More lipstick on that pig. These cameras are worth about $1500 judging by their IQ and resolution. I'd take a Sony A7r II and a Leica adapter any day, and I hate adapters.
Rick Knepper: So I chided Rishi/DPR in the 24-70 GM sample gallery for not providing a scene with an aperture progression but he did here. Thanks! Looks to me like f4 produces the best edge sharpness based on the posted jpegs. Actually, it was a toss-up between f4 and f5.6 but it appears the FOV changed with the f5.6 aperture (I assume this is focus breathing) or Rishi leaned forward a bit. :) So, I gave the split decision to f4, a very acceptable aperture for landscape hooting. By f8, diffraction starts to impact the image but then one does not need to shoot such a scene at f8, emphasis on the word "such".
Good to know.
So I chided Rishi/DPR in the 24-70 GM sample gallery for not providing a scene with an aperture progression but he did here. Thanks! Looks to me like f4 produces the best edge sharpness based on the posted jpegs. Actually, it was a toss-up between f4 and f5.6 but it appears the FOV changed with the f5.6 aperture (I assume this is focus breathing) or Rishi leaned forward a bit. :) So, I gave the split decision to f4, a very acceptable aperture for landscape hooting. By f8, diffraction starts to impact the image but then one does not need to shoot such a scene at f8, emphasis on the word "such".
SETI: Not as good as Canon 24-70mm mkII
Rishi, according to DxO & Rick Knepper (a much higher authority at least to me), the Canon 24-70 II is best at 24mmm and f2.8. Amazingly, the 24-70 II is acceptably sharp across the frame at f2.8. At longer FLs, it does become a more like a normal zoom. I agree, from these images, it would be hard to tell which zoom is better. What happened to finding a scene with infinity across the frame (should be easy at 24mm) and shooting a series of frames starting with the wide open aperture and stopping down one stop for each subsequent frame till reaching maybe f11 or f16? Yes, requires a tripod which DPR shooters appear to be adverse to. :) Some moron subscribers may not understand the test and who may require more explanation than you are willing to provide but....
I am a little disappointed with the lens' edge/corner performance at f5.6/f8.
Rick Knepper: ISO Wars. Ridiculous. A feature that makes the image look worse the more you apply.
There are many ways to avoid blurry images although most of them have been pronounced uncool by the Johnny-come-lately crowd. I'd rather make the compromise in technique than a compromise in IQ but I also understand why some folks feel the opposite. Tech has gotten better over the years. I can almost stomach ISO 800 these days.
ISO Wars. Ridiculous. A feature that makes the image look worse the more you apply.
jtan163: @Rishsi.Thanks Rishi. Great article.IMO shows the total superiority (again IMO) of the Nikon control/menu model over all others I have tried. Total control over every important, fundamental parameter/setting/feature in the camera with eye to the view finder and hands in shooting position. A beautiful concept, well executed.
One question: Have setting banks changed on the D5/D500/EXPEED 5 generation?
Can you save banks on the EXPEED 5 models so that you can later return to the exact same settings you started with in a session as you can with the U1/U2 settings on the lower in the range models?
Has Nikon finally allowed what should be an incredibly useful feature to reach it's huge potential?Or are banks still just a disappointing tease and a total waste firmware bytes, menu and manual space?
It precludes combining the modes that appear on the dial since the modes are selected via hardware. For example, on my old D3x, Live View was one of the release modes so you couldn't do Timer while in Live View. Thankfully, Nikon saw the stupidity of this arrangement and put Live View on its own button but they should have done away with the whole notion of a release dial because there are other release modes that could be combined as well. The near universal Main Mode Dial has Av, Tv, M, Auto, etc., modes that cannot be combined even if you wanted to so those would be appropriate for selection via hardware.
I think the official name is Release Mode Dial.
Wow! You went from total superiority to total waste in just a few sentences.
IMO, the Nikon control setup is one of the most convoluted I have used. That Release Dial setup is just stupid and precludes the combination of some shooting modes that are possible with other brands.
What's the application for a 17 hour exposure?
Seems to me that viewpoints like Taft Point, Sentinel Dome or Four Mile Trail would be optimal.
Rick Knepper: I feel compelled to say that Lee makes wonderful filters but their holders and other accessories are near-junk quality. The engineering is impressive which may be done in-house but if they are outsourcing manufacture as I suspect they have, they need to pick another source. I bought two P105 Hood/holder combos and the bellows on both have separated from the holder. The screws that tighten the grooves where the filters slide into the holder have loosened in the field and I have lost filters when they just slide out of their holders. Filter Rings are actually two pieces soldered together and I've had one of those come apart. The SW150 is multi-piece affair and Lee does not make replacement parts. If you lose or damaged one piece, you either buy a whole new set or you do some engineering of your own. I haven't purchased any filter equipment in a while because I am all set but maybe they've upgraded.
This does not match my experience. Lee Filters USA would not provide parts even if I paid for them, and Lee Filters in Britain or wherever they are located refused to talk to me and referred me back to Lee Filters USA.
SKPhoto12: I do not agree with his approach! Look at the distortion of the nose of the model. It is laaarge and not pretty, whereas the model is quite nice in reality. One can achieve all the same effects of background and bouquet by using a 50mm lens, which is long enough not to distort and wide enough to get the background.In order for the distortion not to ne disturbing with a WA lens, one has to be quite far away from the subject and then his whole argument is gone.For portraits, be they close or with background, 50mm is the minimum for me. Now, if you photograph a group, the question s completely different and a WA works quite well, because you are far away from the subject.
dynaxx: "And for its full-frame range, Sony introduced a new lens class: G Master. "
Just in case this comment above is taken literally, the 3 new "G Master" lenses will work well with any "E "mount camera including the A6300.
The reach and resolution of detail advantage of the A6300 for someone using an A7 too should be significant noise and other factors notwithstanding. For an A7r II user, much less significant. I'd have to see a side by side comparison to see if the A6300 IQ holds up against the A7r II.
As far as trying to frame correctly in the field, you sound like someone who doesn't get out into the field often, much less out into the backcountry in remote areas where keeping the pack as light as possible is paramount.
@Dynaxx excerpt from the Digital Picture 5Ds review
"No longer is the 7D Mark II's pixel density an advantage for reach reasons – or for angle of view reasons."
Maybe a 24 MP camera has a slight advantage. If I know how to calculate pixel density on a sensor, I could make a stronger statement.
Still no histogram in Preview (or anywhere)? Maybe I am missing a setup item in preferences. Otherwise, this is bitterly disappointing.
@Thermidor, my original comment concerned the use of new and expensive GM lenses on an A6300. Everyone's experience with other combos is irrelevant if we stick to the strict rules of debate. I stupidly got drug into a discussion about a format I haven't used since 2005. I've thought about getting a crop camera for the "reach" but with 42/50 MP FF cameras in consideration, the "reach" advantage is minimal or non-existant.
So, why would anyone even consider an A6300 and its downgrade in IQ over FF? An unrealistic expectation of improved AF notwithstanding, cost mostly. Your savings would be quickly overcome from buying a FF lens for double the price of your camera that you'd only be using a part of. It's the whole crop camera ownership thought process that I don't understand.
Rick Knepper: In case someone hasn't mentioned it to DPR, the links to several of the RAW files pull the same image of the boxers.
The 24-70 GM looks very good based on the jpegs of the images I want to view. I'd like to see a landscape image with plenty of infinity in it. Let's see how the edge/corners stand up wide open.