How about a 5" flagship? Not everyone wants a phablet.
No Fuji cameras in this price segment?
Does the price of €400 include a camera as well?
Light Pilgrim: I mean no disrespect and I think it is still better to have a review of D810 2 years after the camera was released than not to have it at all, but it is hardly relevant today. I bet a new camera is just around the corner and I hope it will not take another 2 years to review it.
The D810 is still relevant today and will be for many years to come.
The Silver Nemesis: Is Nikon D810 awesome? Yes, please believe me it is.
Has industry leading DR bla-bla? Yes, it has (I am not joking).
Is it D810 perfect? No, it isn't (that I can tell you, first hand).
Now, examine a bit DPRs wording: I have never seen, for the 5DsR, the following sentence: "industry leading resolving power, for 24X36". However, for DR, the sentence is frequently used for Sony (mostly) and Nikon (far better than Sony, but you got the point).
See, this is what I was talking about.
One has DR, the other resolving power, but one has the Gold Award, so it was judged "better". In real life, apples vs oranges. But here, the apple is "better" than the orange. In an "objective" way.
I haven't used any of them. But I also haven't called any of them poor.
The resolving power doesn't mean much when your camera's output has a low DR or poor low light performance.
Wil Helm: Benchmark performance until the Pentax K-1 in depth review comes out.... in two years or so :-)
Don't keep your hopes high ;)
So the D810's IQ is better than the D800(E) and miles ahead of the 5Ds yet the scoring doesn't reflect on that. In fact the all category scores but one are higher on the D810 vs the 5Ds.The comparison between the A7R II and the D810 is also interesting - the former has worse DR while its Raw quality is still higher.
I love your field test videos but this one in particular was really involving, probably your best to date. Thanks for doing it!
noflashplease: I have to disagree with the use of the term "flagship" for the Nikon D500.
It still is Nikon's flagship DX camera.
bwoodahl: After shooting with my D500 for five days, I can say that Nikon hit this one "out-of-the-ballpark". There's some magic in that 21 mp crop sensor that reminds me of film, but I'm not sure what it is. (Did I say crop sensor?)
Just noticed the nonsense I'd posted. Read my previous post as "Nikon always adds their unique touch". Lol.
Nikon always adds their unique sensor to sensors, no matter whether Sony- or Nikon-made.
Good! Now bring on the X-T2, 23mm f/2 and 56mm f/2!
shademaster: I don't really understand the point of having a "flagship" APS-C body when the "flagship" lenses are all full frame. Why not just make a full frame sensor with an optional crop readout mode where you can (quickly) read out only the center pixels (in APS-C crop mode)? Maybe the design is prohibitively expensive or noisy?
So how about canon/nikon/sony offer some "flagship" APS-C zoom lenses? Then I could see having flagship bodies to go with these flagship lenses. Otherwise, a fast crop-mode readout on the FF sensor would make much more sense (if technologically possible).
PerL, the 55-300's FX equivalent is the 80-400mm. So yeah, it's quite a reduction.
The point of a flaship DX camera is the lower cost (thanks to the smaller sensor). The lack of pro DX lenses however is disturbing indeed.
Sirandar: To those that think you can replace this with PP. With a really good camera with the very best dynamic range and low noise, perhaps you can to some extent.
Water just doesn't behave in panorama and HDR because of its patterned but changing nature.
I have spent a good deal of PP fixing moving wave anomalies in panoramas. In light light environments you minimize with burst shooting and cherry picking frames. In low light well ... good luck with that.
The problem with these filters is framing ... what happens if you don't want the light boundary in the middle of the frame. This should come as a set of 3 not 2 with the extra one with the light boundary 2/3 up/down the filter.
Yes you can replace this with PP. It works well with non-panorama images. Take a photo exposed for the foreground / waves / sea and another one for the sky. Then merge both and you're done.
elefteriadis alexandros: Except polarized filters all the rest is useless in digital photography if you know how to use Photoshop.
You can add ND and IR filters to that.
AKH: Wow. Was a bit surprised to see that such an expensive camera doesn't even have a touch screen.
K E Hoffman, we could also add Autofocus to that list. Once upon a time it was not available but people still took awesome pictures manually focusing. Maybe we should start releasing more MF cameras!
NickyB66: Not as good as the X Pro 2 in most areas, but a decent effort by Sony.
Lol. Good job comparing apples to oranges.
Valiant Thor: Does anyone have an opinion regarding this camera compared to the recently announced (but not yet released) Nikon DL18-50 F/1.8-2.8 Compact? Right about the same price. Thanks.
The DL has a smaller sensor and a built-in lens.The GX85 has a larger sensor but you've to buy lenses separately.Last but not least, there's no similar lens for the GX85 to DL18-50's one.