utphoto: Amazing. The number of dismissive comments about 4K, especially the five to ten years before it will be here scenarios. First, it won't be even five years before it has a 30-50% penetration in to homes in the US. Within two years it will be the standard for virtually all sets 40" in size or larger except for entry level models. And these are not my guesstimates but from professional industry organizations.
The most important reason for 4K is that 1080 derived from a 4K master, even disregarding the cropping options, looks far better than 1080 shot natively. Serious video shooters are already shooting in 4K for archival purposes. As for 8K, don't hold your breath. 4K is the sweet spot for the consumer. 8K will be used primarily for commercial cinema production and presentation.
I remember people saying this for 3d tv's lol.
Carl Sanders: Not impressed with Nikon, would give it a miss if not essential!
Dont buy 4K cameras. They will be obsolete when 100K cameras hit the shelves pretty soon now !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Obsolete ! I said obsolete haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ugly word.
Zoron: 2014 is transition year to 4K, and this is the last chance for Nikon to milk money from 1080p, in 2016 when D900 is released with 4K.....D810 will be obsolete..
Depends how 4K is important to you. Just a new feature that will be usefull to video shooters and those few with a 4K HD screen.
nikon power: It's the lens that makes the camera. The article should be re-titled with"Third time's a charm: Carl Zeiss did it again!"And any any credit or praise to Sony should go to Carl Zeiss.
Sony owns Zeiss.
Never heard of geometry, shapes and composition guys ?These pictures are really good.
Before talking about isos people should learn what a correct exposure is. I shoot iso400 film hand held at night with no tripod on a 55 years old film camera. Look at my results on my gallery (just night examples of what I do, me who is just an amateur).
iso 400.000. Is it what you guys need ? Really ? Really ???
What a joke.
starwolfy: Nothing beats a leica summilux f1.4 asph.Cheaper than an Otus, way smaller and way lighter than both Otus and this Sigma lens. The only thing this Sigma has for it is better value per dollar and autofocus. Its a very good lens but I still cannot accept weight a size compromises you have to make to enter dslr world. The biggest joke is when u compare an Othus to the Leica Lux...it looks like a serious joke from size.
Since you love test charts I will prove you with test charts that you are wrong :)
Better sharpness across the entire frame ? LoLFar less distortion ? LoLVigneting ? LoL
Oh and wait...3 times lighter, E46, wayyyy smaller.
You reply to me with two charts? Just me laugh.
Nothing beats a leica summilux f1.4 asph.Cheaper than an Otus, way smaller and way lighter than both Otus and this Sigma lens. The only thing this Sigma has for it is better value per dollar and autofocus. Its a very good lens but I still cannot accept weight a size compromises you have to make to enter dslr world. The biggest joke is when u compare an Othus to the Leica Lux...it looks like a serious joke from size.
What is wrong if people want to donate to companies they like to make them develop products they want easier? If kodak had made a kickstarter to get donation and continue to developp some film I guess many would have donate.
halfwaythere: Am I the only surprised this is free?
A200Eric: How is that BS? If Walmart didn't exist where would these people be working? They must have scars from the guns that are being held to their heads to be forced to work there.
Until the pseudo Marxists like yourself finally kill what was the greatest country in the world, we still have freedom of personal choice. I just really don't understand what is so attractive about an all powerful centralized government making all of the choices for you. Forcing mediocrity for all and punishing hard work and success. I want to live where anyone and everyone has the opportunity to be successful regardless of how they define it. That however is all but dead and it's not because of Walmart or the Koch brothers.
Wasn it France, the greatest country in the world ?
chiane: Why are all DPR members liberal Marxists who can't even comment about the actual case without some diatribe about wealth redistribution and workers rights, and blah, blah, blah? When someone asks for your opinion on creating a socialist Utopia, we'll let you know at that time.
This is starting to be annoying these people who see nazi's everywhere.
starwolfy: Camera Brand Representatives have to be really carefull these days when they make a presentation of one of their product. A single word (or english mistake by a non english native speaker?) could ruin an entire company's image when some gear heads jump on any occasion to make a big buzz.
We still don't know from whom, and when, or at what event DPR heard this "LIE". We did not see any proof yet showing they Leica really said so. No video. No Press release. No documentation where this LIE is reported.
This "lie" is obviously not used as part of Leica's marketing strategy for advertising their new T lenses so why blame the company so harshly?
I feel DPR was kind of overdoing it on this supposedly lie by Leica.
It's good we know that Leica is correcting their new lenses. And we sure don't want to see this tendency to take such proportions for M lenses for example. But I cannot stop thinking DPR was a bit dishonnest in the way they chosed to present the facts.
Actually i didn't read DPR for months. I came here because I wanted to read some news on this new Leica T and found this stupid news. DPR is still what it always was, a groupment of angry kids who talk about spec sheets and isos instead of pictures. Not a big miss and not too long before I leave the place again :) 3-2-1...
Camera Brand Representatives have to be really carefull these days when they make a presentation of one of their product. A single word (or english mistake by a non english native speaker?) could ruin an entire company's image when some gear heads jump on any occasion to make a big buzz.
Tom Caldwell: It just means that the new Leica lenses are tied to cameras that can add the software corrections and that the lenses will be less competent in non-oem situations. I guess we had all figured that anyway and no one in their right mind had any idea of taking these rather expensive lenses and slumming them on a NEX body - if only that would work.
One of the nice things about the old "perfect" Leica lenses is that once bought they could be used on a lot of different camera bodies and enhance what could otherwise be achieved. Leica lenses were justifiably revered. Not any more - Leica lenses have been shown to be just subject to the same market constraints as the rest of them.
One should not put T lenses and M lenses in the same wagon.
If without any doubt T lenses are software corrected for Distortion, M lenses in another hand retain their Optical qualities with little use of software tweaking via their 6bit coding (vigneting and colorshift in some case are corrected in body).
There are tons of old M lenses wich are optically stunning without any software correction. In the other hand, there are many modern M lenses too which are performing marvelously on Film or even digital sensors even though they were bought before the generalization of 6bit coding on the newer M lenses mount.
This "issue" (if it really is an issue. Sounds more like a weird and surprising troll from DPR to me) with T lenses should not be used as a wrong interpretation of the performance of other Leica M or S lenses. These lenses series have nothing to do with T lenses design and are not targeted for the same clients and for the same needs.
olla: what happened to Zeiss? they seem to have dropped the ball on digital cameras. I guess they did not think a full frame Contax G3 would find a market. My G2 was not only a beautiful camera, the lenses produced sharp & detailed photo's without needing photoshop correction. Most camera companies seem to be growing their mirowless digital camera's choices. I think Zeiss made a big mistake in abandoning the digital camera market.
Seems so many people dont know zeiss is owned by sony.
A journey through israeli landscape. I guess he meant palestinian landscape right ? Right ? Right ???
papa natas: I don't understand the mud slinging here on account of the Leica's very expensive lenses' distortion, plus the long explicative text about it on BobYIL 's text on a different link.Why to prove & test it with brick walls?Who, in his right mind, will buy such a pricey camera to shoot walls?The results will show two hard headed guys: one arguing that his Panasonic is the real bargain, and the other one trying to convince the World that those bricks on that wall are crooked.Hasn't anybody get it?:LEICAS ARE NOT TO SHOOT PICTURES.THEY ARE TO BE SHOWN, SAME AS WE DO WITH SHOW DOGS.THEY ARE NOT BRED TO KEEP YOUR HOUSEHOLD SAFE.
I didnt know I would lose my status of (amateur) photographer at the right moment I put my hands on my first Leica after a long savings period (sorry I am not yet a millionaire like all Leica owners; obviously). My bad. I thought I was just enjoying shooting with a well made camera, to me a perfect mix of modern enough digital technology coupled with the appeal of using your camera like in the old days (manually), but I was just a fool. In fact after some Dpreview psycho therapy I realized I was just in the seek of a status symbole and I was just hyponotised by the red dot sect. Thats right. Damn...I don't know if I will be able to look at my pictures ever again or worse...be able to sleep tonight. But the real question is: will my Leica improve my photography? Because it is so important that my photographs, seen by nobody except me and my friends, are up the mighty mighty highest standards one could expect one this planet. Just as only a pro pilot should be allowed to buy a benz or a bmw...obviously.
Yes these lenses are corrected like all manufacturers do (thats called a lens profile), but it doesnt lower the other quality of their lenses: edge to edge sharpness and micro contrast from wide angle to maximum zoom. Since barrel distortion is very well software corrected these days then why bother. I dont know if they lied or not (where are evidences?) But if I agree these lenses are nowhere near the performance of Leica M lenses, they do not seem to be any slouch either. When I hear people saying its just a basic kit lens it just bugs me. This lens have nothing in comon, performance wise, with a standard cheap kit lens. Its focal length should not fool you. Then if price bugs you, well its certainly overpriced for what it is but Leica always was. To conclude this camera looks very nice and the new T mont seems able to take on a full frame sensor whic is good for future possible development. I am tempted by the body itself as a backup or easy go camera but to put M lenses and not T ones.