Wow, this is a really nice move. :)
Emacs23: I got my words back: Prime is the BEST commercial denoiser right now.Here is the test, the D800E at ISO 3200: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12196364/gallery/different/D800EhSLI03200.jpgTruly spectacular!And high resolution sensors, such as one used in D800(E) or A7r will obviously benefit from it: put an NR, downsample. Profit!
Yeah, I came to this conclusion myself. First I done some quick testing, and PRIME looked fine. However, now I processed several hundred of awful images, and the results are jaw-dropping. It works so well, that some 30 or 40 images of mine that I marked as unusable junk passed stringent quality control at respectable stock site.
Now, the program is sluggish, but who cares. - The computer can work over night. :-)
Tested the software a bit. - PRIME works really good, and it is not that slow - about 1:15 on my machine, per 10MP image.
Compared to ACR denoising, PRIME works better. I would say that it does much more than just one stop. The images looks smoother, and the details remain.
For the software in general - it is simpler than before, and with less aggressive initial settings.
All in all, swell. - And the PRIME is fantastic.
From what I see, this might be a truly beautiful lens. I suppose it can be directly compared with Olympus stellar 14-35mm F2.0.
This lens looks so promising, that I personally am thinking about changing the system to be able to use it.
Isn't this a bit nonsensical? If a cheap camera is used OK; but this Nikon, neither the lens are cheap. To expensive professinal equipment into a field-untested homemade box that should protect the camera from impact and water?
As a stark contrast to launch of this Leica - just look at the user's comments on sigma F1.8 zoom. People love it, and are ready to pay whatever for it (me included).
If this Leica is really a posh accessory, why couldn't they make it a really good posh accessory? Constant F2.8 or even F3.5 would suffice, but what they did really baffles me. - The question is not the amount of money for this tool, but the fact it is hardly usable with sensor and lens limitation.
And when we are at lens, what kind of crap is that? The released samples show loads of problems, and at that price point, there shouldn't be *any* aberrations, or falls of sharpness. And especially on the compact with lens designed for it. I used Sigma DP1, which I was not happy with, but the lens sharpness wide open were top-notch. Now, if you consider the price of DP1 compared to this, it seems like they think buyers are idiots. And literally - owner of this camera would be close to an idiot (I apologize on the wording).
mrmut: Acceptable price for a great lens.
When they published specifications of this lens, that was the reason for me to start thinking about system change. Somewhere in that time Canon also announced their small and light camera, so there two would be paired beautifully.
Thanks for replies; All.
I am aware of the weight issues, but consider this: I currently use E-450 (which is even lighter than the Canon's offering), with ZD-25 F2.8 lens, which is incredibly light (about 100gr). However, today, I had to mount Sigma 35 F1.4 to that same camera, to photograph an event. All vent fine, but sigma is about 500 gr or more. So, when you consider the gain from such an astounding zoom, and (relatively) small weight penalty, I am all in it for this. Essentially fro all purposes, from travel to even photography (I really like small cameras).
For the m43 comment - I don't like them. Even SLR cameras are sterile, compared to rangefinders [and I don't want to pay for Leica (cameras and lenses are expendable tools)], and m43 is even more so. When you look through that digital window into the world, it cuts you out completely from the scene.
Acceptable price for a great lens.
Sean65: I like it. The more I look at it the more I like it BUT I wish it had a fixed f4 and was £500 cheaper. I also think from a design perspective the command dial would have looked better in black.
Not surprised to see all the usual hatred this forum is famed for from it's non photography, flat earthed members who still think more everything = better. lol.
This is nonsensical camera, it is slow even during daylight, and to compensate for the lens slowness, it needs to be shot at ISO 1600-12000 which won't produce much usable images.
This is kind of a posh carry-around. Even suggested F4 is too slow, but that could be somewhere like acceptable, but not this.
As it seems now, this camera is consciously designed piece, and as such I don't pity them as they became joke of the day, along with Lunar. Imagine if Apple would produce something as stupid as this? People would bury them.
And it is not the question of money, either, just common sense, exactly on which they play a bit dumb game. (Meaning - people aren't that stupid.
mike kobal: Lunar's little sister just arrived ;)
OK; this is hilarious in itself, but what if they have prepared something nice? - If they actually have made a new wonder version of 24 MP sensor, and have redesigned the available lens into astounding pieces of art?
If they made a perfectly performing camera, however ugly it might be, it might be worth of a buy. - People do buy Leicas for heaps of money.
(But I don't really believe they would any of this, just lining out possibilities.)
This is fantastic; a lens so appealing that one considers buying into a new system just for this. Would love to see this on Four Thirds mount, would buy it definitely.
I have experienced such behavior before; it changes with good image and seriousness of approach. When you meet with client, he must be perfectly clear on what the positions are, without any additional input.
If you need to say that you won't do something for free, than you need to change the approach. People who want free stuff won't call you then at all, which saves time.
Nice and honest interview. I would really happy if there would be more producers like Leica, as the principles they function on as a company are outstanding. They have low production rates of top-quality product. High prices and effort put into product design give photographers a long-lasting value, which is a point that should really be appreciated. As the time passes, systems come and go, and you still can screw a 50 years old Summicron on new M and get outstanding results. Nice prospect - to have a camera that will last a lifetime. (Maybe that would work even with a MF?)
In the world of built-in obsolescence, Leica "Germans" can bear all the pompousness or the world, but the ideas their company represent go well beyond the product.
Wow, this is unexpectedly good!
Hopefully, QC will not be sub-par this time.
With E-5, Olympus clearly started closing gap between Nikon in sensor signal processing. I am talking in the terms of noise per sensor area. Now, with E-M5, they've done a remarkable job! When you compare E-M5 and D4, you get the same footprint, exactly 2stops apart (D4 is diagonally ~2x larger). That is probably the maximum of what can be achieved at this point, and is something that should be highly respected. Good work Olympus! Congratulations!
The image quality is amazing.
polarhei: I think,i shall take a new try of the other brand since Large Number may be meaningless
I will consider the Sigma SD1m instead of it since there is not so much improvements.
Don't be so sure. Cameras are not set of features, but systems. Nikon has proven again and again that it is capable to deliver robust and stable systems. Sigma does not. Their series of cameras, while providing a nice alternative technology, are plagued with problems.