dahod: Wonder what happens to the in-camera software correction of the newer lenses in a tilt/shift environment.
That's kind of where I was going with this - software corrected lenses might be problematic (unless you have a back built to know the tilt/shift and the programming to correct for it). Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think post profiling would work since I believe it is based on an assumption of parallel focal and image planes and no shift.
Wonder what happens to the in-camera software correction of the newer lenses in a tilt/shift environment.
Sorry if I'm repeating someone's earlier response but I haven't had a chance to read them all.
Michael Tapes did an interesting comparison of the Sony 7RII dynamic range vs the Nikon D810, the Canon 1Dx and the Canon 5DsR on the Luminous Landscape website on Sep 21st. While maybe not as rigorous, it was an interesting video and the Canon 1Dx results surprised me a bit.
Good one - had me going for a while. Would have been better on April 1st though.
Anybody know what the TIFF file size would be??
dahod: Sony must have their rational for compromising the RAW files on their Pro camera. While some have minimized the potential effects, the end result is that they are compromised.
While we never can be sure, can anyone speak to legitimate reasons that would possibly drive Sony in this direction, particularly in this age of large files?
@techjedi - You're probably right - it's all about frame rates and processing power. My understanding is that the medium format Pentax 645Z can shoot full resolution (50Mp) at 3fps until the buffer is full while the Sony shoots at 5 fps (I think). I guess some will think that's important enough to accept lossy compression.
Sony must have their rational for compromising the RAW files on their Pro camera. While some have minimized the potential effects, the end result is that they are compromised.
I could be wrong but as far as I know it still doesn't support phase-detect autofocus and 4/3 lenses.
Maybe it's more difficult than it appears to migrate the technology from the OM-D EM1 but it's disappointing that Olympus continues to ignore their 4/3 users.
vaclav1: 1.Canada Post has 50% higher prices than USPS.2.Canada Post is much slower than USPS.3.I have shipped hundreds packages via USPS, no one was lost, Canada Post is unreliable.
Hi danmarThat's true and if you're fortunate you don't have a problem. My only point was that in every good business model, you need to have an efficient means to resolve customer problems quickly and Canada Post lacks that. At least in our area, it's not very well defined and you seem to fall into a black hole. I think there is room for improvement there.
Maybe you've been fortunate and not needed it, but every good system needs to have a mechanism to resolve problems if they do arise. This is one area that Canada Post needs to improve. In our area, you get a 1-800 number that gets you a recording. Going to the Post Office gets you a poorly copied form that you can fill out and leave with them. In every case of mine, nothing ever came of either. Canada Post adopts the position that nothing is their fault and you need to work with the sender to resolve it. Very poor customer service model.
Agreed - my experience has not been good with them - lots of damaged and lost parcels and a non-functional resolution process.
Other countries do much better.
Only in Canada.
You'd think we'd want to make sure Canadians have the tools and systems in place to successfully compete in the new economy but unfortunately it seems to be beyond us.
A "made-in-Canada solution" is apparently an oxymoron - so sad.
agentlossing: Four Thirds sensor???????
Maybe a mistake? Hardly seems logical, though I like the double assurance that micro four thirds seems to be covered.
The earlier review by DPR (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2966580105/samyang-and-rokinon-formally-introduce-100mm-f2-8-macro-lens)had some comments regarding 4/3 and 1:1. If I understand it correctly, we'll still get 1:1 for 4/3 sensors but not at the minimum focusing distance.
Interesting - I thought there were some pretty significant points raised but it seems Nikon considers them irrelevent.
dahod: As a 4/3 user, I have to admit I'm interested in this lens. Even though Olympus had it on their roadmap for a long time, they never came through with it. I do have the 50mm f2.0 but something longer would be nice and manual is fine.
Maybe somebody can help me out here. The stated magnification is 1:1 for this lens (full frame). What would it be on the four thirds sensor?
Thanks for the input.If I understand it correctly, the 1:1 is constant for the given lens, focal length and minimum focusing distance but the apparent magnification is greater on the 4/3 sensor because of the narrower field of view. You'd have to move back to get the whole FF image onto a 4/3 sensor.
As a 4/3 user, I have to admit I'm interested in this lens. Even though Olympus had it on their roadmap for a long time, they never came through with it. I do have the 50mm f2.0 but something longer would be nice and manual is fine.
Horshack: I went to Samsung's booth at CES to play with the NX1. I was very impressed both with the camera and the competence of the Samsung rep - he knew the camera front to back and was able to answer every question I had, including some very technical questions.
I must be missing something then - sorry. Not bashing Samsung - just didn't see the lens offerings you're mentioning (web site goes as high as 150mm in the zooms and 45mm on the primes). Is there a preferred portrait lense? Also, 150mm is still a long way from extreme telephoto. Can you point me to the lineup you're thinking of?
Agreed- the camera is impressive
Now they need to be equally impressive with respect to lens offerings and customer service.
PazinBoise: I think the last technical hurdle that mirrorless cameras need to clear in order to surpass DSLRs is AF tracking. Mirrorless camera's AF tracking has gotten a lot better but most DSLRs systems are still better at tracking moving subjects. Once they are on par with DSLRs in that functionality I don't think DSLRs will have much left to offer?
Lens selections? Lenses can be made to fit new mounts. Optical Viewfinders? Each generation of EVFs gets better and better and the advantages they offer over a OVF are great. Weather sealing and build quality? Oly OM-D E-M1 and Fuji XT-1.
I really can't think of other features that DSLR offer that can't be integrated (or have already been integrated) into mirrorless systems.
I could be wrong but my understanding is that Olympus uses in-camera software correction to help keep the size and costs of their mirrorless lenses down.
If that's the direction everyone's going then the days of cross-platform lens sharing might be over (unless the companies are sharing software which I doubt)
I haven't seen any optical bench testing of just the lenses (only system testing with the camera) so I have no idea how good the lenses by themselves (without in-camera correction) would be on a different camera. Maybe somebody else has better information??
justmeMN: Whatever. Samsung is just another miniscule-market-share player scrambling for leftovers in a shrinking market.
Good point (Mr. Olympian)
I didn't realize the size of Samsung. According to Michael Reichmann's review of the NX1 Samsung had annual revenues (didn't say what year) of $175B USD making it the 13th largest company in the world (Sony and Panasonic at #105 & #106 respectively). I think Canon's total sales for 2013 was $36B USD and Nikon (2013) was $11B USD.
Seems that Samsung has the pockets to be serious if they want.