dpr4bb

dpr4bb

Joined on Feb 2, 2014

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (605 comments in total)

As far as I'm concerned, the only step forward that would have meant anything would have been a better sensor with better dynamic range and better high-ISO performance. The facts presented in this review leave no room for doubt. This sensor is no better than the V2/J3 sensor. And they are both behind Sony's 1"-inch type sensor. So DxO was right after all, and we're still stuck with visible noise in the shadows at base ISO. The V2 was fast enough already. Can we get better IQ now?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 02:56 UTC as 25th comment
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: I had V1 and now have V2, which I like but Nikon has given me no reason to upgrade to V3. A system also needs lenses and while there are a couple of nice ones, it is just not enough choice, competiton is so good all round these days, Nikon need to wake up.

HowaboutRAW:

Is there any evidence that supports your claim that the V3 sensor is as good as the Sony sensor?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 4, 2014 at 04:40 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: I had V1 and now have V2, which I like but Nikon has given me no reason to upgrade to V3. A system also needs lenses and while there are a couple of nice ones, it is just not enough choice, competiton is so good all round these days, Nikon need to wake up.

HowaboutRAW:

The PB test shots are almost useless for a proper controlled comparison to V2/J3. The IR test shots use a much better lens for the V3 than they do for the ones from V2 and J3. The V2 and J3 test shots at IR look awful, by the way.

The DPR test shots will be the only ones that will do the trick, if they use the same lens as before.

Because of the DxO results and some of the V3 shots that I've seen here and there, including samples from Nikon, I have my doubts about the V3 sensor being in the same ballpark as the Sony one, but if objective evidence shows that it is, then that would be really nice.

DxO sensor scores are what they are, but what I care about are their measurement results, which are objective and useful for comparing sensors. I recommend that you read what IR says about DxO:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/ARTS/dxomark/dxomark.htm

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 23:21 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: I had V1 and now have V2, which I like but Nikon has given me no reason to upgrade to V3. A system also needs lenses and while there are a couple of nice ones, it is just not enough choice, competiton is so good all round these days, Nikon need to wake up.

MFiftysomething:
The only improvement over the V2 that would be worth anything for me would be a better sensor with better high-ISO performance. Something in the ballpark of Sony's 1"-type sensor would be great.
Aside from unsubstantiated and dubious claims, I have seen no objective evidence that the V3 sensor has better high-ISO performance than the V2 one. I'm eagerly waiting for DPR to publish RAW files for test shots from their new studio scene to get a good idea about the high-ISO performance of the V3 sensor. DxO's measurement results have not been very encouraging, I'm afraid.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 17:48 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)

Well, the JPEG engine seems to have improved, thankfully, over the V2/J3 generation, but has the sensor? Please, DPR, when can we see the new studio scene test shots and download the raw files?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2014 at 14:59 UTC as 71st comment
In reply to:

Rooru S: No longer listed in Canon USA huh? Interesting...

@tkbslc:
Interestingly, the two EF-M lenses released in the US are still listed on the Canon USA web site. If they disappear, though, ...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 21:56 UTC
In reply to:

dpr4bb: Is a switch of the Rebel DSLR series to mirror-less imminent?

@rrccad:
Good point! So many of the pieces have slowly been coming together, though. It sure seems as though Canon can just flip a switch whenever they think it's time and they're there.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 21:35 UTC

Is a switch of the Rebel DSLR series to mirror-less imminent?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 21:15 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

Yes, I completely agree that their *overall* sensor score is not particularly useful. What's your opinion on the usefulness of the other sensor scores and the detailed measurement results?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 21:21 UTC
On Olympus Tough TG-3 real-world samples gallery article (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben Herrmann: I really have to chuckle when I read some of the comments here. It goes to show that all of us "see things differently." I personally think that the Nikon and Olympus tough cameras "trounce" the Canon D30. To me, the Canon D30's images look smeared - no detail at all. Of all 3 of the touch cameras shown here, I'd have to say that I would go first for the Olympus, but I'd be happy with the Nikon as a very tight second. But the next guy may disagree - and that's life.

But it's interesting (and sometimes hilarious) to view how folks look at images - which can often be a result of the monitors they view them on, the calibration involved, if any, and a wide variety of variables could come into play - not to mention vision in general and personal IQ standards.

I looked at a few of the landscape photos at base ISO. I agree that the D30 photos look less detailed, but even at 50% view, results from the Canon are the only ones that look like photos. The rest look like watercolor paintings, the WG-4 a little less so. I had never looked at these rugged cameras before. Yuck!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 18:18 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

@HowaboutRAW
Saying that DxO *sensor* scores should quantify anything other than sensor performance is clearly a viewpoint. DxO measurements quantify sensor performance, not overall image quality.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 17:40 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

@HowaboutRAW
Thanks for shedding light on your viewpoint.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 15:57 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

@DarkShift
Do keep in mind that appreciating the DXO measurement results requires an actual understanding of what things like DR and SNR mean...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 15:29 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

@HowaboutRAW: What will one see if one looks? Do tell.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 06:04 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)

Dear DPR, any idea when we might be able to see the V3 in the new studio scene comparison tool?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2014 at 22:57 UTC as 17th comment
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpr4bb: Dear DPR staff, for an added perspective, I'd like to suggest that you also include the A6000 with the 16-50mm kit lens in the Equivalent Aperture vs. Focal Length graph.

@JordanAT: I was talking about Equivalent Aperture, which means that the f-number is multiplied with the crop factor. What I was getting at is that the RX100 III lens has about the same light-gathering ability as the A6000 16-50mm kit lens (a bit more at the wide and long ends and a bit less elsewhere), but in a tiny package. Pretty remarkable, IMHO...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 02:49 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)

Dear DPR staff, for an added perspective, I'd like to suggest that you also include the A6000 with the 16-50mm kit lens in the Equivalent Aperture vs. Focal Length graph.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 03:27 UTC as 179th comment | 3 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

elgol: Does anyone know if ISO-Auto now works with shortes shutter than 1/30th?! Would be great ...

Per Richard Butler's earlier reply, there is now auto-ISO in the M mode with exposure compensation. That's more than an acceptable work-around and better than some DSLRs.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2014 at 14:41 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)

Dear DPR, is there auto-ISO in the M mode?

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 18:22 UTC as 581st comment | 3 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)

Wow! 508 comments in less than 14 hours...

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 17:51 UTC as 587th comment
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »