le_alain: ISO 16000 is very good on first picture;)
You don't really have a clue, and unless i've seen yoiur personal samples - i hold it like paradise lost "believe in nothing". I do photograph for more then 25 years just as a hobby & amateur, since 2001 digital, Mr. HowAboutRAW. Apart from just DL RAWs off the web, i do use & own the gear i've listed. Please don't comment always posts that way here from other ppl including myself, because it simply sucks. Further, your pseudo-interlectual sometimes arrogant comments are nothing more then just amusing to read, can't take you serious, my bad. I've never seen samples from you, neither which gear are you using...but you aöways write about xy DSLR/DSLM you don't own or have...and never posting samples...it's not serious from your side. I just can't stand your behaviour "i do know everything about photoigraphy" and these type of guys which need to have always the last word.
HowaboutRAW: The Lollipop OS supports raw, right?
I've shot the XZ-1 with RAW, and at low ISOs 100-400 the IQ is quite good for such a small sensor - please don't tell me, the XZ-1 is better, because it doesn't work - and doesn't work either way from a phyics point of view. The sensor is smaller, and the IQ is not better, and the XZ-10 lens does have had issues with CAs.
HowAboutRAWplease consume less of your stuff, whatever you're using - it's kinda joke, m43 is in no way competive to normal APS-C Sony sensors:
At everything, DR, Lowlight Score, ColorDepth, ISO performance...m43 looses with flying colors. ;)
The only great thing about m43: many good native lenses, compared to the current E mount lineup, and smaller lenses, bodies - in all other ways: it's way inferior to APS-C.
And - i do own also a m43 G1 with 14-45 lens, it can't match a middleclass Sony or Nikon sensor, but i do use & kept it just for one reason: it's way small, a point where m43 just excels, compared to APS-C/DX and FF, because of smaller sensor size, and therefore smaller lenses & bodies.
My G1 is way handy into a small bag when i'm riding my mountainbike, for the suddenly shot - therefore it works very well.
HowAboutRAWIt's always these kind of answers from you - i write sth, and just >you< answer it, telling me it's all good, etc....i do have the XZ-1 used, and it is better then then XZ-10, and i don't care about the XZ-10, because the IQ it does give is for my personal needs & taste mediocre - period! and i am not wrong here, it doesn't suit my needs, can't you just simple as that get it into your head? For my taste, RX100 is the minimum IQ for 2015 - from the Mk. I, all worse sensors are mediocre for my needs just like that.
HowAboutRAWGood if it works for just >you< the XZ-10 is some kinda joke for me - and the lens is not all that good, check the reviews. The XZ-1 in this respect is much better, so much for the Olympus "very little sensor thingy" which is also off topic here, but you do that quite often - no offence. If you're fine with the XZ-10 IQ, it's ok for you - for me it's just mediocre, period. RX100 IQ and nothing less for a premium compact, everything else in 2015 is kinda joke - or just use the smartphone, if you're happy with that IQ, a pure view lumina would be good enough for that task.
Interesting test and findings of you - nice read, but in fact, the IQ is just too low...anything lower than say a RX100 like quality inside a smartphone is mediocre...and it'll take a while besides the Lumix CM1 when smartphones are typically would have the same IQ & DR...and being cheap, too...so a few more years, i'd think....'til then, i'm using always a small DSLM w/me, for the suddenly shot.
Yes, i know...some smartphone cams are good for smartphone standarts...nokias pure view lumias, perhaps...or the CM1 lumix. But what is a huge turn off for me besides IQ is also the long shutter lag with many smartphone cams..you just touch the icon on the screen...and...err...what? still not being shot, that picture...half a sec or even more later...that sucks, when you are adjusted to typical DSLM/DSLR shutters...
right, but don't get me wrong - before a specific sensor size, say 1/1.7" at least, it's somehow like "pearls for swine" for my taste - i'd do raw with that sensor size, or any bigger...but smaller than this, it's just stealing my time for playing with - no offence.
For instance, i do have the samsung wb2000 - it's a very small sensor (1/2.4" only!) and i wouldn't have had bought that p&s cam a few years ago, if the sensor wasn't BSI tech...and for example, you can play with raw with that cam, because the samsung directly writes raw if you select it onto the sdcard - but apart some little DR enhancements, you won't really get it better by raw - in terms of noise, etc...and so is the play with many of this kind of small sensor types...and it does only have 10 MP - nowadays you've had up to insane 20 MP onto such a microscopic small sensor size...
As long as the Sensor size in Smartphones isn't at least 1/1.7", it doesn't make sensor for me to use raw - raw from a mediocre tiny sensor, what gives? perhaps a little more DR, but quite often more noise as when using jpeg as default...the Lumix DMC-CM1 would be great with raw, but i'd buy a LX100 and separate smartphone then..instead of using a old Kitkat smartphone built-into a camera....way overpriced, too...
Steveke: I've been absolutely thrilled with my Nikon D750. It takes awesome photos. I can't believe all this whining. So there's an anomaly with blinding back-lighting, and that will be fixed. gratis. Although I admit that I haven't been able to evoke that anomaly. Give it a rest and take some photos.
I don't think so.
12 is my fave, well done
really nice collection of photographs
marc petzold: i'd add that you've not used the best old mf lenses (zooms or prime, but "best" would be anyway different for everybody) let's say, a yashica ml 28-85 as zoom, or the great zeiss 28-85, 35-70, which rivals prime lenses, for primes have you used for instance the zeiss distagon 28/2.8, or 35/2.8? both are very good, from the Contax era, with C/Y mount, the same goes for the excellent 24/2.8 Yashica ML, which is better then the equivalent from zeiss, the 25/2.8, hands down.
Also the NEX-7 is problematic and does have issues with lens turbos, speed boosters etc. i've read onto the net, the A6000 for instance or A3000, NEX-6 doesn't have that issue.
Apart from this, a well written article, compliment.
Which Lens Turbo have you used, you've had just written LT, for Lens Turbo, but there are besides from MetaBones SpeedBooster Original and Mitakon/Zhongyi so many crappy Focal Reducers out there - no name brands, and ones with worse optical characteristics.
to be continued...
A quote from you:
"I haven't tried it, but it seems likely that the $500 combination of a 20MP APS-C A3000 and LT could also capture images within spitting distance of an A7, especially using a lens near wide open where the corner shading hurts the A7 most. So, not only do we finally have affordable full-frame sensors to put behind old lenses, but thanks to the Speed Booster and other focal reducers that followed it, we have a spectrum of reasonable alternatives at various price points. Those old SLR lenses are really viable now as serious photographic tools."
I do 100% agree, because of the nature of a Lens Turbo, it does crop the image circle a bit, but especially the LT II version is really better, and can be bought for around 130-150 bucks, and it does especially work well with a bloody cheap A3000 body.
As sonyalpharumors writes, we should see an upgraded A3000 successor soon - hopefully with a decent EVF and better Display.
i'd add that you've not used the best old mf lenses (zooms or prime, but "best" would be anyway different for everybody) let's say, a yashica ml 28-85 as zoom, or the great zeiss 28-85, 35-70, which rivals prime lenses, for primes have you used for instance the zeiss distagon 28/2.8, or 35/2.8? both are very good, from the Contax era, with C/Y mount, the same goes for the excellent 24/2.8 Yashica ML, which is better then the equivalent from zeiss, the 25/2.8, hands down.
marc petzold: What keeps me away from LT for ages: That damn catalogue everything thing, and then it's way sluggish from operation & behaviour, Adobe should really speed things up.
@Stringyou're hilarious - the CPU is from 2009, and CS6 runs pretty fast. I'm not gaming like many kiddies, and guys here. It's good enough. And LR was always that sluggish, even 1.0 on older HW - it sucks. Try CNX2, PhotoNinja,RT, and/or a few others, if you don't mind. Even CS6 is fast, but not LR. I do have computers since the old Commodore Plus 4 times, so don't tell me anything about Hardware, i've spent most of my money until Pentium III times for HW upgrades, no more...since then, i upgrade only when i really need more power, that means building a new rig, because all PCs, either 300 or 5000 Bucks, are crap, if not selfmade. Sth sucks always, slowass HDD, shitty RAM (lowcost) bad bios, cheap board, too less expansion slots, etc, etc....i only use selfbuild rigs since 87, period. And my Box is fast enough for CS6 with my plugins, enough said. My WD Veloriraptor 1TB drives are also fast enough for my needs. I don't trust SSDs yet. Perhaps next year.
Not exactly, i tried a new major trial from time to time to see if things have had improved for my needs..unfortunately, not...uninstalled it...and using different software.
@MPA1My self build rig is an older Core2Quad Q9950, but it does have enough RAM, 16Gig, and otherwise it runs PS fast enough with the Plugins i've also bought long time ago, and keep them updated from time to time, when a new version is out.
Mssimo: Lightroom really needs a panorama, and HDR feature. A face detection feature that exposes for subjects faces would be nice also. Maybe its too much to ask, but full GPU acceleration would be great for high MP cameras.
Karlwunsch, try Raw Therapee - it's a way good RAW Editor for Linux you'd get - and OpenSource, so free, too. GUI is close to Lightroom, but without that catalogue feature.
Another great one is Dark Table, DT in short - which is only avialable for Linux, not for Windows, but also for OSX. RT in fact is avialable for Linux, OSX and Windows.
Dark Table 1.6 is current, and RT 4.2.1 at stable status...it's quite good, if not better than RT....well, it depends what you'd personally prefer.
The only thing on Linux i'm waiting for aeons is 16bit TIF support with GIMP.
What keeps me away from LT for ages: That damn catalogue everything thing, and then it's way sluggish from operation & behaviour, Adobe should really speed things up.
@Milke FL you must be a desperate, lonely Canon Shooter - because Sony's sensors are the best onto the market, period & hands down, enough said! Nikon often uses Sony sensors, somehow slightly modified designs.
PVIDAL: After reading the comments of an excellent discount on Nikon d750 in this post in niceelectronics, and without knowing anything about grey market I decided to buy it. After I bought it thinking that it was a great deal, I saw the a post telling about the grey market and start reading about it. Then the store contacted me trying to sell me other body because the one I bought had a recall and it was a Latinamerica body
Then I asked if the one I bought had Nikon warranty and he told me that it doesn't has it and also that the camera doesn't have serial number !!!!
Then he tried to sell me different products and I said no to them. Fortunately I payed with PayPal and knowing that I have purchase protection I used it to cancel my purchase and have mug full refund.
There are different posts telling about this store that always sells in this way pushing you to buy an overpriced product with this technique and sometimes without giving the product or returning the money.
I think I was lucky in this experience and never will try again buying from a not well known seller. Nikon do not give warranty to this kind of products and not even fix them if you pay for it.
A D750 without serial number - seriously? Try to avoid these kind of cheap webshops anytime.