ProfHankD: Like Canon, but even moreso, Hasselblad is a company somewhat trapped by their historical success; they know they need to evolve, but they know any change will require lots of effort (development cost) and might cost them loyal customers. I'm happy to hear Hasselblad realizing that RED is a real competitor in a variety of ways. Partnering with Sony still makes perfect sense as a way forward, but they have firmly proved that minor tweaks on a Sony product will be seen as "not really Hasselblad" (except for the RX100, which is interestingly where Canon also was able to leverage some Sony guts).
In sum, this all sounds like Hasselblad is finally on the right track, but it also sounds a lot like the same track that led Minolta's camera business to be handed to Sony 2007. Either way, I expect to see some high-framerate sensors in V-like bodies soon.... ;-)
I think Hasselblad unlike Canon has no idea what people want and no idea how to deliver it.
Canon knows what people want and delivers precisely what they know will sell (in large quantities, despite being ages behind competition).
If anything, they should learn from Canon marketing. Cause thats one of top notch things in Canon. Another is lenses.
Otherwise Hasselblad like many other companies suffer from complete detachment from reality. Instead of being photographers and using own brains they rely on marketing studies and have ton of management between theory and final product. But thats case of many companies, not limited to photographic equipment..
samfan: Taylor Swift is completely crazy when it comes to 'value of music' and 'taking advantage of artists' and whatnot.
The whole world is moving towards more freedom when it comes to copyright but people like that still want to control every thought, every tune and every picture in the world.
Which will ultimately doom them..
14-bit issue is one of reasons why I dont want any Sony camera. Especially since Nikon D810 can offer that with ease (and absolutely spectacular sensor performance on top of that).
Im also quite curious about why Sony own implementation of their sensor isnt on par with competition. I mean, they actually make these things. :D
And dear Sony forget 14-bit, give us 16-bit and those 42 or more mpix. Then you can really call it "MFDB competition". Maybe even actually be a competition to that. :D
One more thing..
..reason why Sony isnt doing it, is that they try to make as good camera as possible with being cheap to make as possible too. Reason is simple, they are in red numbers so long that they dont have much choice..
And about 16 bit..
Long time ago (ages in digital era), there was Leica DMR.
Leica DMR is digital back for Leica R8 and R9. Which has 10 mpix APS-H (1.33x) sensor with 16-bit output. Despite its older than brown coal, it can do 2 FPS. Most of its tech is Kodak made.
So dont tell me, that today manufacturers cant make 16-bit camera with at least 5 FPS. :D
Im sure they can, they just dont want to.
Obviously there is reason for that. You need quite a bit of bandwith (you need that anyway due 4K being almost mandatory today) and you need very very good CFA and ADC, otherwise its pointless to have 16-bits if you cant actually deliver enough data for it.
For example today Canon cameras with 16-bits would be no different, cause they have barely enough good data for something like 13 bit. :D
But, things like 1D/s MK3 actually had enough data to fill 14-bits with ease. And today Nikon things like D750/D810 could rather easily do same.
So its possible, just they wont do it. :)
I wouldnt call Nikon, far more limited in-house technical firepower. :D Neither Canon.
Both these guys had digital in time, when Sony had close to nothing. Also Sony has own digital division only cause they bought Minolta (they made some decent cameras before, but nothing amazing).
And of course its possible to have 14-bit out of Sony sensor. Sony sensors had native 14-bits since era of A900. Sensor itself was 14-bit, but Sony used their on sensor processing to compress it to 12-bit.
Nikon had workaround for that, which consisted of double-read that got all 14-bits out of it (for a price of doubling write times and much lower FPS). Today as Sony produces regular 14-bit sensors, its not needed thus D810 has same FPS no matter if its 14 or 12 bit image.
Unfortunately its not SW/FW issue, since Sony uses on sensor processing, which as you guessed once its made cant be switched to full 14-bit. Best you can get is probably 13+1 as in A99. Probably..
Mister Joseph: I wish Sigma makes an "Art" version of their 12-24 too.
The 12-24 Mark I is wonderfully distortion corrected, but has unremarkable sharpness/resolution.
The 12-24 Mark II has good sharpness/resolution, but has a great degree of barrel distortion.
1) would be really expensive2) would be really big (about 1/2 more elements needed)
Its hard to make perfect wide-angle zoom, today I think Canon is rather close. But its neither small or cheap.
Mike FL: SONY is not Leica.
SONY is trying make more money while Leica is trying not running into almost bankruptcy again.
Heh, as was pointed out, its exactly opposite. Not so long ago, Leica needed to build new factory to meet demands for lenses.
Sony is selling off all divisions that are not profitable enough and also they need to kinda get their "money together". In long term Sony is great for making products on which they lose money. :D
For example old but very good A850/A900 was sold with loss, every piece of them. Same was with Playstation 3 if Im correct (and that was for many years and waaay more pieces than A850/A900 which is quite rare sight anyway).
I think that Sony might be profitable quite soon, since they are almost owning whole sensor market. Plus they made some statement about focusing on this market as primary source of income.
Just cant help and wonder why they made it with exactly those 42 mpix. :D
Petrogel: If the price will be similar to the IQ, then i'm sure it'll sell like hot cakes......LOL
Only time when CFA is sorta "in-between" is as far as I know Foveon.
Sensor itself is BW device capable only storing some charge, which is after interpreted as some number via ADC.
I would say that CFA's are part of colour cameras, seems more accurate way to put it. Sensor itself is always just BW device, like one in M246.
Menneisyys: I've imported both ISO6400 NX1 & NX500 low-light RAW's to ACR9.
The NX1 RAW is around 10% brighter (on the white background of the portraits on the left, 12%; in the center area, some 4%. Both measured in the red channel.). Assuming exactly the same lighting, this may mean the NX1 is more sensitive to light. (Actually, in DPR's previous reviews, they did state the NX1 is more sensitive to light than most other cameras.)
Nevertheless, 10% difference in in-RAW brightness wouldn't result in such a huge (1EV in higher ISO) difference. There is something fundamentally wrong with the NX500 - again, it produces even noisier results than the A5100 equipped with Sony's over a year-old 24 Mpixel sensor.
Hm.. looks like heat noise (no suprise, given size of NX500). And obviously due price difference, there is something cheaper (electornics, shielding, cooling etc.).
tecnoworld: So, nx1 is 87%, d7200 is 84%.
A delta of just 3% for:- a better built/sturdier body, though weighting less- much faster fps in burst shooting- gorgeous 4k video- class leading fhd and slowmo 120fps- outstanding evf- 4mp more and bsi sensor- .....
There is a lot in that 3% ;-)
NX1 has nice output, sure.. but try using it in -3eV conditions or around 0eV.
Mirrorless are still different. Sure NX1 is probably top dog between them, but its not enough to beat dSLRs in their departments.
JakeB: When are we going to see a Nikon D400, the true replacement to my D300s???
Sorry. Wanted to post that before someone who was serious made that tired post.
Me too, me too. :) I guess same or better than 645Z probably? Leica unfortunately isnt great in tuning sensor performance. They make amazing lens, but sensor/electronic department is kinda behind.
Only "up to date" camera from them is probably Leica T, which is close to being hybrid between camera and smartphone (or something like that, truly modern camera). Even then sensor isnt as good as it could or should be. Nikon seems to have very good know how in pushing Sony sensors to their limits. Leica apparently not, latest 246 Monochrome shows that too, unfortuantely.. :(
But even when Nikon is probably best for Sony sensors, 645Z is rather amazing.
Mescalamba: - Camera is bulky when compared to mirrorless rivals
Aaand? Like, you know.. its dSLR? Why the heck you put this into cons. Its dSLR so its normal that its not flat. Kinda obvious, logical and whatnot.
Its like saying, lemon is sour and apple is sweet so apple is better.
Plus show me comparable AF in mirrorless. No? Why? Well, maybe cause they are mirrorless? :D
You know, when you argue that "its not in score" or "just for you to know" why just pick one and not include whole "difference against mirrorless due nature of technologies".
It wouldnt hurt to just pick "compare everything to mirrorless" or "compare only within same type of camera".
@ZeisschenSo.. why are you here?
And no its not reduction ad absurdum, its logic followed to its source. Source in this case is thinking that readers are incapable of figuring out that small fact about size difference between dSLR/mirrorless.
Lassoni: When Nikon starts bringing 4k in their cameras is when things start getting really interesting.
Im sorry, but unless we are talking shooting very fast sports or super demanding stuff like "kingfisher catching fish" you dont need 30 FPS.
Also I know that there is plenty of people which like high FPS (I do too, sometimes), but have you ever tried to go thru 50k pics and picking 10 good? :)
But sure, if someone likes it..
..you NO USB card reader? :D
justmeMN: Mirrorless rivals are too small when compared to the Nikon D7200. :-)
Agreed, mirrorless needs to visit gym ASAP! :D
Retzius: The D400 is coming this year... a unicorn told me so
Was he doing moonwalk on rainbow? Otherwise it doesnt count.
You really think there is someone considering dSLR when he wants as small as possible camera?
I know that people in general are stupid. But even rather stupid people can use Google. And find that "if you want a small camera, buy a f*cking mirrorless".
So its pretty much there, cause you also think that people are stupid and are unable to find out that Nikon D7200 is a dSLR and it has certain size. Which isnt like many mirrorless but bigger.
Im starting to think that nanny states and their way of thinkin is sorta infectious..
Im aware that you live currently in US and people there sue over everything I just still think that people wont sue you cause you forget to add into dSLR review that part about dSLRs being in general bigger than mirrorless.
I like reviews here, not that I will ever use them as guidance for anything, but they are nicely made and usually easy to read. Just please dont lower that bar for "IQ needed to understand this review" further than this.
I would pick D750 or D810. :D