rubank: Interesting. Almost as good as the "old" D800. Definetly more moié, and less resolution according to DPRs studio comparison, especially in edges and corners.
Possibly a little, and I mean little, less colour noise from ISO 12800 and up. So what.
It´ s not just in the corners where 810 loses to 800.Look at the line bars. 810 just produces moiré when the going gets tough...36 Mpix isn´t enough to get rid of the OLPF, you would need at least the double pixel count. Those who claim otherwise have blurry vision.
Nikon´s reason for the omission is just cost reduction.
Interesting. Almost as good as the "old" D800. Definetly more moié, and less resolution according to DPRs studio comparison, especially in edges and corners.
rubank: Would it really be impossible to make the lens smaller??I mean, look at the size of the actual lenses compared to the overall size....
Once upon a time there were FF compact (film) cameras with very good lenses a lot smaller than this monster - and they were both wider and faster.
Lot´s of replies and all miss the point :~|
The lens elements (the glass part) in this Sigma are tiny while the housing of said elements is huge (in comparison). The question is why, that was the meaning of comparing to compact FF cameras, since even they had AF. So the huge housing isn´t necessarily due to things like AF...I think it´s just styling, not a "must-be".
Would it really be impossible to make the lens smaller??I mean, look at the size of the actual lenses compared to the overall size....
If one downloads RAWs from the DPR studio test and develop them in RawTherapee 4.1 at default settings, the result will look a whole lot better. And I mean a lot!
samfan: Nikon adding features via fw, eh? That's new. Seems like they finally fired the old management and hired someone competent.
It sure is!But it doesn´t work in LV though, only when using the OVF.
Steen Bay: Well, if something sounds too good to be true... As far I can tell the QE of the Red Dragon must be quite a bit higher than 100% in order to get such a high SNR, and that's hardly the case.
I think you´re forgetting that the QE figure of ~50% is for the green channel only. The aggregate QE of the sensor is far from 50%.
The X-T1 studio scene shots look awful. Is there something wrong with the demosaicing? Or is this typical of the Fuji sensor...?
Seems a nice lens, BUT:the exposure is exactly the same at f/1,4 as f/1,2 in the truck series, and I can´t spot any difference in the background blur.
The MTF charts doesn´t look very promising. No better than the Nikkor 24-120/4 - and that is not the best lens.
Bolt is actually way behind the finishing line in that shot, he´s in the curve, so DPR:s caption that he crosses the finishing line at the moment of the lighning is clearly wrong.
Why make these things up?
Who cares what vendor makes the gripas long as Canon holds on to the moronic L-design of their battery grips.
Look at Pentax and Nikon for a proper way to design a battery grip.