Artistico: Well, in this day and age when digital processing has removed the need for colour-correcting filters and most others, save for ND, Polarisers and the occasional Grad for the ones without the patience for bracketing and post-process combined exposures, the only way a filter manufacturer can try reducing the fall in income is to hype up new products that no one really needs to try to create a demand.
I know what some will say - getting it right in camera is better than in post, etc. Well, the "right" image in that camera is also a processed image, except you are leaving your processing in the capable(?) hands of camera manufacturers sometimes with quite differing views to yours as to what a final image should look like.
I am as nostalgic as the next person, but using colour shift filters just so I have to move some sliders a tiny bit less in post doesn't appeal to me.
But, then again, what is Tiffen to do? If I were them I'd produce new filters no one needed and hyped them up too.
It looks like you have never worked with presice colors and are a pure theoretician. The ability of digital image to correct colors has its limits. More so, if you want precise colors. In most situations it is much easier to screw on a proper filter, than f**k 20-30 minutes with color correction afterwards (by eye). With each single image. With unguaranteed results. One can also use a Color Checker instead, but then again, you need more time to correct colors in PP (apart from that color checker and software also cost money).
High-res screen is good.... unless you work with Adobe products that can't scale up fonts...I have tiny-winy letters and icons on my Dell 27" 2560x1440. Thank's God it is not 24" or 22" with same resolution.
steelhead3: I wonder if the judges will know which cameras took the shot?
that is why you get 2/3 of the prize in nikon gear, not in cash.
ZAnton: From the anounecement day of Nikon 1 system, I expected that it will be likeSony RX10, RX100, Panasonic FZ1000 or this one - a compact camera with bright lens and relatively big sensor.But Nikon just f**d everything up.Loosers.
They had 3 years (after Nikon 1 line release) to do it right, and they are still "surprised" by bad results.
xpanded: Scandinavians have bigger brains ;-)
and pockets =)
I forgot about it.
beavertown: Nikon 1 will definitely go to hell.
@groucherfor Gods sake, what do you need 60fps for?
From the anounecement day of Nikon 1 system, I expected that it will be likeSony RX10, RX100, Panasonic FZ1000 or this one - a compact camera with bright lens and relatively big sensor.But Nikon just f**d everything up.Loosers.
Excellent camera, but I find 74mm at the long end a bit too short. It was always a weak spor of the LX-series.On a nonchangeable-lens camera I would expect at least 100 or better 120mm.
ZAnton: I don't understand the whining. This is basically a Canon 5Dmk3 with better button layout and a tonns of DR at low ISO, and flipping screeen, and a 1000 $/€ cheaper (Nikons release price vs canon actual price) and a build in flash that works as a trigger, and 1 fps more (and same flash sync).Oh my Goooooood, it doesn't have 1/8000s! :'-( - are you f**** kidding me? Do you want to shoot snow @ f/1.4?Get a freaking polarizer or ND filter for 20 bucks and sh** the **** up!
@Segamanlook on my old stuff. ;-)I also have Oly m4/3 camera.
@david vellaThere is a joke:"Warning: there are counterfeit Christmas balls from China. There is no visible or quality difference to the original ones, but THEY WON'T MAKE YOU HAPPY!!!"
Sorry, my english is not good enopugh to decode so much **** =)
Skulls: When you decrease the number of pixels that increases their individual size and more light is received by the sensor, right? Why then the ISO range is still 12800?6.5 fps in FX mode means 7.5fps in DX mode... well, I have sony a6000 with the same amount of pixels and it can shoot 11fps, with about the same buffer size of 22 shots, 1/4000 max shutter speed, with the same ISO range, it weighs 344 grams and it costs 600 euro. It is APS-C but still... where the price difference comes from?Am I missing something?P.S. And the Sony has got a AEL button which can be programmed to be AF-ON!
Yeah, and my phone can also shoot 7fps, has 20MP blah blah blah... and it can ring, and I can play games...and it is only 150gramm...
I don't understand the whining. This is basically a Canon 5Dmk3 with better button layout and a tonns of DR at low ISO, and flipping screeen, and a 1000 $/€ cheaper (Nikons release price vs canon actual price) and a build in flash that works as a trigger, and 1 fps more (and same flash sync).Oh my Goooooood, it doesn't have 1/8000s! :'-( - are you f**** kidding me? Do you want to shoot snow @ f/1.4?Get a freaking polarizer or ND filter for 20 bucks and sh** the **** up!
raztec: Oh Nikon! Why can you never get it right?Af-ON button and 1/8000 shutter speed would have made this the perfect camera.
No, then you would whine about 6,5 fps instead of 7 or 7.5or about not fully tilted screen
JohnTh: Most probably this throws out Tokina 16-28 F/2.8 and even Canon 16-35 F/2.8. Eager to see the image IQ, distortion charts etc. vs to above and Nikon 14-24.
Why is this not a PJ zoom? Do you KNOW how fast its Af is?This lens competes with Nikon 14-25, and Nikon 17-35, and Canon 16-35, and Tokina 16-28
brendon1000: Should be a stellar lens but but $1599 for an APS-C lens seems rather steep. :P
Wait a year or two.
Sannaborjeson: That is weird.
They show only 3000x2000px samples on their flickr and all the samples are terribly over-sharped. https://www.flickr.com/photos/carlzeisslenses/14833959224/
And for some reason CZ bans people from commenting or asking questions on their photo samples.
They have Original Size 3817*5719But you are right. It is oversharped.
Put the freakin' hard buttons back!