Jim222: grainy sky for iso 100!
Well, the photo was processed in ACR, so the "grain" is a normal thing. When shooting Jpeg, there is no grain but there is no detail either.
It is clear that CNX-D is downgrade compared to Capture NX 2. Most comments are negative, however compared to View NX, in many ways it is an upgrade.
Nikon claims that Capture NX D will be free tool, so for me it is good move, because no one, who has been using CNX 2, would pay for it.
Many comments are exaggerated.
Breen: It is quite nice update from Canon, however.. The company became a copycat.
HDR, multi noise reduction, handheld night scene.. all copied from Sony's DSLR. Sony has HDR's since 2009, MNR, HNS also for about 2-3 years..
And now, another Canon's "breakthrough" in photography.
Well STL it is not pelix. Translucent mirror has different purpose in Sony camera. Of course Sony based SLT in some way on canon's invention from 1965, however in totally different way. In 650D canon did exact copy of Sony features. They work exactly the same way, that is why Canon is a copycat.
When Sony invents new features, usually haters say that they are stupid and unnecessary. After 2 years Canon copied those features and now tyeh are great.. because it is Canon..
It is quite nice update from Canon, however.. The company became a copycat.
I can say only one word.. WOW!
Comparing sample photos I have to say it loudly.. People were complaining about Sony HX200 picture quality, but in fact Sony camera is far more superior to Canon SX260. I know that HX200 is a bit different camera and it has 30x zoom instead 20x in Canon. However if Dpreview will test Sony HX20V I'm sure the results will be even better..
Why Sony HX200 has better quality? Please download sample photo with house and palm trees.. Even 1:1 image from Sony camera has far more detail. When you scale down 18 MP to Canon's 12 the advantage of Sony HX is even bigger. Image is more crisp,when SX260 produces very soft image, especially in the corners(compare the look of the windows, trees).
I wrote this because lot of people think that only Canon makes good cameras. These sample photos show how they are wrong!
rssarma: While I like the direction m4/3s is heading, its definitely not turning out the budget system I thought it would be. I was an Olympus user for 5 years before I switched to the D700; I still use an E-1 & E-330, but the cost to get into m43s seems pretty high to me.
Well there is always 45 1.8 which is not as expensive.
Ivanaker: I just cant understand the pricing of m43, or any mirrorless gear, it is way to much.75 f/1.8 - $899.99om-d - $1,299.00
on the other handnikon d7000 - $1,199.00very new 85 f1.8 - $499.00
And that lens is an investment as you can venture to FX format with it.
Im glad m43 exists, some nice cameras and lenses from them, and they are pushing tech forward, and forcing Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax.... to make even better DSLR. But i cant see how anyone can choose om-d + 75 1.8 when for the same money you can get d7000, 85 1.8(FX), 50 1.8(FX) and 35 1.8(DX).And im not going even to venture into benefits of one system or another, ill give you that m43 is smaller.
What you do not understand? Who said Nikkor 85 1.8 is as good as Olympus 75 1.8? Another thing, how big is Nikon D7000? OMD is very HQ camera, but compared to DLSR it is much smaller!
If someone wants good(and possibly small) weather sealed camera with super HQ lenses will not buy D7000 because it is huge compared to OMD.
D1N0: For the price you can get 3 Samyang's 85mm F1.4. One for your camera, 2 to throw at people who mock you about it.
Who cares. Samyang doesnt have AF.
Comparing this lens to Canon 85 1.8 is stupid because these are not the same quality!
Also it is stupid to compare this lens to FF. It is not Full Frame like it is not medium format, it is m4/3!
I hope price will be lower because 900 bucks is too much. Propably the price will be about 800$