Certainly going to be a great camera for action and general use ...
Just from what I can see here, I'd still go for my 750 for file quality that is just a little bit better all around ... but can't hold a candle to the speed and, likely, AF accuracy of this new body
Will be interesting to see the DXO scores when they appear ...
Charrick1: I wonder if Nikon is trying to wean themselves off of Sony sensors and not doing a good job of it... I don't know. Whatever the case, this is a big deal and whoever doesn't think so - and wants to keep people in the dark who are considering a $6,000 purchase - must be saying that just to satisfy their brand loyalty. I even read someone's comment saying that this camera is better than a camera that came out in 2007, and that no clients ever complained about pictures from that camera. Well said! Now you can go back to your cave and play with your 2007 technology and never have to buy another camera again in your lifetime. For the rest of us, we're actually interested in the cutting edge and what performance specs a camera has. We're not interested in keeping quiet so as to not hurt your feelings.
D5 has exactly the same DR at ISO 200 as the D700 ... and probably produces magnificent files ... all this bother about base iso DR is overblown
exactly the same dynamic range as my old D700 at base iso and about two more clean stops a high iso ... I'd say its a fab camera
Yake: I'm happy to see Canon improving their sensors, but this testing is still unrealistic & over-rated. A 5- / 6-stop underexposure represents an extreme situation — something that most photographers won't need in a photography lifetime.
Virtually all of the history of photography was made without this extreme "shadow lifting". That includes millions of photo books, advertisements, news pics, portraits, wedding pics, record/CD covers, magazine covers, etc. And nearly every fine art photo in books, galleries & museums.
Some people will point out that this tech lets them make certain photos more easily — and that's good — but it's not as if photographers had no way of dealing with extreme contrast for the past ~180 years. For one thing, photographers weren't persnickety about showing detail in *everything*, but rather made artful decisions about what should go black & what should go white. Besides that, they had other tools: bracketing, lighting, reflectors, graduated filters, etc.
you can actually think of "all of the history of photography" as one long exercise in managing a lack of dynamic range ... think of all the things you can hardly take a successful picture of that we can plainly see; dramatic light is usually very high in contrast, or contra ... if we had displays that had 14 stops of brightness, you'd vey quickly understand why you might want ever higher dynamic response than the current state of the art ...
the most "3D" Nikon lens ...
5 User memory recall positions - thats pretty impressive
Tyr-Sog: Wish there was a version without the flip screen, touch screen, and video for a little less $$$.
flip screen - on my 750 never deploys accidentally and I practically forget it is there - until I need it - and then can do things that are really useful and impossible with OVF - like interior photography, on tripod, backed up against a wall, to get the whole room = switch to LV and flip the screen up to compose ... brilliant!
Fred Mueller: no idea if the lens is worth the money ... but boy there sure is a lot of blocked shadow and blown highlight in these samples ... nasty!
"matter of taste" - but also a matter of just how the camera body tends to "look" - ie great resolution, but not so great dynamic envelope; I was surprised.
no idea if the lens is worth the money ... but boy there sure is a lot of blocked shadow and blown highlight in these samples ... nasty!
ebuliavac: This seems to be the first review of a Nikon DSLR on this site in a long time that did not complain about overexposure by 1/3 stop. Is it true that this camera does not do this? Interesting that the new D750 overexposes according to dpreview. It would be helpful to know about the D610 for a number of reasons: 1. Setting exposure compensations to - 1/3 EV constantly is bound to underexpose some shots. 2. It will be hard to tell from the LCD readout whether a scene is overexposed by such a small amount. 3. If details are in fact blown out, you can't get them back. Please let us know dpreview. Thank you so much in advance.
Some follow-up thoughts are: Why would Nikon produce cameras consistently with this problem? Seems easy to address?
Why doesn't anyone else complain about this?
Thanks again. My D70S is spot-on with exposure. I have a Sony NEX 7 for high ISO needs. Still, an optical viewfinder and Nikon (or Canon) colors are hard to beat.
i have a 600 and a 750 ... my perception of both cameras is that they both under expose slightly. Don't agree with the DPR claim of overexposure at all.
I shoot Real Estate professionally. The 750 is a fine fine camera. I upgraded from the 600 because the bracketing feature is more complete in the 750, and the tilt screen is useful while on tripod ...
good eye for composition ... processing a little too flashy for me in some of these
who cares about the method finally ... ?
Renato60: I have used the 5dsr for a couple of weeks and the combination between the sensor and the latest Canon lenses is simply breathtaking, not only in terms of resolution. Images are almost three-dimensional, resembling the effect of an old Kodachrome. I suggest not focusing only on specific aspects (i.e. DR, noise, ...), all things that can be easily adapted in Photoshop, but on the final result.
Apparently the same photo of the tulips has been shot with the 5DS and with the 7S. I also made the same consideration.
Agree ... and I have Nikon gear ... 750 right now. There is some validity to pointing this out (endlessly) I guess, but if I was a Canon shooter I wouldn't jump ship for 2 ev in shadow recovery at base iso. These issues really don't affect our photographic abilities much. Just a touch of NR in the Canon "Tulip" shot and it's good to go IMO, and has the same visceral photographic appeal (kudus Rishi) even without that. Plenty of photographers (who can easily grasp the technical significance) will ignore it or compensate where necessary, and do splendid work with these new bodies ...
lens looks like it performs as advertised, but so much over saturation, blocked shadows and blown highlights - why ?
Just a little NR and then sharpen at radius of 2 pixels (cause they are so small) and you get a really great result in the iso 400-800 landscapes. But why shoot landscapes in daylight at 400-800 ?
People will do great things with this camera in the studio ...
Love the videos you guys are doing, just generally ... people who crit. the new G7 need to get a life ... so what if the G7 is not quite up to Sony spec ... still mighty fine, and no excuse to not come back with some great keepers ... but more to the point - you had a great trip. Thanks for sharing.
thanks guys ... these videos are a cut above ... for their aesthetic, insight, and lack of hype
what a pleasant, effective way to have a look at new photography gear ... (even though I've fortunately had a 14-24 for quite some time)
hope you keep it going