akjos: About time... But what an a$$hole maneuver fromNikon ... Charging 230bucks for tripod collar? Speechless :/
just by a third party at 10 bucks
Body - G15 or Nikon P770024-150 f/1.8-2.0 lens, (can be a bit bigger than current G15/P7700)OISsensor - 1/1,7" to 1"8-12 MP,DR of current Nikon DSLRs or close to that,DXOMark max.ISO 400.articulated screen, no build in OVF or EVFadditional EVF either cheap or in package,wheels for aperture (around the lens), for ISO (on top), for exposition (on top), relatively big wheel on the back side.4*AA batteries.cheap and small flash with tiltable light and AF-assist light.
ET2: Why you guys keep posting the old studio shots? Why not use the new version?
@Barney BrittonWil the old test scene be available for older (non re-shootet) cameras? Can one choose one of the test scenes for the "transient" cameras?
Very sharp lens and good sensor.I wonder what aperture this lens has on 140mm equiv. Canon G15 has 2,8. I hope Nikon has something similar.
Skipper494: Full frame sensors in compact cameras are long overdue. 1" and m4/3 are band aids. We had 35mm film in little cameras like my Chinon Bon Ami. Miniaturisation is not a problem. Having space for human sized controls is. 1" and m4/3 are just a way for the industry to gradually introduce larger sensors and milk as much money along the way.
Small 35mm camera means - no OVF + fix lens + small grip +... I bet 99% of the population here (including you) will whine, as they do when somebody makes 98% OVF or EVF.
Photato: The Popular Sony IMX078CQK (12MP Type 1/2.3) was capable of 1920x1080 at 60fps but no camera using that sensor implemented it afaik.Also capable of 12MP @ 42 fps but that one neither showed up in any product.I guess the limits are in the supporting electronics rather than the sensor itself in dealing with such high data bandwidths.
I'd rather see though a 8mp sensor optimized for video like in the Canon C100 capable of reaching ISO20,000 almost noise free.
12MP is no sense for handheld cameras.
Canon's 8MP is a FF, sony is 1/1.7", it will never produce anything usable at ISO20000.
Philip Peynerdjiev: Canon MKIII is perfect for JPEG's shooting, in RAW Nikon is king.
There is only one crazy man on Earth who shoots Jpeg on a $3500 camera. His name - Ken Rock****.
Dear DPreview.I can not write on the new forum. After typing several words on the message field, some "sripts" are hanging, IE crashes. Even these words can be typed VEEERY slow.I also can not cut quotation in several pieces to answer it part by part.IE8, Win7
upd: Also "Del" button doesn't work, only "backspace"
Edmond Leung: At high ISO, RAW looks OK but JPEG looks bad!Low price = bad JPEG engine? No way!Nikon needs to improve that.
1st, JPEG are OK.2nd, only an idiot shoots jpeg on a FF camera.
Joes Raw Talk: I find the pictures to be underwhelming and overexposed in some instances. A high end APS-C looks to be about as good or better...especially for these sort of shots. Which brings me to the observation that full-frame may be important for some applications but certainly it is a premium price to pay when you can get an excellent output from the best of the APS-C, for a lot less dollars.
Exactly which APS-C do you mean? Overexposed where?
f/1.8 on the short end - goodf/4.9 on the long end - bad
phemark: Help me understand the need of F2.8 in such a lens.
I would think, that at 10mm, this lens will be mostly used as a landscape/architecture photography tool, and for that you will need the biggest DOF. Of course, at 10mm even 2.8mm will you give great DOF, but i will doubt that anyone will use it due to softness.
So why is it F2.8? so you could handhold shoot at night some buildings? (Most would still use tripod and bigger F stop anyway)
Milky way? Startrails? Landscapes in darkness?Indoor photography?
ZAnton: I use digital cameras for like 6 years. From hundred of gigabytes of my photos I can probably find 2 or 3 with exposure time 1/2000s or faster. Nikon's lack of 1/8000 means nothing to me. Noone will ever use it unless he wants to shoot f/1.2 in midday in Sahara.
Lenses faster than f/2 produce immence amount of CA when used wide open under sunlight. Even in the center. So this makes no sense.http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1566137827/photos/1855279/img_7901-3Again, who shoots bokeh-portraits under very hard sunlight? Idiots?Also, the difference is only 1 Stop. For god sake don't tell me, somebody need exactly that Stop of bokeh at 1PM in Sahara.
Ashuaria Lee: I was waiting for 1500$ T_T bye-bye my D600 adios amigo~
Why don't you wait for $10 FF?
welshwizard: Think I'll stick with what I've got, scene and idiot modes on a £2000 camera?
How about... not using them?I have 5dmk2 and I have no idea what modes it has except A,T and M.
@D1N0Do you have Lightroom?Go to Library, check all photos you have and then on the top press Metadata. Then look how many photos do you have at 1/8000 sec. Then tell us.
I use digital cameras for like 6 years. From hundred of gigabytes of my photos I can probably find 2 or 3 with exposure time 1/2000s or faster. Nikon's lack of 1/8000 means nothing to me. Noone will ever use it unless he wants to shoot f/1.2 in midday in Sahara.
ZAnton: another highly overpriced lens for a few techno-geeks who collect that crap and never shoot?
I have heard the same ode to Canon L some years ago.Now I have Canon L. Nothing special.
My last hope - is to see your photos in your galery made with Carl Zeiss lenses.
Do you even understand how illogical your answer is?
another highly overpriced lens for a few techno-geeks who collect that crap and never shoot?