A brand selling out its name like this, is a chronicle of a death foretold.
Technically speaking, 16:9 is not a wider format but actually narrower vertically on a 4:3 sensor.
Cropping it afterwards because you like those dimensions - and don't mind loosing parts of your image, sounds more logical.
But it's less simple, I presume.
High ISO has no improvement at all over a D4.The improvement is at JPEG processing and NR level.
So basically no improvement. Only software. Nothing some basic Lightroom can't do.
I won't deny I'm underwhelmed. Especially when many sources where claiming a full stop improvement when the D4s was announced or previewed.
I'm quite impressed to see it's actually cleaner at high ISO than my D600 full frame.Unsurprisingly, the 24MP D600 clearly outshines the X-E2 at base ISO in sharpness and detail.
I do wonder how a Fuji full frame sensor would perform.
Looking at RAW, moire problem seems obvious. But there is no clair winner.
In some places the 7R is better, in some places the D610 is better (for example, the upper right corner from the greyscale group drawing).
What I don't like, is the oversharpening in je Sony jpeg's.
Interesting stuff. But at this video quality it looks almost the same as a video shot with my smartphone.
Not really the way to go to impress.
Frank_BR: Just a nice attempt to hide the fact that Canon is losing the battle of sensors to Nikon?
psst Shaun_NycYes Nikon does. And Nikon did. Most are Sony, others have been designed by Nikon. Put even Sony sensors get a proper Nikon treatment and outperform the same sensors in other cameras.
But where the sensors come from is irrelevant. The current line-up clearly gives the golden cup to Nikon.
JDThomas: Are people actually READING the article? It's about Anthony Karen's methodology on photojournalism and trust. The subject is beside the point.
This is exactly the same wrong, hypersensitive, context-ignoring reaction as the story with the deaf boy having to change his name in sign-language because some people said it looked like a gun.
This paranoia will eventually end in a deaf, blind and empty society.
@ ryan2007 Extremely ironic when you're asking for censorship because of the subject of these photos, don't you think.
Mikhail Tal: Or you could have just exposed for the sky and used flash...
Ha nice one
opiecat: ring type ultrasonic motor? for a kit lens?
@ Xentinus It's obviously metal.
ChrisKramer1: But the future is here already: Sony NEX series!
Never heard of that smartphone.
schaki: Dammit Nokia...Details gets ruined by bad NR.
Where? I see more detail in all the pictures, compared to the competition.
Higuel: some $1300 for a lens that does NOT even close the iris as ordered by the camera...from a white brand on top!
This confirms us all that Samyang has forgotten that their first major success, the 85mm f1.4 owns it to the fact that it was INDEED way CHEAPER then the options from the brands! WITH almost the same optical quality.Start increasing the price like Sigma is doing and in no time Samyang is be story like many other brands who propose stuff way too expensive! They still have a looooong way to catch sigma in AF and ANY automation for that matter! Naturally they can try a crazy move like Sigma did with the SD1 sold at absurd prices, well, actually NOT SOLD! And in few months they had to cut the price to less then half!!! That is what Samyang deserves also!
You tell camera to close the iris. The camera tells the lens to close the iris. The lens closes its iris.
You close the iris.
It's not that hard, really.
Deleted pending purge: No such thing like Pro cameras, there's only Pro photographers. And what makes them Pro (besides being obvious where their bread comes from) is sometimes the fact that they can do good photos with any camera. Otherwise, mercantilistic lore or not, there are only expensive, less expensive, not expensive, and cheap cameras. Technically, these will do what their specs say, if you either need or can afford to use them. But in the end, it will always be 10% equipment and 90% author - at any price level.
You never hear a pro say that it is 10% equipment and 90% skill. Because it obviously is not. Equipment matters. Reliability and performance. Especially in professional photography. That is why someone earning a living out of it, buys the best tools he can afford. And yes this mostly means PRO cameras. There are many times you NEED weather sealing, high ISO quality, lots of megapixels, high FPS, fast glass etc.... 90% skill isn't gonna make your camera any faster or more waterproof for a particular assignment.
This cliché statement just keeps on popping up. Everytime.
bluevellet: I'm surprised dust is still a problem with DSLR's. Even more so with cameras at that high price range.
When you change lenses, eventually you get dust on your sensor. This will always be the case.
However, in this case the particles come from within the camera itself. I'm slightly disappointed in Nikon. But still, ordered my D600 yesterday.
tmurph: Sony got to be congratulated for putting a full size sensor into a high-end compact camera.Love to own one and I like the 35mm lens which in my opinion is a good choice for a camera to take with you on your travels.Seems a great camera for street photography.
I think it is not a matter of technical knowhow, but more "would it not be too much of a compromise?''. Terrible battery-life, slow AF, no viewfinder (a must have for street photography, imo) and no interchangeable lens... I think it's hard to sell to a lot of people, even ignoring the very high end price.
But yes Sony won the prize for delivering the first small FF compact. Sony decided it was worth it - probaby more in terms of long term PR. But that doesn't mean it's getting the price for best or most innovative or complete camera.
Maverick_: my second post on this. Why do we need 1080P on a 4.7" screen? What's the purpose except bragging right. I have a Samsung Galaxy Note II with 5.5" screen in brilliant 720P Superamoled and I wouldn't want my resolution to increase at all. It will only shrink down all content.
Keep 1080 for TVs and 720 for smartphones. Stop this madness!
I'm not a big fan of 1080p smartphones either. I see a 720p 4.3" screen as ideal, personally.There is a point you stop seeing improvement in ppi. I believe that 4.7" and 1080p is way over that point. It is just wasting valuable battery and cpu cycles.
I agree, technology should be pushed forward, but I rather have a 4.3" 720p smartphone with a new technology battery that lasts 5 days than a 4.3" 1080p with mediocre colors/contrast that lasts 1 day. When I get dark and cynical thoughts, I feel like they can't improve battery and just put sharper displays in smaller form factors to detract attention from where the real improvements should be.
Caleido: If you bump up the default sharpness of the D5200 or sharpen in post processing, you get the exact same oversharpened look of the E-M5. At base ISO, because any higher ISO clearly shows the (albeit small) disadvantage of a smaller sensor.
A fine camera, the E-M5 and I have a m3/4 body myself. But don't talk rubbish.
Where do I even remotely imply that sharpening images also improves colors? Please contain yourself in daftness when replying or don't reply at all.
Obviously, you can not only change the sharpness, but also completely fine tune contrast and colors if you shoot JPEG with the D5200. Like every other DSLR from the last decade.
I won't magically become identical to the E-M5, but you can come close.
If you bump up the default sharpness of the D5200 or sharpen in post processing, you get the exact same oversharpened look of the E-M5. At base ISO, because any higher ISO clearly shows the (albeit small) disadvantage of a smaller sensor.