V3 compared to old DSLR's

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
BarnET
Senior MemberPosts: 1,491Gear list
Like?
Re: V3 compared to old DSLR's
In reply to Wu Jiaqiu, 2 months ago

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

BarnET wrote:

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

BarnET wrote:

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

BarnET wrote:

retro76 wrote:

please don't read into DXO too much. There are countless issues with it's numbers, for instance color depth does not equal color accuracy and dynamic range doesn't tell you how much headroom is in the highlights vs the shadows. The only way to truely evaluate a camera is to take it into the field and shoot. I call tell you that my J3 files properly processed in Aperture are hard to discern from most DSLRs at lower ISOs, in fact compared to my Canon 60D, the J3 actually has better highlight headroom. Yes you can pixel peep to find differences, but side by side printed you could not discern images from the 1 inch sensor and a larger sensor under most conditions.

Yes let's compare the j3 to an 5 year old Apsc sensor that has about the quality of an d90 and let's call it good.

It's complete and total garbage in quality when compared to decent cheaper models that are available today and you know that too.

depends what you want out of a camera, you could argue anything below a D810 is a total compromise and a waste of time.

No i want my camera to produce decent stills with noise free shadows at lower iso's.

At 1300 bucks that's the least we could ask for nikon. But i fails to deliver on that very moderate request.

It's simply not better in terms of quality then a 1/1.7 inch compact with an decent lens. Like the pentax mx1 which can be bought at 249 bucks.

lots of great cameras out there not all of them suit everyone.

If you pay 1300 bucks the quality has to be there. The V3 is at the same level as an 5-8 year old Dslr that people give away. That fact alone is not worthy of the Nikon name.

And then there are some stupid designe decissions.

like the micro SD card slot to save size?!?!

here take a look at the true wonders of size

http://j.mp/UH9pgU

First the rx100 mkIII

It has the same sensor size. but has more pixels.

Shoots 1080p video but at an higher bitrate.

Has an similar field of view lens but 4 times faster at the long end.

has an built in viewfinder and an full SD card slot.

all of that in an package much smaller?! how did they do that

GM-1

it's smaller then the V3 but it has an sensor double i repeat DOUBLE the size.

ow and the lens is the same size while having the same aperture but has to cover an image circle DOUBLE the diameter.

ow and it comes with an SD card slot too?!

both nice cameras with much better pricing, that's the biggest bugbear of the higher priced 1 series camera...pricing.

Prices and image quality. terrible shadow noise at lower Iso's is not competitive in the current mirrorless market.

I've bought my 2 bodies 2nd hand because of this reason, I.Q. wise they aint perfect, but they do the job well enough to please me.

I messed with a GM1, very nice, but as i like shooting long telephoto it's useless to me.

Gx7 with the 100-300 or the em-10 with the 75-300mm would be better picks for telephoto.

But you seem to have the excellent tamron 70-300 vc. That's 1 solid reason to keep shooting Dslr's where Nikon still makes very good products.

i sold it and now have the 300mm/f4 instead, i used to use a Sigma 500.f4.5 on a D7000 but just started using the 1 series instead, the m4/3rds telephoto options are poor and not long enough for me, plus i love the AF on the 1 series

the crop of the sensor doesn't mean you shoot tighter. it just means less room to crop in post later. As no lens is sharp at that pixel pitch.

.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow