jack123torr: Hi all,
I am tempted to sell my Nikon D7100 + 18-200 lens (old vesion, "red NR") and replace by the FZ1000. It is smaller, lighter, more options (rotating screen, panorama, wifi, NFC, etc etc etc).
The only point that concerns me is: "will there be a noticeable difference on 4x6 prints at ISO 3200 and 6400"?
Any comments? Thanks.
If 4x6 inch and not foot prints are your target, there is no need for you to spend more than a couple hundred for a camera. You won't see a difference between a Fuji F900 and a $100,000 Hasselblad system.
Peiasdf: Wow, for the price of these adapter, might as well pick up an extra Rebel SL1 when you want to shoot Canon lenses.
Lens bulk, what are you smoking?The Canon 100-400 yields a 200-800 equivalent. Now what is the size weight comparison with the 800mm Canon canon, I forget? This smart adapter is just the thing to get me to buy into the OMD system though it would be to enable the operation of a Canon 100mm macro.
After comparing the images to those from a Nikon D90/D300/D300S, IMHO it exceeds the IQ of those cameras if only slightly. These are amazing results for a $900 all in one camera, I doubt whether Panasonic is making any money on it. Just shows what 8 years of sensor technology advancement can do.
ISK: More FZ1000 samples here:
The RAW files are there for download, just click on the link. Unfortunately Lightroom doesn't yet support this camera.
Timmbits: I like more controls... but I prefer the large LCD on the Sony, and I hate swing-out screens with a passion - no matter what you tell me about these two, I couldn't live with that LCD. I guess we all have our preferences... but for me, it would be the Sony.
I too vote for a Fuji X-S2 with a larger sensor and a larger and faster RAW buffer. A battery grip would be a nice option and of course the latest in EVF technology. The ergonomics and size are terrific, a camera for adults instead of these little toy cameras for folks with the hands of an 8 year old.
starwolfy: Before talking about isos people should learn what a correct exposure is. I shoot iso400 film hand held at night with no tripod on a 55 years old film camera. Look at my results on my gallery (just night examples of what I do, me who is just an amateur).
iso 400.000. Is it what you guys need ? Really ? Really ???
What a joke.
Go up into the Rocky Mountains to photograph wildflowers. Set up your RRS or Giottos tripod with your favorite camera and lens, compose and calculate exposure. Then notice that you'll need 1/4000 to 1/8000 sec to stop the fluttering flowers and leaves from the ever present wind. I forgot to mention that you are in the shade to get the deepest and richest colors and that some flowers only bloom in the shade such as the Lady Slipper Orchid or a Coloradian's favorite, the Columbine. The shadows are a good 8 EV darker than sunlight.
Of course multiple image HDR is impossible under 4,000 frames per second due to ghosting.
A beautifully clean ISO above 400K? I'd take out a second mortgage were it available. For now I'll keep saving my nickels for a D3S or D4S.
from a former D300S user
8GB of RAM for serious image editing, NOT!
MLWestphal: What a shame it will be cloudy in NJ.........
Or didn't buy a Tesla. Wonder when the press is going to get wise to Teslagate. Christie is just another pawn of the oil companies aka Bushy and Ronnie.
Maybe the price of used 645D's will drop to a more affordable level. That and a 200mm macro would be just fine for me.
vadimraskin: What is the point in small camera that needs big lenses? Balancing it is a pain!
The point of a small camera is that they are basically jewelry as Leica discovered 40 years ago. Designing camera bodies for the hands of an 8 years old is an admission that few buyers are serious about photography. This is all about sales and not usability. They even lossy compress the raw images from the A7 bodies and nobody complains.
While WayneHuangPhoto hit most of the top issues, there is still the almighty stupidity of the camera makers.
10's of thousands of Nikon D300/D300S owners did not replace their cameras because of the tiny raw buffer on the D7100.
Fuji is covering every silly mm and f/stop below 60mm with nothing meaningful above 60mm. Where is the 80-400/100-500 long lens, where is the 150mm macro...? If those lenses had existed, I would have purchased the X-Pro and then replaced it with the X-T1 even with the silly top shutter speed of 1/4000th sec. It's got an electronic shutter Fuji, give us high shutter speeds so we can actually use your f/1.2 lenses and eventually long telephotos.
Canon hasn't built a new camera in several years, just 60's Detroit styling changes and miniscule technical upgrades.
Sony,they can't do anything right.
Olympus, the only company getting almost everything right. They now have almost 50% of the interchangeable lens mirrorless market share. I wonder why?
No different than what Jony Ive designs for Apple. Fashion is more important than function. Leica has been in the jewelry business for 40 years.
By pumeco "Yes indeed, alternatives, paid or free - just alternatives"
What alternative is there to Lightroom? Nothing compares at any price. Though Aperture is almost there, Apple's approach to removing features from their photo and video apps with each new release makes that a silly option.
mpix345: I heard they will soon offer a limited edition version with no LCD for only $1000 more.
And they are going to hire Hasselblad to make an $8000 wooden grip so that it can be held comfortably by an adult.
nathantw: WTF, no XQD card? And SD instead of CF? What the heck?
You got it. SD = toy camera. At least the other FX cameras have 2 slots so that one can be used as a backup. Clearly the shutter is from the D610 as well. Getting D4 IQ for $2000 less would be a deal if not for the toy memory card and the top shutter speed of 1/4000. As all but one of my lenses are FX, this would have been a no brainer move from my D300S.
For a Nikon D300S and Sigma 180 macro, I found this rig to be insufficiently sturdy and went with the Manfrotto 055XB. Heavy yes but I stop so often to take pictures that it is not really noticeable.
I use the Manfrotto 3275 Gear head (replaced by 410jr). Tripod and head weigh 126 oz (7 lbs 14 oz) or 3.6 kg.
While the light Manfrotto ball heads lack stiffness and security, I found the 498 to be both sturdy and secure. There is a safety catch on the release lever so that it takes 2 hands to remove the camera. Though, this is a heavy head, it compares favorably against heads costing twice as much.
Sometime in the next few months, I hope to have the opportunity to do some wildlife photography with a Sigma 50-500 on my D300S. I will bring both the gear and ball head for some parallel testing. My GUESS is that I'll be sticking with the gear head for landscape work and the ball head for wildlife. Yes a gimbal head would be nice but any under about $600 seem to not work that well.
See Thom Hogan's review at:http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/current-nikon-dslr-reviews/nikon-d4-review.html
Henry Falkner: They are re-inventing the wheel. Such corrections are incorporated in the firmware of my 24x zoom Olympus SZ-30MR pocket P&S and a multitude of similar dedicated cameras, and presumably in all cell phone cameras.
Academe is sometimes so isolated, they have no clue as what is happening around them.
Too bad you had to demonstrate to the world that you didn't understand the article. This is known as trolling.
When are we going to get fully functional lens adapters for Nikon and/or Canon lenses? Fuji is just not addressing the pro market for either longer zooms (70/80-200 and longer) or long macro lenses (150mm).
My wish is for a Nikon to Fuji adapter WITHOUT the focal reducer so I can use my Nikon D and G lenses on the Fuji. I'd pay $400 for a quality adapter that passes through the electronics and the autofocus motor drive.