Is the sensor read at full resolution for Live View? Aka does the increased resolution of the EVF even get used outside of playback?
The Olympus E-M1 is one example where the higher EVF resolution is mostly only useful for playback compared to the lower resolution EVF of the E-M5 (mk1).
The faster processing of the stacked sensor may or may not allow for this. But it may also still be too slow to provide 60-120 fps at full resolution.
That's generally something I would to see tested, as EVF resolution numbers on their own don't tell much about the detail of the EVF Live View image. Furthermore it gives some clues about potential AF improvements.
Thanks for the video!
Not meant too seriously, but the advantage of the vibration control was specifically mentioned in one scene where the camera was put firmly on a bridge handrail and another scene where the camera was on a tripod. Just two cases of the video image not entirely fitting to the spoken words. ;)
Eleson: If optical steady shot means 'in-lens' then I don't understand 5-axis stabilization?
Electronic stabilization (aka cropping and rotating the final image) is possible, of course. But then either a larger area of the sensor needs to be utilized (possible, as the sensor offer 22 mp total) or a part of the image is cropped (as with many video implementations) and maybe even stretched back afterwards.
In any case this is inferior to sensor stabilization, because it is in essence a software solution. The drawback of sensor stabilization is that it needs more space inside the camera (see Olympus E-M5/1 sensor module size).
"making it the first truly 'pocketable' compact high-zoom camera with a built-in electronic viewfinder"
Sorry, but no. The TZ70 may come with 5 mm more height, but in return it comes with 1.6 mm less depth. And in this general height x width size category it's depth that defines how pocketable a camera is. I guess you can put both in a jeans pocket, but the LF1 still trumps them in size (only up to 200mm in return for a bigger sensor).
For comparison, the HX90 is 36 mm deep, the LF1 is 28 mm. And while you can squeeze a RX100 into a jeans pocket the LF1 does that far more comfortably because of its lesser depth.
Still a nice offering, if only Sony would include a raw file format, which the Panasonics do.
How can in-lens stabilization compensate for rotational movement? When you rotate a piece of glass the image does not rotate. When you rotate a sensor, on the other hand... ;)
Has AF-C performance been improved *considerably* since the pre-production firmware demonstrated at Photokina?
Jim Salvas: What fun! But, hey, guys, we're also waiting for a test of continuous AF with the E-M1’s new firmware. This would have been a good opportunity.
Olympus documentation does and does not cover a lot of things. Albeit it is irrelevant for this video it still stands, the E-M1 uses PDAF for AF-S with M43 lenses. It is used for initial validation of whether the target distance has changed at all. If it didn't change a bit then you get an instant in-focus and no further (CDAF) focusing procedure is initiated at all (there isn't even a screen contrast change like what happens with CDAF). It doesn't seem to work in all instances, but again, it has been reproduced and is only reproducible within the PDAF area. Search the MFT forum here on DPR.
Nope, PDAF *is* used with MFT lenses. It can and has been reproduced. ;)
It wasn't more or less hybrid before v3, I see no difference in behavior there, at least with non sequential modes. On a side note, the E-M1 even uses limited PDAF in AF-S, it's just not advertised (or even denied).
Well, the implication of higher PDAF burst rate is that PDAF (algorithms) in general must have been improved (in speed). I was not using the E-M1 enough lately (got a D750 for improved AF-C), so I cannot really compare.
The only extensive discussion (or rather ongoing report) I know about is my own "Focusing explained" thread here on DPR. It started with the E-M5 and went on with the E-M1 later.
In short with AF-C (face detection disabled) there are four modes of operation on the E-M1:
1. Good light: PDAF with high fps EVF/screen (CDAF around the PDAF areas with tracking).2. Medium light: PDAF with low fps EVF.3. Medium to low light: CDAF with high fps EVF.4. Low light: CDAF with low fps EVF (can be prohibited by using the "fast" EVF refresh rate setting).
The E-M5 also slows down EVF fps in order to catch more light for its CDAF once light levels turn too low, same as 3. and 4. on the list above. But with PDAF on the E-M1 it happens with higher light levels already.
So the stuttering (aka longer exposure per single EVF frame) is a way to fetch more light. Once the E-M1 switches to CDAF it usually stops stuttering until light levels drop even more.
It's a question of light. The PDAF of the E-M1 needs lots of light to function well, because the PDAF sensor area is small. Once light levels drop down to about "indoors with a big daylight window" it first becomes jerky (drop of Live View / focus frame-rate) and then automatically switches to CDAF. And the user mostly has no control over its behavior (switching).
"the new Nikon COOLPIX P900 is the first COOLPIX compact camera"...
Hehe, they really wrote "compact camera". Maybe my hopes for a real (non tough) "pocket camera" that keeps out the dust from my pockets will come true anytime soon.
Turn on the sub-titles. Not useful, but funny.
D750 Filmmaker’s Kit all right. But without focus peaking I find it really hard to judge focus on the built in screen. Live View (CD)AF is less than perfect light is abysmal, so manual focusing is the way to go. But again, it's really difficult to judge the focal plane during recording without focus peaking.
roughneck1024: wow they made a camera just for that???
Not exactly. My D750 reflects a lot easier from light-sources coming from below than from above. It's reflections of the mirror-box walls, not off the AF sensor. So upside down may or may not resolve "lot of issues". Rather some, sometimes.
Miki Nemeth: The Rodelink will support "transmitting a 24-bit/44.1k signal". I tried to find similar information about the Sony UWP-D and Sennheiser G3 systems, but I found nothing. Maybe I didn't serch too hard.I am eyeing on a Sony $100 ECM-AW4 (having an external mic jack, too) Bluetooth microphone set. Why should I pay four times more for the Rodelink?
44.1 kHz (CD/audio) is a bit strange of a choice when 48 kHz is more common in video (DVD/Bluray).
ealvarez: I just tried multiple number of entries of serial numbers and found
equal or greater than 8802634 are not affected
equal or greater than 3026254 are unaffected
I found Serial number beginning with 8XXXXXX are for cameras that being sold in asia and 3XXXXXX for USA and maybe Europe. I'm just guessing but
Try for yourself
That being said, I get a lot more internal reflections with light from below than light from above. I will have it checked, but in practice am currently more worried about three different lenses being soft on the same side and the cursor controller on my D750 being somewhat badly placed.
We've got 60xxxxx in Germany and mine is in the affected range. I just found the corresponding German support site at Nikon.de, but you can enter the serial number on the US site, too.
You can send it in for free, but it's only half an hour drive away from me and I need other things checked, too. So I will visit them sometime soon or maybe I will have my camera replaced by the dealer (which legally is the better choice).
There is some magic going on...