3200 The WifI works but I haven't managed to get the GPS to work. Where I have tried to use the GPS has been in Rural areas of Va I doubt seriously even have Satellite Coverage.
So it questionable if either would be an advantage. I can get my iPad or iPhone to control the camera. So that might be some advantage.
I am a little leery of that articulating screen. I am Retired Electronics Tech. And I know any cables that are constantly flexed tend to break. Isee this actually as a Weak link
No actually each time has been in open space . A Couple of times at home out away from Trees and once at a Church and cemetery In fact the area I shots of in one of the albums on my Gallery. I have set camera to use the GPS. But all I get is a constantly blinking red light. As you can see in the album in question it was in wide open space. However The Church is below the Blue ridge mountains.
I'm saying there is no possible way for it to be an absence of satellite coverage. I would try giving it more time to acquire initially, double-checking camera settings and keep in mind that the GPS unit may be faulty.
Sun 10-Nov-13 02:08 PM | edited Sun 10-Nov-13 02:37 PM by RRRoger
Seems to me that the D5300 is a big improvement" Better Sensor Expeed 4 Processor Bigger, brighter Swivel LCD Smaller/Lighter improved battery WiFi & GPS built in 1080P Video at 60 fps Full Time AutoFocus
I will be testing the Video "in store" if as good as I expect, I will be bringing one home.
Does anyone know if video can be sent by WiFi in real time?
Wed 27-Nov-13 01:13 AM | edited Wed 27-Nov-13 01:24 AM by RRRoger
>Will the Expeed 4 Processor have any impact if you shot RAW only?<
Just processing the Sensor image to a digital file requires some computer power. The Expeed 4 is also suposed to be a factor in ISO (especially High ISO), focusing, White Ballance (metering), and probably even if you set everything manually.
I've had my D5300 for a month now and am still finding more things I like! The LCD is the best I've seen. High 12800 ISO images, both stills and video are better than other DX cameras I've used at 3200 ISO. This is probably due to the Expeed 4 Processor. The cheap Menke (D5200) grip and Vivitar batteries I bought work great and make handling better.
Happy New Year RRR! I would be very interested to know if you see a significant difference in Sharpness between the D5200 and the D5300. (I shoot the D5200, and am a Sharpness nut. I have obtained some very high sharpness with the D5200, good Nikkors like the 35mm f/1.8, and good technique. If interested, please see my Gallery for sample images.) BTW, I love your Monterey Bay Waterfall image!! Thank you sir. Regards, Steve
>I've had my D5300 for a month now and am still finding more >things I like! >The LCD is the best I've seen. >High 12800 ISO images, both stills and video are better than >other DX cameras I've used at 3200 ISO. >This is probably due to the Expeed 4 Processor. >The cheap Menke (D5200) grip and Vivitar batteries > I bought work great and make handling better. >
Very interesting (and gratifying)! That's a bit of good news for me, as I usually shoot at the lowest ISO possible (100, 200), preferring to decrease shutter speed as needed, since I generally shoot landscapes/stills/product, so no need to stop action. Thanks for this info! Regards, Steve
>>Happy New Year RRR! >>I would be very interested to know if you see a >significant >>difference in Sharpness between the D5200 and the D5300. > >Hard to see the difference at ISO 100-400 >I am sure it is there, but insignificant to my eyes. >The big difference is at higher ISO, especially above 3200.