Provia_fan: Pricing and availability, before releasing samples? As much as I like Sigma this is a bit of a faux pas
Um: "but I tend to shoot better with cameras that I love to handle and love the looks at."[sic]
But have you handled it?
There's an obvious functionality to it--really obvious.
Foveon is a chip not a body design.
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.
Are you using these lenses on a full framed DSLR?
Film handles vignetting in the corners much more easily than digital sensors--it's one of the reasons FF digital cameras took a while to take off.
In other words, it's best if light hitting the sensor is as close to perpendicular, to the sensor, as possible.
nerd2: If we consider just the DOF and price
85mm f1.8 for FF = 56mm f1.2 for APS = 42.5mm f0.95 for m43(4/3 stop and 2/3 stop difference between FF - APS and APS - m43)
NIkkor 85mm 1.8G = $499Fuji 56mm 1.2 = $999 Leica 42.5mm f1.2 = $1499
I heard that all lenses are quite sharp at wide open - so this fuji lens has pretty good value, even compared with larger format lenses.
The wine is easy, as is the Coke.
You're not "educating" me, you're telling me to limit my perception. you clearly don't know much about wine--the aeration thing is really really obvious and well known.
I didn't say a thing about wine glasses. Changing the terms is a kind of behavior on your part used for distraction from actual testing.
In other terms:
You've made my point well for me. You changed the test when you didn't like easily repeatable results that agree with my senses. This is standard bad science on your part. (Like the Myth Busters).
So yep: If my senses agree with other tests, then my senses are indeed scientific.
Gourmet was a food magazine. Not exactly wine. (But again I didn't say a thing about wine glasses.)
You read like those who claim there's no difference to the taste of organic meat.
And the fact that you keep changing the test and being obvious only helps the case for better lenses or audio gear.
zodiacfml: Good, sample RAW files please!
What would you extract those raws with?
cprevost: Love that empty marketing speak- " While retaining its famous textural expression, which seems to give form to the air itself, the updated Foveon direct image sensor produces images that are more colorful, rich, deep, and faithful than ever before."
I didn't see noise in these ISO 100 jpegs on the sigma website:
Image sample - http://www.sigma-global.com/jp/cameras/dp-series/gallery/
I checked the biggest jpeg again and there's just zero noise.
Lab D: This will be VERY popular and may kill any sales of the Sony AX100 which is a camcorder (Who still buys those?) which costs $1100 more but with same sensor and similar lens, and also the RX10 which is $400 more and can't do 4K.
How are you sure it's the Sony sensor?
It's not impossible, but how do you know?
simpleshot: You don't need an atomic bomb to kill that many.
The Japanese slaughtered a total of 30 million people in Asia during WW2.
They would do massacres in a single city in hundreds of thousands. Most of the massacres occurred in China - 23 million civilians. In Nanking city alone, 300,000 were massacred. In the majority of the killings, people were slashed with bayonets and left to bleed to death.
Source the claim that Mao killed 45 million people in 4 years?
Do you mean through mass starvation in the 1950s or 1960s? And where are you getting that number of people and small number of years? An internet posting will not be accepted as a valid source--unless it leads to a well sourced book on the subject.
Anyhow that Mao committed crimes isn't in dispute. While rightwing Japanese types deny the Japanese crimes in places like Nanking in the 1930s to this day in 2014.
Back this up:
"The Allies killed many more in the largest genocide in the Soviet states during WWII than Germany."
What you're posted here means something entirely different than: Over 20 years Stalin killed more people through things like starvation+deportation to Siberia+out right murder than the Nazis killed in various concentration camps during the first half of the 1940s.
You've also grossly insulted various Soviet citizens killed by the Nazis, not to mention Poles killed by the Nazis.
LukeDuciel: pity it doesn't have an option for EVF
Since the lens is of a fixed focal length, you can use an external OVF easily enough.
Jogger: Sigma should just become a lens manufacturer. Take all the RD monies form their failed camera division and pour it into making lenses like the 501.4 ART.
Suspect Sigma got a better understanding of color and light when Sigma bought Foveon.
For ISO 400 and below, Nikon and Canon barely hold a candle to color from a Sigma SD1 Merrill--even if the Canikon bodies are using Zeiss lenses.
MayaTlab0: I'm still puzzled as to how my hand is supposed to hold this camera and operate its controls.
Think about your right thumb.
While not well written, the terms get at the better color from these sensors. So pretty far from "empty marketing" speak.
Michael Piziak: I don't like the ergonomics on this camera.
You've handled this camera? Where?
stepalex: So instead of the 'grip' protruding forward, they made it stick backward thus doubling the camera's thickness? Yup, that's smart.
Think about where/how your thumb rests.
The xavcs format is some variation of MP4 and opens easily enough in Adobe Premiere 5.5+plays well enough on my Windows laptop, not so much on a Mac.
The AX100 costs a bit more than $1100--more like $2000. And I like the design of the AX100's body.
But if the Sony is not for you, there's this Panasonic or perhaps a different Panasonic or Canon.
What's the advantage to xavcs? The other reasons for using the AX100 I apprehend.
And I realize you were addressing the OP.
Barney Britton: Apologies for the dead link which was in place a short time ago - it should be fixed now.
Raws shouldn't be "smudgy"; at Imaging Resource are you sure you're not looking at raws with some in camera NR?
Also you didn't say EM1, you said m4/3s generally. And right the EM1 is one of the best high ISO m4/3s cameras in the year 2014.
So even without smudging I'd expect the NikOne V3 to have a hard time keeping up with the EM1 for high ISO work, especially since the EM1 has many excellent lenses, and better optics help a lot with higher ISOs. The best Olympus and Pana lenses are better than even very good Nikon 1 lenses--like the 32mm 1 lens.
The Coke is easy, so that tells me you really don’t pay attention.
The shape of the wine container has a lot to do with aeration of the wine, which has a massive effect on taste, this is well established, and shows that you know nothing about wine. (Proving my point that you don’t look into subtle differences and therefore are not to be trusted–just like the TV show.)
Expensive wine, often isn’t much better than just moderately priced wine. (I’m sure there are exceptions–but I’ve never had a $1000 bottle of wine.)
If my senses agree with other tests, then my senses are indeed scientific. That you don’t want to set up those tests is your failing. Or if you want to ignore the results as noise or contamination that’s again your fail.
You read like those who defend crap food.. In fact, it’s this kind of attitude that in the past helped to decrease the sound quality of digital audio. Digital photography escaped the worst the digital audio mistakes.