kewlguy: Looking at the IQ daylight comparison with EOS 700D - why does the Canon have better accutance and/or micro contrast? better lens? D5300 image shows as if there is a haze.
Ryan, I agree with you as I have 6Ds myself. I just wanted to see if the D5300 with AA filter could have the same IQ as D7100, but looking at the samples I wonder why it is softer than both 700D and D7100. Unless DPR used a different lens...
Oops, change the RAW 700D to Nikon D7100 - the D5300 looks even softer!
RyanBoston: I've had this camera since Christmas and love it. The workability in raw is incredible, especially with good glass. Amazing detail and colors! Pulling shadows is amazing.
I've had the D40, D60, D90, D5000, D5100, and T2i. The D5300 is my favorite out of them all and am amazed at the quality of the pics.
Slap a Sigma lens on the D5300 and be prepared to be amazed.
No it won't. He slapped a Sigma lens on the D5300...
Change from Jpg to raw, if you can't see it than you're blinded by your fanboyism. D5300 has no AA filter that's why I asked...
Looking at the IQ daylight comparison with EOS 700D - why does the Canon have better accutance and/or micro contrast? better lens? D5300 image shows as if there is a haze.
Looks like Sony is trying hard to collect some cash - but I'm sure A7/R users are rich so this lens will sell like peanuts
At least Canon remembered to put a sensor inside the state of the art entry camera...
If only DPR wants to use other raw converters, the comparison will be a totally different story...
_P: Question for Fuji owners: there was a huge problem with RAW processing software, that's inducing Adobe, which - in short - wasn't able to refine fine details. The only one doing a decent job was Photo Ninja. How is the situation with this regard now?
Anyway, what a beautiful / terrible times!D610: 1329 GBPE-m1: 1300 GBPA7: 1230 GBPX-t1: 1059 GBP6D: 1350 GBP
I'm on the market to upgrade from E-1. Got E-PL5 for my wife already and its fine for casual use, but I don't like it for landscapes very much, so I will not like E-m1. Now, taking into account that it cost THE SAME as D610, some serious question have to be asked... I would consider myself mad if i'd choose E-m1 over D610 for landscapes and low light work, though on the other hand Nikon is terrible with manual focusing over VF. So if FUJI RAWs can now be processed into something decent to wonderful that may be just the perfect compromise. Also seems best option for MF lenses with those different kinds of MF support in it.
what raw situation? I have been using X-E1 for 7 months and use C1 Pro and Iridient Developer with great success. I also own Canon FF and IMO Fuji X-trans is as close as any APS could to FF. If your main interest is landcape photography, get the D610 or 6D. For low light and compact size the Fujis will do just fine (even the old X-Pro1).
arqomx: Will there be a silver body offering?
Want silver? buy Df! It will give you bling for a lot more money, too if that's important to you.
Nice camera - good looking and ample of features! no doubt about the image quality, for sure.
Frank B: Not for me. The lenses are too big and too heavy. I have an Olympus E-5 and I carry it and the Olympus 150mm f/1.8, Olympus 45mm f/1.8, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and the Olympus 12mm f/2 in my pockets. (Cargo pants and jacket when colder (or cargo shorts in hotter weather). I do not think I would be able to do that with the Fuji. I have my camera and lenses with me virtually all the time.
I picked Fuji as my second system after trying the EM5 and owning m4/3 for a year. Clearly the APS-C is indeed larger and better. Fuji lenses are sharp and the files have more detail esp when shooting raw and convert in C1 Pro.
Micky Finn: When is Fuji going to actually bring out a new camera instead of essentially the same one with the same technology and sensor in several different bodies? I wouldn't mind, but the viewfinders in the X series, especially the electronic viewfinders, are lousy and the lcd's are not up to scratch, add to that the annoying handling of everyone of them I've tried and they are heavily disappointing. I tried hard to like the X-Pro1 and the X-E1 but they were terribly disappointing in reality, and for me this camera has to be far, far better and a massive improvement over everything else Fuji have produced. Yes IQ is good and the cameras look great, but it's no good if they are hamstrung to the point of being frustrating.
Says the smartphone shooter...LOL
naththo: More hump in middle again for mirrorless. lol! I think its good to have hump rather than nothing to make camera a hot looking.
More likely unable to see the hump housing a rather large EVF
Retro done well without the Df ugliness. Good job, Fuji!
Better experience the real thing - save more money, at least get an A7/A7R and 50 Lux APSH.
This lens better not vignette...77mm for a 50/1.4 is huge!
hmmm where is that $1000 I hid last time...
Even though we can always say "sharpness is not the only thing that matters" - still, a $1700 lens with poor sharpness? Does it get better stopped down? yes, but for the price, IMO, not good enough. I tried it for a day and my first thought was the awful plastic build. Yes, it produces 'unique' rendering, but the fair price should be $700 less.
Mike99999: I don't understand why everyone is raving about this lens. Judging from the sample pictures the rendering is awful. I *strongly* prefer the images I'm seeing from the Panasonic 20/1.7, the underrated Olympus 17/1.8 and from the new Sony Zeiss FE 35/2.8.
Seems like a repeat of the highly overrated Fuji 35/1.4 which is basically a rebadged Sigma 30/1.4 which nobody wants to admit. Behind the scenes Sigma is an OEM for many major brands, and Fuji is definitely one of them.
LOL, both 23/1.4 and 35/1.4 will trash anything similar from the m4/3 camp. Last time I checked, Sony 35/2.8 is way overpriced for an f/2.8 lens.