Raist3d: Makes sense. Sad for those who are out of a job after working so hard. Not sure they will hit it with virtual reality but for video can see.
One problem: they are coming in with some tough competition that got the video workflow figured or mostly figured out. Like Red and BlackMagic. That's tough to get right and if they don't, no film maker will take them seriously.
Getting the focus right with moving subjects is not trivial with video. Maybe that is an area where a light field cameras could provide some real value. However, to do so they would have increase resolution and make the 'focussing' much more fine-grained. To keep costs and data volume down, the post-capture 'focussing' should be restricted to a very narrow range, ie, you have to get the focus as close as possible during shooting with the light field aspect only allowing to correct for small errors.
PeaceKeeper: That 16mm f/1.4 is enormous. 67mm filter thread? Egad. O.o
I know this Fuji has autofocus, but the old Olympus OM 24mm f/2 I own is tiny in comparison. And by the looks of the elements compared to body size they "padded" the outside of this lens quite heavily. There is no way the autofocus internals take that much space...
This would be a dream lens for me by the numbers, but it looks like it will hang off the front of an XT-1 like a brick. It's as big as the 56mm f/1.2(if not bigger).
I can only hope that the "WR" on this lens is not "provisional" as it is on the 35mm f/2, and they did some serious work to make it bulletproof, accounting for the portly nature of the lens.
A FF 24 mm f/2 DSLR lens (which the OM 24 mm f/2 is) combined with a 0.71x focal reducer (Speedbooster) gives you a 17 mm f/1.4. This is therefore a very fitting comparison. AF partly explains the size difference but a different optical formula to achieve a higher performance than the 24 mm f/2 + speedbooster combination is probably a bigger reason.
LSE: I thought it was more than just a modified filter?
the base ISO isn't the class leading 64 found on the D810 but they start at ISO200 which in theory means their high ISO results should be superior to the standard 810. If they get a 2 stop advantage, it would make all those f2.8 telephotos a lot more interesting. But even wide angle fast lenses like the 14-24 F 2.8! would benefit for those fast aperture wide shots.
No, it's just that when exposed according to ISO 64 (ie, such that the green channel has a headroom of 3 1/3 stops), this sensor would blow out the red channel way to easily. To give the red channel the standard 3 1/3 stops of headroom you have to reduce the exposure by 1 2/3 stops.
joe6pack: Sony's SELP1650 (16-50mm for APS-C) is just 29mm collapsed.
Panasonic's Vario PZ 14-42mm is 27mm collapsed.
They don't count because they have no mirror, hence not DSLR?
And the K-mount has a FFD of 45.46mm, more than twice that of E-mount and M43.
It is highly misleading to hide the DSLR part in a footnote but the category of DSLR zoom lens is a relevant one, and it implies also a sensor size (APS-C and by luck also 4/3) without a category would be meaningless.
What is creating this huge gust of water? And what kind of dam is this?
Marty4650: It looks like Sony is getting serious about FE.
Smart move, on their part. I hope Canon and Nikon are paying attention.
55 mm is also a decent portrait focal length for APS-C.
Papi61: This is what I don't understand; why do you *HAVE TO* sell all your DX lenses when you buy a full-frame camera? This is what manufacturers would want us to do, but it's not a rational choice, especially now that lenses aren't selling on EBay as well as they did a decade ago. You'd be taking a huge loss, and for what? What's wrong with using a DX body *AND* and a FF one? A DX body is certainly more useful when you shoot with a long tele (or tele zoom), while your FF camera has the upper hand in low light. In other words, best of both worlds.
There is nothing wrong with having two systems that serve different purposes but that is not was this article is about. The article specifically talks a about using DX lenses on a FF body.
Papi61: Did we really need another iteration of the 55-200 kit lens? Looks like the thread size is the same (52mm), while the body is possibly a tad more compact. Most likely, the AF motor is the same (i.e. nothing to write home about.) I seriously doubt there's a way to squeeze any better performance out of this design. I guess they just wanted it to be smaller.
BTW, have you noticed that some people clicked on the "I had it" button? How's that possible? These lenses haven't even been released...
It is 25 mm shorter than Sony 55-210 mm f/4.5-6.3 E-mount lens. Since the flange difference is 28.5 mm, Sony E-mount camera with the lens mounted is only 3.5 mm less deep than a Nikon F-mount camera with this lens. And for taking up space in your bag, it clearly beats the Sony lens.
Joseph: No AF-S 24mm f1.8 yet. The 300mm does sound interesting though. Will wait for review(s) to come out first.
Its zoom range is so short, you could almost call it a prime.
noirdesir: Multiple sources have reported over the years that Nikon uses non-Sony 24 APS-C sensor, from both their own sensor group as well as Toshiba. I have repeatedly heard that the D3300 sensor is a Nikon sensor and the D7100 a Toshiba sensor. Thom Hogan recently mentioned that the D5300 sensor is also from Toshiba. When the D7100 came out, it was remarked upon that it a tiny bit more banding than the D7000 (which had a Sony EXMOR sensor), suggesting that Sony still had a small edge in that regard.
The only other brand using a 24 MP APS-C sensor (besides Sony and Nikon) is Pentax. As Thom Hogan also mentioned that Sony hasn't offered its 24 MP APS-C sensor to other companies (or they did not want it, the NEX-7 sensor appeared to be much more picky in regard to the angle of incidence than previous Sony 16 MP sensors), it might also have a Toshiba or other sensor.
Ah ok, the lower end models (D3x00, D5x00) are a bit of a blur for me, in particular when they keep the same number of pixels.
jtan163: Nikon Canada https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np37mHApfxU "a lot of those features it shares with the d5300"
I.e. really nothing much new here.Touchscreen, super small size, eye sensor.The eye sensor would be extra important if you were going to use an EVF.I'd guess with an EVF camera the video can go either to the EVF or the LCD.
My guess is there is an EVF coming to Nikon real soon, and perhaps it was intended for this model but something didn't work out, or they are testing their code/logic/usability on this model where they still have an OVF, and it won't matter if the sensor behaves slowly.Taken together with this fact that they say it's the smallest Nikon DLSR, I think mirrorless or at least an EVF driven Nikon consumer model is gonna be maybe the next model.Also be interesting to see if the D3300 stays in the range.
I wonder if they'll fully exploit the interface options touch gives them in the next model. I dont think they have in the 5500 yet.Glad Nikon is responding.
Eye sensor is also import if you have touch screen ...
Multiple sources have reported over the years that Nikon uses non-Sony 24 APS-C sensor, from both their own sensor group as well as Toshiba. I have repeatedly heard that the D3300 sensor is a Nikon sensor and the D7100 a Toshiba sensor. Thom Hogan recently mentioned that the D5300 sensor is also from Toshiba. When the D7100 came out, it was remarked upon that it a tiny bit more banding than the D7000 (which had a Sony EXMOR sensor), suggesting that Sony still had a small edge in that regard.
Valentinian: Nikon 300mm/f4 ... shorter, lighter.......available next month for $ 2,000.When will OLYMPUS release their 300mm/f4 ?????
The point to make is that a 300 mm f/4 lens for m43 and one for APS-C or FF don't have to be much different from a design standpoint (though they serve different purposes). Yes, the m43 version will focus more on centre sharpness and the APS-C/FF version more on sharpness over a wider field but longer tele lenses image circles tend to have noticeably larger image circles than necessary for the sensor format they are designed for.
StephenL: When will people realise there is no such thing as full frame? m4/3 is full frame to an Olympus user. Yet to a Pentax 645 owner, a Canon 5D sensor is tiny.
What is now referred to as 'FF' has the largest lens catalogue and had the largest lens catalogue for the last 50 years probably. And largest lens catalogue usually coincides with largest market share in the ILC market. APS-C created an exception to that rule by creating a hybrid system using a flange distance and lens mount from a 24x36 mm system with a smaller sensor meaning people were able to use lenses designed for larger sensors very easily.
lacikuss: When you offer purchasing advise, like in this article, I'd recommend to narrow your comparable cameras based on customer segments and not on sensor size, which is pointless.
If I'm a video enthusiast, then I can't agree with your D750 top recommendationIf I'm a landscape enthusiast then I can't agree with your D750 top choiceIf I'm a sports & wildlife shooter, then I can't agree with your D750 top choiceIf I like light camera for travel, then I can't agree with your D750 recommendationIf I have a limited budget, then I can't agree with your D750 recommendationetc.
High-end Camera is an obscure and very subjective matter.
Please learn some marketing fundamentals and start focusing on your customers preferences rather than the obscure technology that manufactures use to trigger desired features that most of the time true photographers hardly ever need.
If you offer enough categories, eventually every camera will will in at least one. How meaningful that is, is another question (the European awards for 'Best xxx of the year' follow that pattern).
And a lot of people aren't wedded to one category only, they shoot a wide range of subjects and thus a camera which is pretty decent in all categories is likely the best choice for the majority of photographers.
Do you have to be on a boat to get that shot?
Cheng Bao: "Based on CIPA standards. Compensates for angular shake (pitch and yaw). Measured using a Sonnar T* FE 55mm F1.8 ZA lens, with long exposure noise reduction off."
Wondering what the long exposure noise reduction to do with IBIS cipa rating.
Noise reduction can affect acuity, the impact of shake might be measured by measuring acuity.
VirtualMirage: DPR, I feel that was a poor choice of words to say that the A-mount is "Not Dead Yet". It labels the brand with a negative stigma, one I don't think is warranted. Your headline implies that A-mount is dying or will be dead instead of reassuring that A-mount is alive and the focus on the mount is on fewer models that is focusing on a higher end clientele.
As we have seen so far, their product release cycles have not been longer. The release between the A77 and A77II is far shorter than it was from the A700 to A77. We could assume it will be the same with the A99's successor too. When there are fewer products to release, there will naturally be fewer announcements.
Now it would be nice to see more lens or flash announcements. This latest announcement is a good sign.
VirtualVirage:You have very much confirmed my impression of a sad state of affairs.
mpgxsvcd: You guys do realize that the more controversy there is in these reviews the more clicks Dpreview gets, right? They have no incentive to put out an article that everyone says “Yup I agree” and then goes about their merry way.
They have been posting articles lately that attract attention because they are controversial and we take the bait. Personally I like it this way. I like the controversy. Others may not though.
Do you realise that your comment says more about you, than about DPreview?
If news organisation aren't allowed to make puns in their headlines anymore, then we've arrived at a very sad state of affairs.