Lenses with glass elements. What will they think of next?
Ruy Penalva: I think, besides the poor lens inventory, it is not a camera for serious still shooters.
Google Translation as follows--
tell me that feels ....not have a real camera ..I swear .... but the years passwill never forgetTHE G1 was the firstAnd the systema maturoBest camera gh4all until today ...
Thanks for the very good reference.
ThomasSwitzerland: I cannot help. Those samples do not communicate anything what the D750 should be.
They could be taken with almost any camera, even 1” sensor or smaller, by any snap shooter.
I trust <dpreview> as a prime source. But on some of their sample galleries they communicate only one thing: Nonsense. Or said in a diplomatic way: Much room left for optimization.
"it'll be of limited value"
Not that limited, in my humble opinion. Let interested persons vet the tests of Gordon Laing at Cameralabs.com.
Thank you and God be with you.
@theprehistorian "Close inspection makes me think the lens [28mm 1.8] is less than stellar though"@groucher"Thanks DPR, you've cured me of any thoughts of replacing my ancient wide metal primes."
To be sure, the house facades (no. 0807 and no. 0809) don't look that sharp.
At all events, I don't think people should make purchasing decisions until the full review is published.
buybuybuy: Some Do's and Don'ts:
Do remember that the samples:(1) are just for eye-candy. (2) contain no important discriminatory/distinguishing attributes that may be used as indicators of the performance of a given camera/sensor format.(3) come with more caveats, asterisks, and footnotes than a typical tax document(4) are for people to say "Wow, how great the horse is," "Wow, how great Puerto Rico is," and "Wow, how great the D750 is."
Don't:(1) use your own mind to form opinions about the camera, including but not limited to high ISO performance and performance in different lighting conditions.
Do:(1) remember that when DPR wants you to have an opinion about a camera, they will tell you your opinion (that's the same thing Nikon told them)
Hope that helps!
He lost me at "Some."
"It would also be nice if DPR would put the camera up on a tripod for a few shots and try to go for optimal IQ."
Every now and then, DPR posts a shot of the Seattle skyline, rich in edge and corner data. I like that. Gordon Laing of Camera Labs often offers similar kinds of scenes.
And a good weekend to everybody!
ThomasSwitzerland: Ken Rockwell has just published snapshots on the D750 with the 20mm f/1.8.
To me this represents outstanding journalistic quality in time and precision. Why cannot the so much larger <dpreview> deliver?
Ken's shots (1) don't show low-light image quality, (2) don't exemplify "mural-size" image quality. I have nothing against the camera, only I'm not sold on it -- not for a nut of $2300 plus lens. Ken's review is fine, only it's too short.
Thank you VERY MUCH for exhibiting the ISO's with the thumbnail images!
meland: As Barney has learnt from some of these comments unfortunately there are quite a few wallies around.
What is a wally? I know it's not Yiddish. Is it a fesse?
pacnwhobbyist: Dpreview folks: Did you have a chance to shoot with something other than the 18-135 lens by chance? The photos look nice but it seems like the lens is holding the camera back a bit IQ-wise.
Agreed. Let's use Zeiss primes to get the best out of the camera.
Parkettpolitur: I have a Ricoh GR, so I'm probably not going to buy this. Still, I've been interested in the X-series for quite some time now. Does DxO finally support their RAWs? Will they ever? I only use DxO, so that's been a huge hurdle for me (and one of the main reasons I haven't sold my E-M1 for the superior X-T1).
>In my experience they still win for sharpness and noise against all but high-end FF cameras (which is partly their excellent lenses esp. the kit).
This is good news. Thank you.
photo perzon: Sony RX100 has EVF. It has bounce flash. Canon has neither.
>there should be some photo challenges to show the possible merits of direct flash.
I've avoided flash for 50 years out of sloth, mainly. It would be instructive if I could see what could be done with some kind of muted or diffused flash.
Pete peterson: I'm only interested in cameras with dials as I hate getting into menus for every change, but even if this camera's IQ is as good as the Sony RX100III, I wouldn't buy it cos it has no EVF. To me no EVF means putting on my reading glasses every time I take a picture then take my reading glass off so that I can see the rest of the world in focus, then put the on again to take or inspect the next picture - totally inconvenient. I bet most of the geeks developing this camera wear glasses, did they not think of us long sighted people?
>Varifocal glasses make life a lot easier.
Aha! VERY GOOD POINT. I am definitely going to get varifocals.
Thank you for the turn-on.
olypan: Love the way dpr have manipulated the front page with Canon headlining all week with articles on the weakest introductions at Photokina.Substitute any other brand for these dismal products and the Amazon control is obvious.
Did you know that there are numerous persons among us who believe in bigfoot, a hollow Earth, pills that turn water into gasoline, cold fusion, the health value of drinking your own urine, space aliens, etc.
We have our work cut out.
>I will never, ever take a photograph with a direct flash.
Cartier-Bresson once said that [direct] flash photography is a "horrific massacre."
Jim: It's not much smaller than the G1X Mk II. Both appear not to be shirt pocket-able but both do appear to be jacket pocket-able. Given this and the fact that the G1X Mk II isn't much more money, why not buy a G1X Mk II instead of the G7 X?
>I'd hate to put a $700 in a shirt pocket
Good argument for VF's generally.
$700, no VF.
>ISO 3200 is actually 1600 ISO
And I wasn't a big fan of those "orbs."