Mustafa: Cue the 'no 4K, no sale' brigade.
Mustafa, I would generally agree with you, but they have to be marketing to those people... Seems a little odd to entice a demographic only to take them half way. Great concept, just under executed. Same with the SD cards...
Great concept, but I think the implementation might be miss-spec'ed. We'll see... but I think another MF manufacturer might capitalize on this more than Hassy once a more desirable concept is drawn up and released.
PeteGrady: I'll admit to not being the best photographer on earth. But, I have to say that you folks at dpreview need to get better with these "real world" galleries. For all the extensive and reasonably high quality reviewing you do, along with the championship job of bringing us the latest from the world of cameras and photography, these galleries are generally very poor. As one example, you have a shot of a bride on some sort of concrete structure framed against a natural wood paneled wall and doors. It's an attractive setting. But then you shoot it at f/1.4 at 1/8000. What do settings like that show us about the D5? IMHO...zero. The shortcomings of the lens and the photog's ability to find the proper plane of focus for this kind of shot overwhelms whatever it might be that we could tell about this cameras sensor performance in soft light. Sorry to rag on you guys, but you're a popular site that does a lot of things just fine...taking useful evaluation pictures should be one of them.
Again, I do understand your complaint... but for me... the content isn't a concern. I'll wait for the controlled studio test to judge absolute quality (relative to other bodies). But it was interesting to see the weaknesses and strengths Nikon decided to compromise on.
Odd comment... with regards to the bride photo, wide open with fast glass is a wedding photog's bread and butter. Remember we are talking about photographing people, 90% of the time you don't want to see 100% of the detail a 20, 36 or 50 megapixel camera can show in a person's face.
I get what your saying, but why are you looking for award winning photos for free use? I think this is exactly as advertised, real world photos... not high cost and high effort contest winning photography. Sorry if this comes off harsh as well (it was not meant to), but I wouldn't expect anymore of the editors/photogs in this context.
Hmm... I would have preferred a slightly softer than hard or a reverse grad filter... Either way... I guess this means they are looking to improve the current system, and that is good.
Karroly: Are these filters for photographers who prefer to carry loads of expensive accessories rather than spending (losing ?) their time in post-processing ?Or do I miss something ?
Some of us prefer the look that filters give, and the extra added benefit of not having to blend images is a bonus.
Tazz93: If the FF cam took that big of a step back, the crop cam, D500, has to be worrying to those who have preordered.
Lol, I'm just saying it would really tick me off if I pre-ordered one.
If the FF cam took that big of a step back, the crop cam, D500, has to be worrying to those who have preordered.
There's definitely a use for this tech/product, but I don't see it as a must have, or even something that would be used very often.
Tazz93: I'm mostly curious how this feature will work? I often wish the AF points were a fair bit wider in coverage.
" In fact, it's the same AF system that you'll find on the D5. Since the AF system was developed for a full frame camera it provides coverage that extends almost to the edges of the frame."
I shoot Canon so I wouldn't be able to get that period, just curious if the idea works as well in practice as it does in theory.
Note: The comment was specific to the D500.
I'm mostly curious how this feature will work? I often wish the AF points were a fair bit wider in coverage.
wetsleet: ISO (ASA) 3000000?Is it time for a return of the DIN logarithmic scale instead?
(obviously, I understand the marketing dept prefer impressively big numbers)
AKA, Nikon Night Vision... but all jokes aside, that type of jump suggests to me they may have got most of the native range into the "usable" range. If so, that's pretty impressive.
Lars V: ISO 3.2M... Nighttime pinhole, anyone? :D
A usable 100K or 200k would be pretty insane.
3 million ISO...
beavertown: D750 scored 90 and this scored 83?
Eyes checked by a back or foot doctor... Ok... It appears you missed the reference on the "soft challenge". The difference you mentioned in some of the other MF cameras likely have more to do with the lenses than the sensors. I'd assume the test lenses from Canon are not quite level with some of the $5,000 standard focal length lenses of the MF world. Once again, Canon only makes one lens (at least that has been tested) that comes even close to resolving the sensor's level of detail and it would never be used in a comparison with a MF camera.
Its a niche camera... kind of a one trick pony. That's the reason it is scored in that range. I still love mine, honestly, I could care less if it isn't optimized for video, or "only" has 12,800 ISO abilities. I bought it for the resolution and it delivers there in spades. Its a DSLR camera that challenges Medium format's digital detail supremacy (a soft challenge, but still a challenge). Not to mention, Canon only has one lens that can reproduce 90% of its senor's rated resolution, the rest are a fair bit lower ranging from 25-70% of the theoretical resolution. IMO, that suggests there's still quite a bit of performance on the table.
STAY AWAY FROM THIS PHONE!
I hate to say it, because I liked it, but the fact remains its just too fragile. The plastic body is just not up to par. I broke the LCD in my pocket purely from tension from my jeans and my leg. No contact with anything else. A hard case may help but you shouldn't need it.
Wow, they're having problems selling a $600 software suite... Who'd of thought that?