bigdaddave: Numbers 6, 7, 8 and 9 won something?
I must dig out some of my rubbish shots and submit them
Prixnobeldefoot: Some of the pictures are interesting.However, I find it sad that none of those have a "natural" look.I know Photography is a visual art, but I feel that nowadays people tend to value more visual effects than content, you have to make it appealing to the most people possible. It has to pop out...
Like #3, let's give them a sunset, some flowers, add some contrast and saturation and done. It's well executed but it's s been done a million times. I find it rather cliché.
I like #1 and #7 because they're intriguing in a way.
Ahh, yes. It's j-school, that's what it is.
<quote>controversial is just a bullcrap word </quote>
nicolaiecostel: Number 6 looks like it's made with an iPhone and instagramed. 9 is not a landscape, it's a bloody tree and nr. 8 and 7 are architectural photographs. 1 is inexplicable, nr. 2 is a picture of a lady taking a hike. I mean, c'mon !
Glad you broke the ice, Nicola. Of course, we all have to be kind, but none of these images is my slice of liver.
I agree completely.
smafdy: But when will they deliver a Full Frame model?
HowaboutRAW: "But it also made the camera seem a little delicate, and fragile."
Seemed plenty solid when I handled it.
NB: Magnesium can feel a lot like plastic.
"However, it does seem a bit blasphemous to put the revered 'Summilux' name on a lens that isn't an f/1.4, and sometimes is closer to the brightness of an Elmarit than anything else."
The above quotation is preposterous. I suggest that the author use the newish 50mm M f/2.0 APO Summilux (8,000usd) and not get lost in the names, but concentrate on results.
You're a good sport, HowaboutRAW.
That SAAB picture is really poor. Makes me cringe.
Uh-oh, I think that's a little mean. If you think so, I'll retract it and apologize.
fmian: 'since it created the first 35mm film camera 100 years ago'
I don't know man, if you're going to write articles up on the internet for a whole bunch of people to see, at least get your facts right.Not going to bother reading the rest of the article.The first line pretty much sums up the (lack of) knowledge the writer has and the laziness in not bothering to research on the topic.
See? People are ok.
pdelux: Pretty average images. I dont mean to be disrespectful, but those images could've come from any camera released in the last 5 years. Where is this "leica" look Leicaphiles are always raving about?
I can see right on this page what Leica has to offer and it amounts to a medium banana.
In the full-sized image, highlights look a little "orby."
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!