Akpinxit: Good (enough) IQ , but underwater images show way to much corner distortion . Shame for short battery life . Also , from this , to me this camera looks more like "all around , all weather" unlike "underwater" : any small cover which not properly sealed will kill 800$ camera - make no sense.
that's an effect of the refractive index of water - the glass-water surface needs to be specifically designed to avoid sever corner sharpness loss (usually via a dome port)
How about .DNG?
noirdesir: This is welcome, though 16 bit is overkill. Take for example the Nikon P330 pixel of 1.8 μm size (most smartphone pixels are smaller than this) and it gets less than 12 stops of engineering dynamic range with a very flat read noise curve and a very high QE of 75% (possibly somewhat a calculation artefact). I haven't done the math but I would estimate that a 1 μm pixel with a QE of 100% and a read noise of zero wouldn't get more than 12 stops of DR.Add one bit for over-encoding, hey even two, and anything more than 14 bit is just encoding noise. And for real sensors with a QE of less than 100% and some read noise, a 12 bit encoding is very likely completely sufficient.
" I would estimate that a 1 μm pixel with a QE of 100% and a read noise of zero wouldn't get more than 12 stops of DR."No, because there is no DR limit - if you have a very high full well capacity and very bright exposure.
Is there an button to switch the studio scene to 4 competitors?
does this have sRGB emulation mode?
Poweruser: Still not sure where the point is with wide-gamut screens?
95%+ of users cant see any difference because their devices run SRGB at best (often times uncalibrated), think of tablets, phones, all Macs, etc.
Also, you cant "print" Adobe RGB.
"Also, you cant "print" Adobe RGB." wrong. If you print yourself from lightroom you can print the 'full' colors of the photo.
I'd like to see more:* challenging highlights, like glass/metal reflections or maybe even a direct light source in the frame* really dark objects, both detailed and clean (to see pattern noise)* different material like wood, leather etc.
tulo: i never managed to understand the use of "toe-in"/converging optical axis for close focusing like in the Sony TD10. it is the OA of the viewer's eyes that are supposed to converge, giving a sense of depth - not the OA of imaging device, is it?
Interoptical distance defines the strength of the 3D effect (father apart = stronger), converges the position on the 3D plane (bigger angle = closer)