If today, this photo would probably have been taken with a smartphone and not a Leica.
lacikuss: How does the D1s compare to the D810? It doesn't seem to me that the D1s is worth twice the price of the D810. The D810 not only has more than twice the resolution but now it is also quite fast for action shooting in crop mode, which is how those picture will be published anyways. D810 IQ can't be matched with the D1s you can see that by DXO marks with the D800 are the highest.
I can buy two D810s for the price of a D1s which gives more flexibility when shooting events, weddings, etc, so is the D810 the top of the line for Nikon?
I assume you're talking about the Nikon D4, the successor to the D1. The Nikon D4 is basically a fast focusing camera with high frame rate for sports photography. And because this kind of camera often works exposed to the elements and with large and heavy telephoto lenses, the mechanical construction is more robust than the average DSLRs. Of course, all this is reflected in the price.
That said, cameras like the Nikon D4 and Canon 1D are with their days numbered. In a few years, they will be replaced by mirrorless cameras with electronic shutter operating at frame rates of 100 fps or more. A camera for amateurs like the Panasonic FZ1000 gives an idea of where the technology is pointing. When operating in 4K video mode, the FZ1000 produces very good 8MB images at 30fps, what is more than double the maximum frame rate of a Nikon D4. The mirror system and mechanical shutter of the current DSLRs have no future.
Frank_BR: It is crystal clear that what Nikon did was basically a slight makeup on the D800 to raise the price. The D810 would be a fairly modern camera if it was released in ... 2012!
Nikon is truly facing difficulties to innovate its product line. Meanwhile, the "mirrorless" camp keeps accelerating and introducing increasingly modern cameras. The result is already appearing on the market, as shown in this graph of unit-sales growth by camera type:
The Wall Street Journal, which is not a specialized publication in photography but knows a lot about business, has realized that the mirrorless cameras are not only the future, but also the present of the photographic technology. And the WSJ is extremely critical of Nikon:
This is a link for Google search result:
If you click on the first link of the page you'll go to the WSJ article (it worked to me, and I am not a subscriber, too)
It is crystal clear that what Nikon did was basically a slight makeup on the D800 to raise the price. The D810 would be a fairly modern camera if it was released in ... 2012!
Frank_BR: It's amazing that many of the "new old" features of the 2014 Nikon D810 were already introduced in 2012 by Sony on the A99:• Electronic first-curtain shutter • 3.2in 1,229k-dot RGBW LCD screen • Auto ISO available in manual exposure mode • 1080/60p movie recording • Uncompressed HDMI output with simultaneous recording to memory card • Built-in stereo microphone
Consider also that the Sony A99 can record simultaneously to both memory cards, the GPS is built-in (it is optional in the D810) and the LCD is fully articulated (it is fixed in the D810).
Bottom line: Nikon is a company that is years behind Sony in the technological race. While Sony already has years of experience in building mirrorless cameras and is firmly entering the era of 4K video, Nikon is trapped in the DSLR technology, and only now is able to deliver 1080/60p video in its $3k camera.
Oh, I almost forgot to say, the main advantage of the D810 over rival 5D mkr III is the 36MP sensor, which is made by… Sony!
Calm down, gentlemen! Only a blind man cannot see that the "new" D810 is just a collection of relatively old technologies that other companies have been using for years in their cameras. Nikon is a technologically exhausted company.
About Nikon and Sony are "best friends", well, that's nonsense. Just uninformed people do not know that Sony aims to overtake Nikon and become the second largest producer of cameras in the world. And Sony is in the way to.
Lousy camera? Don't be ridiculous! The Sony A99 received the DPR's gold medal with score of 84%, what is higher than the 82% received by the D800. And unlike the Nikon D800, the A99 never suffered from the infamous focus inaccuracy that plagued so many D800s.
This is an extremely complex lens with 20 optical elements and almost 2kg weight. You can imagine that half the weight comes from the expensive optical glasses used in the lens construction. When a company produces and sells for only $1000 a lens of this caliber, we can only applaud. Bravo, Tamron!
It's amazing that many of the "new old" features of the 2014 Nikon D810 were already introduced in 2012 by Sony on the A99:• Electronic first-curtain shutter • 3.2in 1,229k-dot RGBW LCD screen • Auto ISO available in manual exposure mode • 1080/60p movie recording • Uncompressed HDMI output with simultaneous recording to memory card • Built-in stereo microphone
Okay, I get it. The lenses will be simpler to design, production costs will fall by half but consumer prices will double. Sony is a very smart company, indeed.
If fluorine is so good to repel drops of oil, why Nikon did not use it on the D600 sensor?
"With an electronic first curtain, the exposure is started by a purely electronic process (as the name implies). Some manufacturers such as Canon and Sony have used this for several years, as it can be used to entirely eliminate any vibration from the physical shutter action. Olympus's implementation is however subtly different - the physical shutter still closes and opens as usual, but the exposure is slightly delayed to allow any vibrations to die down, and then started electronically.'
Subtly different? Oh no! Please say that Olympus jerry-rigged an electronic first curtain!
straylightrun: Even regardless of IQ, that $300 10-18 is going to sell like hotcakes.
Canon is making a big bet. Make no mistake, Canon must sell a lot of lenses or loses money.
Frank_BR: How important is +1/3 EV here, -1/3 EV there? Nobody buys a camera like the D4S because these trifles. Who buys a D4S wants a rugged camera for action. Everything else is secondary.
I was talking about JPEG Tone Curves / Dynamic Range, and not about high ISO performance.
How important is +1/3 EV here, -1/3 EV there? Nobody buys a camera like the D4S because these trifles. Who buys a D4S wants a rugged camera for action. Everything else is secondary.
Lies have short legs, milled aluminum bodies and red eyes.
I do not know why DPR gives so much importance to the method of distortion correction. The modern trend is that the bulk of the distortion be partially corrected optically, and the remainder by software. That Leica is a mystifying photography company, we all know long ago.
Frank_BR: Three cameras, same price: $ 1199
Sony A77II: 12fpsNikon D7100: 6fpsCanon 70D: 7fps
SLT rules, flipping mirror sucks!
Canon 1Dx shoots at 12 fps in high speed mode.To achieve 14 fps the mirror must be locked up.
The maximum fps depends on mechanical limits of the mirror- shutter system, not on the performance of the AF system.
fabio riccardi: To Richard Butler:
If you want fast autofocus in not so good light, you need a mirror of some sort.
The mirror, flipping or not, allows to use large, dedicated phase detection sensors, which work much more reliably in low light situations.
Sony claims that A77II auto-focuses down to -2EV, which is much better than most of the competition with flipping mirror.
theprehistorian: Are there any decent lenses for these things? I have recollections of most of the standard primes being a bit below par compared with similar from Canikon...