If the output of this camera at ISO 200 is "not good", "unacceptable", "noisy", blah, blah, blah, as so many posters claim, and there are two stops difference between m43 and FF, does that mean that the output of Nikon FF cameras at ISO 800 is "not good", "unacceptable", and "noisy"?
To Mike9999:I'm guessing about your ISO question - maybe it has something to do with the surface area of the sensor. Considering that the M43 is a smaller sensor, "maybe" it doesn't collect "enough" light and therefore need a higher ISO to reach acceptable exposure. Again, I'm only guessing - don't really know.
This looks like a very good walk around camera. Most of the pics were shot with kit lens and they look good. This is a very interesting camera.
For me, I would rather that they do more to the D610 - better autofocus, i.e. more frame coverage and if the can make it even faster. The resolution is fine - don't need more. Maybe a little more low light capability. Aperture control in live view! Call it the D620! :-)
It really doesn't matter how Samsung got to this product. If it's good we are the winners!
Say what you will. The guy shots straight. It's not overly technical, it's entertaining and helpful for those of us less technical.
Very nice pics. I have been wanting the Nikon D610, but these pics look really good. Tough choice.
Wow! That is beautiful.
Very impressive. Were you in a plane or on the ground?
That is just beautiful.
Nice pic. ... I like the extra info as well - the tripod. .... I'm learning. ;-)
Very nice, but I am curious: Why is there an area out of focus nearly in the center of the back of the bug?
I love this site. I think on balance DPR does a great job all things considered, but in spite of all their effort we are still left with trying to figure out why things are different. In this case, we have good cameras for comparisons with good lenses on all cameras, but there are clear difference in the results. The Sonys appear to have higher contrast and appear to be sharper, but why? Is the contrast and sharpness dialed up on the Sony's processing or are the optics on the Sonys better? ... Always questions! It's still early on for the Sonys, but there is no doubt they look good.
vapentaxuser: Technical image quality from these cameras are impressive and certainly on par if not slightly better than their full frame competitors, based on what I have seen so far. But still I find myself not overly impressed with the images from this camera. I think it has to do with the color reproduction and the way it handles skin tones. I realize that is a bit of a subjective observation, but I still think the big two have a bit of an edge in that regard.
I haven't reacted to as much to color reproduction as I have focus. The images that I have seen are mostly oriented toward shallow DOF or abstract scenes where there seems to be no specific point of focus. It is difficult for me to see autofocus characteristics without seeing the point of focus. These kinds of pictures leave me feeling like the photo is not in focus. Sometimes I want to see tack sharp, not soft warm fuzzy photos.