Critics in the use of Photoshop (or other pp sw) must all be jpeg shooters, 'cause last time I checked RAW files have to be converted and adjusted through a post-processing workflow. JPEGs go through an automated conversion process in-camera.
If the photog is not going to adjust the RAW file after opening it in software(i.e., file open>file save as) they'd actually get better results shooting straight jpegs, cause unedited RAW files look flat.
Wonderful images, thanks for sharing them. Wish I had that kind of talent. As for all the douche's whining about PP, there wasn't that much done IMO. A little blur on some, a burned edge on some, perhaps some desaturation on some. Pretty minimal compared to what heavy PP would look like, and not dissimilar to film-era darkroom techniques. Most of the work was done in planning, setup and capture with lighting and composition carefully staged. Taking the studio outdoors as it were.
Shouldn't it have a faux frame advance lever?
I don't get why the frame rate is only 5.5 when they are using the D4 16mp sensor and the same Expeed 3 processor.
Adobe CC = Adobe Compromised Creditcard
Thanks for the tutorial. Ignore the haters. Haters hate.
OP: wondering if the Focus Peaking feature works through the EVF or limited to the LCD?
Last night I watched an excellent documentary on the Mexican Suitcase on Netflix.
fastprime: No support for Nikon Creative Lighting System seems rather odd considering the P7700 has this feature.
Good to know. I see that there are different models available for Nikon and Canon DSLRs but didn't see any for Panasonic. Which one are you using? Does it matter? I have Nikon 800 + 7000 but also Lumix G3. I see N1 for 800, N3 for 7000. Will these fire the remote flash from the G3?
Not following you, please elaborate how manual mode enables this camera to control external flash.
No support for Nikon Creative Lighting System seems rather odd considering the P7700 has this feature.
NJHr: Is that weight figure correct? It seems impossibly light for a DSLR of this supposed build including batteries. Its 75g lighter than the very compact K5. Amazing if true.
Who knew a low pass filter was so heavy!
Love those doggies!
ThomasSwitzerland: As I am doing photography since more than 40 years, I have many first rate classic lenses left (from Nikon, Zeiss to Leica). I tried them by adapters (with lens, without lens) fixed to many: Canon FF, Nikon FF, Oly MFT, Pana FT, Digital Crops Nikon etc. I am not a scientific lab because it’s my hobby. But none of those adapted lenses matched digital sensor requirements. Center might be ok, but that’s it.
If you have an amount of material (your lense) and put another material (lenses by adapter system) in addition between, the output compared to the input is less. Some specifications may be lifted, others will suffer more. The net result is negative. Save your $$$ and buy for the USD 600 savings (from this funny adapter) a good lens for digital to enjoy. There are excellent quality offers.
Digital is the future, adapters are out. Don’t fall in love with things which cannot deliver.
It's difficult to have an intelligent conversation with someone whose mind is already closed. If you have legacy glass that you feel you cannot use, I'd be happy to take them off your hands!
Read the Metabones White Paper specifically the paragraph dealing with legacy glass and AA filters. Besides, lots of people have fun shooting mft cameras and legacy glass. Not everyone cares if every pixel is equally sharp.
For DX or APS-C you reduce the crop factor from 1.5 to 1.06 and pick up 1 f-stop. With most current DX sensors in the 16 - 24mp range, this adapter basically eliminates the need to upgrade to a FF body (assuming you already own FF glass).
For 4/3 sensors the magnification ratio reduces the crop factor to 1.4 from 2.0, giving the edge to the MFT camera vs the DX camera for a slightly wider FOV (and a gain of 1 f stop). Again this assumes you already own FF glass. If you're weight and size consious, this is a pretty good benefit. A restriction here is the dearth of UWA FF glass that would suit landscape photographers. For example a 24mm Nikon AIS would be 35mm on a MFT camera with SB. Probably better to just buy a UWA from Panasonic or Olympus and live with the 2x crop factor.
Other genres could really benefit though, eg street where there's no need for UWA.
If Metabones produces a cheaper version with no electronics that would be interesting for legacy glass.
Gunnlaugur Gudmundsson: nothing against the photographer... and I guess this is the trap most people fall into... Iceland still life/the pristine country in the north... (and if that's your cup of tea, you'll get it..)
anyway, if you come to Iceland.. the reality is that you have to be prepared for wind and rain... cold and darkness... as well as blinding light
Iceland is a place you need bright lenses that are able to capture light...
during the summer (4 months) you have too much light,,, during the winter the land is dark, dismal and cold - a very rocky and hard outpost of Earth...
so, please... not sugarcoating....
granted... the sky, the clouds and the untouched land - nature not conquered - makes Iceland what it is...
I visited Iceland in the last2 weeks of July this year. It rained fairly steadily every day and heavy grey clouds were omnipresent. Our trip to Jokalsarlon was disappointing due to high winds, heavy rain and dense low clouds. Visibility was about 75 yards. Our campsite in Skaftafell NP was completely water logged. This was the height of summer! Despite the weather, I did manage some nice shots at Landmanalaugar and Thorsmork. As Gannlaugur says, be prepared for the weather.
Can someone explaing/expand on what he meant when he said:
"With this camera you can focus at a combined aperture of F8, which isn't possible with the D7000."
I find that there are a significant number of files rejected by LR when I use the card reader. Even when I bypassed the card reader by using USB I still got quite a few files LR was unable to read. I finally used Windows to simply copy the files from the camera/card via USB directly to the HD. Once there I imported them to the LR catalog, never had a reject since.
On another note, one thing you can set on import is CA correction. I think this is a convenient time to make this adjustment as a batch operation.
fastprime: Regarding this conclusion:
" We emphasize the word can, because if you're truly after 36MP performance, be prepared to do some work. Flawless technique, fast shutter speeds and top-shelf equipment (particularly lenses and a tripod) along with a low ISO are requirements not options."
I really don't get this. The pixel density is slightly less than the APS-C D7000. On the D800 the DX area of the sensor is 15mp, therefore the additional 21mp are in the sensor area between the DX area and the perimeter.
All cameras benefit from flawless technique, tripods and better lenses. Nobody talks about flawless technique, tripods and top shelf lenses being requirements to shoot a D7000 (or the 24mp D3200, 22mp 5D3 or any other brand high density mpxl camera). Why should the D800 be singled out?
Samuel DilworthTry grasping this: A 15mp DX area moving around inside the 36mp FF sensor will have exactly the same resolution as the FF area below it. The only thing that changes between a 15mp APS-C sensor and a 36mp FF sensor is the FOV.