bigdaddave: Yes, looks a nice camera and DP always drool over Nikons
But not to put in the option of a smaller RAW format is just so stupid
Funny thing is you think you know what I think.
If I must say, I am neither attracted or interested in this model, because of the wonderful 36mpx sensor.
Few people will ever need such a resolution, not me for sure.
Don't treat me like a fanboy, cause I am not one. I was just pointing out that GENUINE smaller RAW is not the same as a RAW shot from a sensor with less megapixel.
Canon system is a good option, but still not something I would use. Better use sensor's native quality, doesn't matter you are talking about 10 o 36mpx.
Why? because if you can spend almost 3000$ on a camera body, I'm pretty sure it's not a problem to put 3-4 16GB CF in your pocket.
thought we were talking about RAW, non surrogates
How in the name of God can you make a smaller RAW format?
Raw is a bunch of data, directly picked from the sensor, not an image. You can't resize it, just because is NOT an image. Must be developed.
The thing you can do is shoot with a smaller amount of pixels, a smaller area of the sensor (DX) and there you can have Raw, just from a smaller portion. But you have a crop factor so is nonsense.
The thing I can't stand is people commenting about stuff they don't know anything about. Anyone who fully understands cameras would not make a sentence about a smaller raw format, cause is not possible. So why are you commenting about a high end professional DSLR?
andrew jansen: Mr Fartleberry, I agree. Would we only use a filter when the camera's own dynamic range capabilities are stretched by the scene? Or because the filter offers effects that the digital darkroom cannot replicate as well?I prefer to control my application of ND Grey filter once back in the digital darkroom thanks - at least there I can decide if a filter was called for, and in what position to place it, and how strongly to apply it.Not to mention the optical compromise of glass in front of glass, scratches, or dust settling, and the time taken to load the filter on. That is where Lightroom comes in. Shoot the scene when the moment is best, and do the rest back at home.
Now I am keen to hear from anyone who can help me understand why I should still cart most or all of my old filters around with me.
Well you can emulate. But I'm pretty sure if the DR of the sensor is already stretched, a filter on place is better than any post production workflow.
T3: I wish these super high megapixel cameras would also advertise what their average file size is going to be (RAW and JPEG). They should add that to the specs page so that consumers understand at least one of the ramifications of shooting with a camera that has so many megapixels. It's pretty pointless to have such high resolutions, and have such large file sizes, when the average buyer is probably never going to be printing these images very large anyway. They certainly aren't going to be printing at billboard sizes.
So true. High megapixel is good for large prints for sure. But many people are never going to print any picture. I see rich girls buying a D3200 and posting pictures of their friends on facebook.
They could get the same results with a D40.
dawn2dusk: Hello, for long i hve been planning to buy d5100, but after this came out there is a chaos in my mind. D5100 is great except it doesnt have inbuilt focus motor in it, so as this camera.(I m much into photography than video so dont care much whether manual contrl is there or not). But what really took my attention about this camera is that i can crop the photo n can get little closer to the subject without the need of large zoom lens(need ur opion if i m right on this). Also i want to know if i take a picture with high iso with both the cameras and then later i bring the size of the d3200 image down to the size of d5100 will i be able to get the same picture quality(with similar amount of noise). I m really confused i think the price of d3200 and d5100 is around same and i dont want 2 spend more than tat. And if d5200 comes out it would definitely be more expensive. So i want to stick with these two. Please give ur opinions which one would be a better deal. Planning 2 buy soon.Help!!
1) EXPEED3? Does that make good pictures? I thought PHOTOGRAPHER made the picture...maybe the camera if you want....but now the processor? Oh boy, we're going really down.
2) D5100 shoots video too, D3200 is just a minor improvement in that field if any noticeable. And most of all: video? C'mon please.
dawn2dusk, listen to people who actually take pictures like me or the others above, get a D5100.
And I'm no professional shooter, but my D3000 is still enough for me, I invested in some VERY good lenses. THOSE make the difference together with your talent. Not 60p vs 50p or 8mpx more.
justmeMN: In Amateur Photographer Magazine, a Nikon representative said: "Megapixels is a spec point that features whenever you look at a website, a brochure it's always highlighted....For that [entry-level] customer it will be important, but higher up
enthusiast-level D7000 customers, for example, have a much broader range of demands on their list to tick off, such as performance in low light, or being more robust."
In short, 24MP is just a marketing gimmick aimed at entry-level buyers.
Look at Apple. As they discovered they make much more money with the consumer market, they're abandoning the professional one. And that's bad.
Higher entry level sellings = more founds to invest in innovation for professional and prosumer is not always right.
By the kind of questions I read here, I think is clear that Nikon is giving new entry photographers something they don't need or understand. But makes them THINK they need it, that makes profit for Nikon itself.
Don't really think this brings any good to the market nor the buyers.
Many people had trouble deciding between entry level cameras with a "regular" mpx count, now they get so confused some people actually consider buying the D3200 instead of the D5100. Pretty crazy IMO.
Well, I say stick with D5100. it's 16mox so you can still crop a good amount of the picture. Plus, cropping doesn't make up for the lack of a good telephoto lens, keep that in mind. I'd go with the D5100 just because it's less entry level, that is something real, instead of bull**** about picture quality, megapixels and other minor differences between the sensor of the two models.
Stollen1234: apple LTE not compatible with LTE in Germany..this is a scandal..how could apple claim that the new Ipad is world tablet if the high speed connection is not compatible with major parts of Europe such Germany and many other countries???
here in italy I'm pretty sure we don't even have 4G yet XD
Baseman: Follow the leader leader leader, follow the leader.
Only reason Apple is doing so good is cause of it's marketing and ability to make you the consumer 'think' it's better than everything else. Funny there's still no memory card slot. Hmmmm.....better than the rest, I think not! It's only Apple's followers who will fight tooth and nail to proclaim it's the best. Still waiting for that memory card expansion. Oh wait, you'll never see it cause Apple can make you pay a lot more to get only a little. I like the ability to swap memory cards. Fill one, switch it for another. Need to transfer data across any platform, no problem with a memory card. But ooops, sorry Apple people, I'm talking another language to you. Just remember, Apple only wants your money by making you think you can't live without their product. Time to WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!!
well, you see, the point is sd cards are pretty slow. if you actually put a sd card slot, it would be to expand memory. then people start to complain the system is slow and so on.
instread, you just buy the sd card adapter for the ipad and you can put pictures right away on it.
alfpang: Finally the iPad I've been waiting for (Retina or bust!).
If nothing else, it's going to up the game across the whole industry in terms of what "standard" display resolutions can/should be. That can't be bad even for users of competing devices.
What would the point be on such a screen? 4k is destinated to large panels. that way you can have crispy sharp images even on those. On a 10" screen, I think 4k would be a little visual improvement. Very little.
Peak25500: Maybe Apple should think about it's Mac consumers instead of all that fashion victims...
Yup. Apple is CLEARLY dropping the professionals down. Too bad.
Baseman: My cell phone still beats this thing for pixels per inch. This has only 264ppi, my cell has 329ppi! Beat that Apple!
I agree. at some point enough is enough. more pixel density would have meant higher price, less battery life and so on. from the normal distance you use the ipad I think they made this so that every step forward will be pointless. like they did on the iphone.
Well what should we say about laptop monitors? OMG! They don't have nearly as much ppi as last smartphone! Should we dump them?
Seriously, Base(megapixel)man, there's something more on a screen than its ppi.
bed bug: I feel like singing...
"to dream, the impossiblle dream..."
So does this mean a total customer recall and refund!!!
it's the only real way. pretty sure it's not fixable with firmware updates.
Wubslin: Yet another winner for Canon! I wonder where this leaves Nikon? Maybe they should just break up the company and give the money back to the shareholders.
nikon's shareholders are canon's shareholders....and vice versa. they just aim to cover the most of camera sellings owning two companies
nanoer: It is clear that who ever master these 4 things will win the war. The lens technology, Sensor technology, Digital Signal Processing (DSP also its SW) and its Marketing. The last 3 are even more important than the first. See how quickly Samsung and Sony are catching up in photography! 30 years ago they were just purely electronic. And Samsung were still an OEM.For us, the only thing we can do is to advance our photography skill. Then, any equipment in our hand will do the same.
can't argue with that. well said.
toomanycanons: My D5100 stayed with the big boys up to ISO 3200.
How's your wallet?
pingshakl: Finally there is factory radio wieless flash. Pocketwizard is dying....
no it only means wireless ttl triggers will come down in price. that's good!
KitHB: for home use, resolution does not need be super high vision unless you want wall sized screens.
That said the BBC has shown some excellent work on high framerate TV. 300fps overtakes the visual system and looks indistinguishable from looking through a window. There's a subtle change in the look that takes place at around 240 fps, motion blur and other artifacts we assumed we are stuck with, just vanish.
I'd vote for a unified 300 fps standard ahead of yet another bigger format at slower framerates.
sounds good to me