I think it's cute how canikon shooters keep saying PIxel shift is only good for product shots as if trying to reduce its usefulness. I can think of many uses for it, from fine art to fashion, crime scenes to landscapes. Even portraiture. Shooting art for galleries, museums and for the artist's websites.. It's a lot more useful than some people are making it out to be. And even if it was just useful for product shots- that's a big industry and covers many things. And as good as the PS photos look, this camera could really put you ahead of the completion.
And now learning it has motion compensation, that opens the doors even more.
qwertyasdf: I think ISO / noise performance advantage of pixel shift is merely theoretical. I can't think of a case which the stillness of the scene could afford you to use pixel-shift, but at the same time, you need high ISO.
Really?I can think of many scenarios using pixel shift in dim lighting where higher iso would be beneficial...
Will B Milner: Cool stuff. But am I right in thinking the lens is letting it down? The 645Z/D810 shots are razor sharp across the frame. (apologies I haven't read all the comments)
Also High ISO on the K-1 looks pretty good too...
Yes, The lens is letting it down. A portrait lens optimized for center sharpness, plus most likely a bad copy, not so uncommon with the made in Vietnam versions of FA limiteds.
samhain: I see no issue with the idea or camera design. What's absurd is that Leica is actually charging MORE money for this than the standard version, when clearly their cost is reduced.
That's so smug. They should be ashamed of themselves for inflating the price, instead of passing on the savings.
I have a serious love/hate relationship with Leica. There's some people at that company who could use a good slap across the mouth.
@archiver Well... I think that's exactly what it is, right? An M262 with no lcd.Leica not having to cut the hole in the back and install the screen & buttons, along with some basic rewiring doesn't make it a different camera. It's the same camera, they just didn't install the LCD panel.
It's anyone's guess as to what it took to make the camera, but I'd bet money it doesn't cost Leica more money to make it.
Whatever, I wouldn't pay more money than a standard M262 or 240 for it so it doesn't really matter what I think.
I see no issue with the idea or camera design. What's absurd is that Leica is actually charging MORE money for this than the standard version, when clearly their cost is reduced.
belle100: It seems to me more like:"Initial information .. suggested the camera module had only been certified by Leica but the company"(Huawei) was not happy with that statement by Leica and changed that to "the P9 camera is indeed co-engineered with Leica" to make it sounds better.
Probably.My guess is at most Leica bumped up the contrast and maybe tweaked the colors, to give it the 'Leica look'.
I'm surprised Leica would put their name on a camera made in China. Maybe I shouldn't be...
graybalanced: What is it with people in the thread blaming Nikon incompetence for this? Do you have any idea how bad the Kumamoto earthquakes were? The video coming out of it was shocking...4-lane highways wiped out by landslides, bullet trains derailed, hundreds of thousands homeless due to destroyed buildings... and this is in a country with excellent earthquake preparedness as you can see in the much higher death toll in comparable earthquakes in other countries.
Remember the 2004 Asian tsunami? Hard drive production was severely constrained by factories knocked offline, and prices went way up for a while. This is that type of situation.
I have no vested interest in defending Nikon other than being interested in the DL. My SLR is Canon and my compact is Panasonic.
There will be a slight delay in the arrival of your new toys, cranky Westerers with disposable income. You'll live...
Well said @graybalanced.
Flashback: I hate to differ here, but where is the pop?
I can see plenty of detail, but not absolute sharpness. Maybe it's a due to lack of contrast. I was expecting more from this combination.
This doesn't seem to be a 'pop' lens (ala Zeiss), instead focusing on getting everything else right. I don't remember the specifics, but I read a great article & discussion a while back that talked in-depth about the trade offs in lens design. If I'm not mistaken- the 'pop' comes from 'micro contrast'. Usually lenses like zeiss tthat have lots of 'pop' are seen as being very clinical, and don't always have the nicest bokeh. Where as other portrait lenses(like the Nikon 58mm 1.4g) may focus more on smooth rendering, a flattering 'creamy' look & very pleasing bokeh. I'm not the best person to explain it, probably butchering it- but in a nutshell that's what I've come to notice in tele lenses.
This lens seems to walks the line by having the best of all worlds. I prefer the higher contrast Zeiss style formulas but I respect the hell out of this lens, and foresee it doing VERY well in reviews(particularly ones that take bokeh into account).
FuhTeng: I'm going to leave this here for all those who believe sharpness (resolution? accutance?) is the most important thing about lenses -
"Our young men should spend more time considering the composition and merit of their images, and less time with magnifying glasses counting how many bricks and shingles they can resolve." - from a Paris newspaper article on Daguerrotype photography, from 1841.
Seeing as how this is a story on a photography GEAR site, demonstrating a new lens... Why wouldn't we talk about it being sharp (& other characteristics)?This isn't a photographer critique thread and the people shooting aren't pro photographers. Smh at some people on here. I wonder if they're just butt hurt that Sony is pumping out more, and better, lenses than the currently stagnant Canon & Nikon lens depts? Or perhaps they're just miserable in general and jump at the chance to share their negativity with any audience they can...?Who knows.
This lens looks awesome. Very sharp. The transitions are very smooth, almost the opposite of Zeiss in that regard. Great color, great bokeh. This should be a very flattering portrait lens. I've been waiting to see if Sony would bring a pro level portrait lens out, and they did not disappoint. Lens looks to beat the older Sony/Zeiss 85/1.4. If I shot Sony, This would probably be the first lens I bought.
Good job Sony!
tedolf: The thing is huge.
It is bigger than a Leica M9!
Well... Atleast the sensor is smaller.
samhain: Loving those LED's! So smart. Sometimes... It's just the little things :)
@russell didn't even consider that. Good point.
samhain: This camera is beautiful.
As a former long time Pentax shooter, my big question is: how good will the fa limiteds be with this new sensor? Those 3 little lenses were the reason I went with Pentax in the first place, and the darlings of the lens line up.
If I was Pentax, I would be working hastily on bringing out updated versions of those lenses(and ideally have production brought back to Japan). Throw in a new 50mm 1.2 & 85mm 1.2 (and a pro level flash) and I think they'd could draw in a LOT of buyers.
When I first started shopping cameras, a Japanese photographer I really respected wrote: "bodies come and go. You buy into a system for the lenses."That always stuck with me. And a stunner 50/1.2 & 85/1.2 would call to wedding & portrait shooters like a siren.
@keith reeder I couldn't disagree more. Hands down the best looking DSLR body to date.
Red makes the most sense, as it's the least visible from a distance at night. But now we're just being picky :)It has little led lights to help you swap lenses, cards, etc in the dark. And that's a cool feature.
samhain: "A camera body so small and so pocketable encourages run-and-gun, hand-holdable shooting, but trying to get 42MP of sharpness dictates careful application of shooting technique, and maybe even a tripod. "
And that's the sole reason why I won't be getting this camera. Putting a 42mp sensor in a take anywhere/travel/personal pocket camera makes no sense. Like usual, Sony gets the tech right but drops the ball in the 'real world use' category. It's as if the cameras are built without any input from real working photographers. This camera same so close to being 'my perfect camera'. Guess I'm stuck dreaming about a full frame Fuji X100T, or a Leica Q with a longer focal length.
But that's referring to their ILC cameras. A one-off FF x100 with fixed lens wouldn't take away anything from their ILC's. I think they could exist harmoniously, just as all the other brands with both ff & aps-c. I don't get the 'either/or' mindset.
Smaug01: Is it me, or do they keep printing PENTAX bigger and bigger? That's a shame.
Definitely a throwback to the 67. I like it.There's always black Gaffers tape if it bothers you that much.
Loving those LED's! So smart. Sometimes... It's just the little things :)
Seumas: I would like to thank dpreview for spending so much attention to the K1but i just wonder what about the 50mm f2 in the picture about the use of vintage lenses?
the most common 50mm MF is the f1.7 version, another common and appreciated 50mm 's the f1.4 version.. So why did you choose (and maybe use?) the cheapest f.2 version?
Agreed- If memory serves, I think the 50/1.7 was the best of Pentax 50's.
But honestly, that camera should have the 43mm on it
This camera is beautiful.
Boss of Sony: In my experience, the 35mm focal length does not have the wow factor, regardless of the image quality. People say "WOW!" when they see my 16mm wide images of Switzerland (APS-C), or my 24mm photos of Japan (LX100). When they see my 35mm photos taken with X100s, they say "MEH". This camera may be good for pixel peeping. Won't blow non-camera nerds away.
@boss agreed. 35mm on full frame is a 'Jack of all trades, master of none.". It's a great versatile focal length, but there's not much 'wow'. I spent years shooting with a Konica hexar AF and got used to it, but always longed for more DOF. Although I will say- it does have more 'wow' than a 28mm. That's gotta be the most boring fl ever lol. (Ironic that it's the most used, via cell phones).
Imo 50 is where it's at. Even 40mm has more pop. Pentax's 43mm is really nice on FF(film), and said to be the closed FL to the human eye.
It's just a matter of time till we get one with 40-50mm fixed.