Vitruvius: Under specs for autofocus it lists both contrast detect (sensor) and phase detect. Is this right? Also the wireless and smartphone remote control (Play Memories) is VERY limited at the moment. It is just a remote live view with a trigger. That's it. No apps work with the A77ii yet. But I hope they change that.
But the A77II may do exactly that, use both contrast on the image sensor and the separate phase sensor, but we don't have access to the logic systems driving the AF, so we can't check.
I've handled the A77II, and for lower ISOs, below, 3200 it's a really impressive camera.
I just wish Sony would wake up to the idea of putting a 14MP sensor in the A99 body.
Wye Photography: Here I am processing some pix just taken on my 5mp Olympus E1 thinking to myself "I must get out of the Jurassic". But then again more than 5mp is wasted on me and I do love my E1. I would also love to have a go on this machine.
Here's an E1 ISO 800 jpeg, it looks pretty bad.
So unless raw is radically better, or there was a vast firmware improvement. 800ASA is far from useable with this 2003 Olympus--not a surprise.
That's not a CCD sensor? (It is a Kodak CCD.)
I'm surprised you're happy with ISO 800, but I guess it's not impossible.
Lots of idiots are attracted to cameras like the Sony A7r and Nikon D800 because of more mega pixels.
Charlie Jin: OK. I have Sony RX100-mk1 and I was going to upgrade to mk3, especially because of the bright lens (and built-in WiFi). I compared the portraits from NX Mini and those from Sony RX100 mk3 (the sample pictures in here preview). To me, RX100-mk3 is not in the same league as NX Mini which produces so much better and more artistic pictures. Sony may be more detailed and pictures may be sharper, but that's not my preference. Now, I am hesitant. The only upside for Sony is that it's very pocketable. I am not sure how much pocketable NX Mini is. Does anyone have good experience in using both cameras ? Thanks.
The problem is that the 17mm Samsung lens is not out yet.
With the 9mm lens the Samsung is easy to pocket, but that's not the greatest Samsung lens.
The Sam zoom is optically better, and not big, but then not fast.
The Sony has an EVF, not so with the Samsung.
Shooting raw, the Samsung is a tiny bit better high ISO camera than the Sony.
CameraLabTester: This camera looks very much like the Nikon 1 series in many aspects, but feels friendly and endearing.
Amazing how PRICE POINT in a camera can achieve so much respect.
Well done Samsung.
Except it doesn't really look much like the Nikon 1 system.
Both are boxes with a lens mount, but the Samsung is significantly thinner, and has very good touch screen menu system. (No EVFs in the Samsung system.)
beavertown: This Samsung sensor puts the Nikon V3 1" sensor to shame.
You don't get what you pay for nowadays from Nikon.
But the Nikon 1, V3 has a very good sensor. (Don't take my word for it, get raws shot shot with a better lens than the kitzoom and check.)
There's simply nothing to be ashamed about that sensor. And the V2 also had a good sensor.
You're deluding yourself if you think the Nikon's sensor doesn't come real close to the image quality from the Samsung. (Again I have raws from both and I like the Samsung.)
Now, the best Samsung lenses are better than the best Nikon lenses, but the Samsung 9mm lens isn't a great lens, and almost no one has used the 17mm lens. The kitzoom is good.
Right about price, but differences in price are not the same as differences in image quality.
So look at raws shot with various lenses, and skip the pricing thing when making IQ claims.
"Shame" is a bit extreme, I have raws from both and the Samsung is only a tiny bit better. Of course the lens used for either system matters.
K E Hoffman:
The OP's question and citation of the specs, quoting:
"Under specs for autofocus it lists both contrast detect (sensor) and phase detect. Is this right?"
So if the specs are correct, there is contrast AF, and that likely would be on the main imaging sensor. So that would be in addition to the phase detect AF sensor above the mirror.
Timmbits: Don't want a swivel-out screen (I prefer the vertical pivot type), don't want the larger size, don't want the nx300's buffer lockup. I've waited a long time for this camera, and now I'm just learning to love my NX20 just the way it is.
I think it a good camera, just not great, and the lens isn't up to the best from say the mirrorless lines of Fuji, Panasonic, Samsung and Olympus, or Leica to be complete (and frankly of course the Nikon 1 system has some very good, not extraordinary, lenses).
The Ricoh GR is a bit smaller, no evf, than the NX20 with the 30mm lens.
There's also the Samsung NXmini, like the Ricoh GR no evf. The NXmini probably has a somewhat better sensor than the Sony RX100III, though I'm only looking at the high ISO capacity. The NXmini's kitzoom is good, the 9mm not so great, I've not been able to try the 17mm yet.
The Canon G1XII just doesn't have a lens that would attract me.
Fuji and Panasonic will probably both ship large sensored compacts in the fall. The raws I've seen from the Pana FZ1000 look really good.
ecube: I wonder how many users who posted comment have D3 or D800. Of those who have at least one or the other, how many have master all the features and properly used those features. How many are dissatisfied with the quality of the photos they have taken. How many believe Nikon D5 or D5S will improve their photos?
How many use Nikkor lens exclusively? How many use the so called "Pro Series" Nikkors? How many use the Schnieder, Zeiss, Leica, or Swarovki lens? How many use the photos direct from the camera WITHOUT post processing (except perhaps for removing effect of dust specs or straightening)?
What good is buying and using the latest and greatest camera if you still have to rely of post-processing?
A flash? Are you joking?
No, I'm not confusing high ISOs and dynamic range. But...
The Nikon D600 most certainly does NOT have a quiet mode, the Df and D610, and D4s do. (I don't know about the D5100, but it is reasonably quiet, like the D800.)
You appear to have confused the D3s and the D3, they are significantly different cameras. Until the Df released, the D3s was the great high ISO body--not limiting this comment to Nikon bodies alone.
I don't believe your claims about the Panasonic, flash or no. Also "Lumix" is a general Panasonic camera term and says nothing about the model or sensor size.
Please use a serious high ISO camera, not any by Panasonic, before commenting. Also ISO 3200 is no longer considered high ISO. Try above 20,000. ISO 3200 would have been considered high for a DSLR (the Nikon D2Hs) in 2005.
Schneider (European) makes lenses for Nikon bodies. You may have B+W filters by Schneider.
So many things for you to look at and learn about.
lacroix75: I learned great lesson in the past couple years from Nikon, never buy their first release of anything. Case in point, D800 (early on focus issues, etc..) vs D810 (much more refined version of practically the same thing with minor upgrades), D600 (Oil issues) vs. D610 (again cleaned and refined version). So for me going forward, wait for the second pass, i.e., D910 instead of D900 (if there's such a thing in the future)... ;)
Nikon needs to pay attention the the Canon 6D, or whatever replaces it.
Right, the Sony A7S is disappointing for higher ISOs and colour, the silent shutter is amazing though. Some of Sony's choices are just strange.
ScottRH: Nikon has fixed their quality issues from the problematic D600, D800/E.
It's odd, it's not the kind of colour problem that can be removed with good raw extraction.
It's like raws, extracted to tiff, look like compressed jpegs, but the 8bit tiffs are huge.
I never thought the DR of the D800 real strong above base ISO, but this is different. Maybe a firmware fix will get to the solution.
Even though I like the D810's AF, and the body, I'd skip this even if I were interested in a low ISO high MP camera. (And I'm not.)
No. This has nothing to do with easily removable colour casts. I've not yet tried a Zeiss lens on the D810 body, that could help.
An approach to this problem looks to be to work with magenta in Selective Color if you have Photoshop. No the solution doesn't work from within ACR.
Not really a surprise, since Nikon doesn't get magenta.
bocajrs: I'm passing on this one (No issues with my D800) and I'm curious to see what they'll announce in Photokina.
Indeed, but consider the show.
spikethompson: I have a D800 which I use every week for wedding photography, these cameras are so advanced you you would need to print pictures 60ft x 40ft to pixel peek with the naked eye. The real ability of the d800 is its low light ability and doesn't look like this one has made many advances . By the way, Real videographers use video cameras, real photographers dont read reviews, they take photographs.....!
The D810 is a better lowlight high ISO body than the D800, and neither is particularly good when put up against a Nikon Df or Canon 6D.
The D800 also has dynamic range problems above ISO200.
David Smith - Photographer: I think Nikon now uses the same sensor that Sony uses in the a7r. Amazing detail is now also available for Nikon users.
Boring. (Amazing someone else called me a Nikon "fanboy".)
The problem with this 36MP sensor is lack of DR, this is well documented with the D800. And Nikon generally does a better job than Sony when using the same sensor.
The D810 raws that I've extracted, with ACR 8.6beta, ACR8.6, and Capture NX-D, look strange, and it's not simply a "camera profile" problem.
I try not to limit my favorites to one particular brand--though will defend brands where they're strong.
marc petzold: @HowaboutRAW
The Nikon D810 is sth better, of course...but costs also more than twice then the A7R - for neglible more performance, also it's much more heavy, and i must say the best thing with E-Mount ever is that you can virtually adapt every lens from the past 60-70 years, that doesn't work with most DSLR because of the mirror box, and bajonet flange. *If* i would have the money, i'd go for E-Mount, not Nikon anymore...it's just too heavy, too expensive (good lenses) and take too much space into the bag anyway - but i do enjoy shooting with my APS-C Nikon's, but i won't upgrade them to FF, because of size and price issues, i'd go for Sony. For example, it's way cheaper (and more fun) using the A7 with legacy mf primes for myself rather than buying the D610 with the 35/1.4 Sigma...much more expensive, no aperture control onto the lens, plastic lens body, etc...and more weight into my bag anyway.
Okay, but fast AF and very quiet shutters/mirror-movements are sought out things for some.
Given how quiet the A7S can be, the A7R is an embarrassment.
I will of course try the update to PhotoShop CS6, but the color problems are not really solvable with photo editing software.
The D810's color problems also exist when the raws are extracted with Capture NX-D.
It's not color matching that's the problem.
There was progress after the D700, but really only in full framed bodies. Right Nikon has yet to really replace the D300s. And Nikon appears to be avoiding doing a D710 with say the sensor from the Df.
The D810 is much much less audible than the Sony A7r, and the Nikon has very very good AF.