Deliverator: So, the green auto setting on consumer DSLRs isn't simple enough? I know more than a few people with consumer DSLRs who use this setting almost exclusively to their complete satisfaction. A few of them might stray off into the scene modes, but that's it. They have no desire or need for anything else, and that's just fine with them.
Well, Richard, I think its interesting we have different experiences. One thing I've noticed among my friends with DSLRs is that VERY few of them have upgraded, or are even considering upgrading them. For their uses, the kit zoom and green auto setting are more than sufficient for what they want to do with their cameras, and there is nothing compelling, or even interesting in newer cameras that they might want. Even those with D80/Rebel XTi era cameras don't see any need to upgrade: they use their phones for video.
I think what we're seeing is market saturation.
matthiasbasler: I don't believe it is primarily the complexity of dedicated cameras that is responsible for the drop in sales. I see it as a combination of following factors:
1. Smartphone cameras meanwhile can create good-looking photos.2. Having a smartphone saves you taking a dedicated point and shoot camera with you, and if you don't care about DOF, minimizing noise or the like you don't loose much. Oh, and you don't have to care about shutter shock at all.3. Smartphones have cool tricks like filters, blurred backgrounds, sweep panoramas etc. built in, so no need to go through a complicated software workflow in post. -> Time saver.4. People who still like a dedicated camera often already have a capable one, and few see the need to spend money every two years to get some new features.
Maybe dedicated cameras will become again what they had been before the digital era: A tool for real photographers, not a gadget everyone has. And there's imho nothing wrong with that.
Good points. Add to those the fact that:
5. People can take those photos they're capturing on their smart phones and immediately post them to Facebook, Instagram, Flickr etc., and email/message, them to friends and family with no hassle whatsoever. Even the cameras with the best WiFi integration can't get close to matching that, as there is always the added step of connecting it to their device.
So, the green auto setting on consumer DSLRs isn't simple enough? I know more than a few people with consumer DSLRs who use this setting almost exclusively to their complete satisfaction. A few of them might stray off into the scene modes, but that's it. They have no desire or need for anything else, and that's just fine with them.
KShape: 8, 12, 17 are not shot by 35L...
It does say that isn't not the 35mm L II in the notes. The author is musing that the new LII will have some stiff competition from the Sigma Art.
EcoPix: Thanks dpReview for raising the issue of focus accuracy with SLR lenses. We love our reflex viewfinders, but increasing resolution is starting to reach the limits of this design. Zoom lenses often need different focus calibrations for different distances and focal lengths (and even f-stops sometimes), making the adjustments complex and too much for even the capable operator to do by AF fine tuning.
What’s needed now is focus mapping for each lens. Given the power of the modern camera’s IC, would it be possible for manufacturers to include a program in the firmware that maps focus for each lens at the range of distances, f-stops and focal lengths via the main sensor, and stores the data for calibration of the AF module?
@fz750: I'm thinking it would work exactly opposite. Perfectly focus in Liveview, then switch to the viewfinder, and note the change to focus. Repeat several times for each focal length and each aperture. Could be automated with a USB link and a program on a PC.
DPJoe2: I hope DPR is reading what DL has to say about posterization and conducting their own test about that.
Ok. Thanks for clarifying. My understanding is it only happens at high contrast boundaries. I suppose that could happen in daylight at the edges of building roofs, leaves on trees backing on sky, etc., but I haven't seen any examples of it... not that I've looked too hard.
"Raw compression can limit dynamic range"
Um, surlezi, I'm not sure if you're just trolling, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here.
I was referring to the posterization example in Slide 8 of this article.
Thom Hogan has reviews of the A7 and A7r, where he goes into the posterization issues with the Sony compression scheme. Since the compression scheme hasn't changed in the A7rII, they are still there, as evidenced in Slide 8 in this DPR article.
Pre-orders likely came in larger than anticipated, so they're holding off until they can ramp up production? Maybe they learned from the V3 experience?
surlezi: Did you see slide 8 in this article? Pretty obvious posterization there. Thom Hogan has some examples on his site as well, albeit with older Sony cams of various flavours (including the RX100, which he raves about).
That said, I'm not sure how critical it is. Maybe as much as the banding issue with the D750, which is to say not much of an issue at all.
Peiasdf: It is not going to be on the 6S but will arrive with some nice new features on the 7. Apple never rush to put half-baked stuff on products.
arrow501: Will any Canon or Nikon body auto correct lens distortions with this lens?
Lassoni: Such a shame that google is now part of science circles too. It just goes to show how much ppl are willing to give this company power
alcaher: regarding the 200-500: will it be sharper or equal to the 80-400mm in the 200-400mm range?...we have to see the comparisons, but the price of this new lens is a strange move from nikon since it will be almost 1k less than the 80-400.
with the popularity of the tamron and the two sigmas with their wider and longer focal range, the nikkor should have to do quite good on performance if they want to sell alot of copies. The extra 100mm of the third party options still a big deal for many wildlife photographers.
Maybe for many nikon shooters, this lens migh be kind of the 400 f5.6 canon version they were asking for... so in that case, this lens must do great also in the AF performace... and for that price i doubt it.
The D7200s AF system is more advanced than that in the D300s. Comparison reviews indicate it performs on a par with that of the 7DMII, despite its seeming shortcomings on paper.
Lassoni: Very skeptical about 200-500. It's much heavier than Tamron's older 200-500 (maybe due to constant aperture, and addition of VR). Still, way too heavy for my liking. A real shame they chose not to use PF in any of these lenses.
1.2kg vs 2-2.3 kg. I really don't see point in this. PF would've made the lens 1.5kg
I am not an optical designer, but it might not be that easy to implement PF in a zoom lens.
GEDERA GUY: As an upgrade to the D80 , the D7000 is a definite improvement , but build quality is still lacking , next to say, the D300S .
That being sad , the camera handles well ,even if the video function is still an option I scorn .
The main problem I have, is the slow flash sync speed with my SB 600 flashgun - a pathetic 1/60 sec .To utilise the full potential of the D7000 , I need to upgrade my flash gun - not easy when finances are tight .
You should be able to sync at up to 1/320 (FP mode) with your SB600.
Wubslin: I see the usual Internet Warriors have assembled with their tired canards about so-called 'rootkits' - how dreadfully predictable.
Let's get this straight once and for all - there never was any 'rootkit' or any other malware on any Sony product, ever. The people making these malicious and untrue claims will no doubt have to defend their lies in court.
It was a totally botched ATTEMPT at copy protection implemented with code that was effectively malware that left the machine wide open to exploits. So, IT WAS A FREAKING VIRUS. All the anti-virus programs of the day recognized it and cleaned it. Just because you are too obtuse to understand this doesn't make it any less true.
@Wubslin: I don't hate Sony. Heck, I own an RX-100.
They DID plant malware on CDs. I HAD one of those CDs, so I don't need to go to the internet for evidence. You of course, will ignore this, as you have all the other evidence, because you are a troll.
Wubslin is trolling you all.
exapixel: Nikon's recalling and fixing a product, and gets mocked mercilessly, while Sony still can't emit a 14-bit raw file and gets a free pass?
nththo, examples about on the internet. You don't have to look hard. Heck, there are even on the forums on this very site.
Now, I know what you're going to do next: argue that it is rare. Well, so was the D750 flare issue, but that didn't stop you from bleating your horn about Nikon quality control.
The fact is, this problem is EASILY solved with new firmware, if only Sony would do it. Why they refuse to while putting out otherwise very high performance instruments is beyond me. Then again, so is Nikon not producing a D400 and Canon sticking with off-chip ADC.
Head-scratchers abound in this business.