RGWB bayer pattern (Sony), X-trans Bayer pattern (Fuji), SuperCCD (Fuji), Foveon (Sigma) and now Foveon Quattro (Sigma) -- all are just minor variations of the de-facto standard RGGB bayer pattern sensor.
All variations (which include variations in spectral width of filter colours) are just a mathematically described trade-off between luminosity and color resolution and noise. With the standard RGGB bayer pattern being already very close to an optimum (taking the reduced color resolution of the human eye into account).
The problem is:
Who on earth makes the vendors believe that their variations of the standard RGGB bayer pattern will be paralleled by software makers in their raw converter algorithms which are highly tuned for the standard pattern?
Of course, they won't and rightly so. And after Sony abandoned their approach, Fuji and Sigma are now alone. No way their proprietary color schemes will survive. Just like SuperCCD didn't.
A good scientific paper about DFD and an evaluation showing that phase detect and DFD should have similiar performance can be found here:
It is 14 years old ;)
IMHO, the current batch of Sony-based CMOS 33x44mm cameras creates some pressure esp. on Nikon to move upmarket from 35mm full frame. The smaller medium format CMOS sensors may soon become cheap enough and fast enough to threaten cameras of the caliber of a D4x.
km25: The little boy holding bunny in the 10th pic looks like a fake background, used at Sears. But it is not, this is areal place and time. The liitle boy is not looking off camera to drunk uncle Ned. He is hold the rabbit for real. He is at home and has some connection with the little bunny. These are all pictures of all of the contrived images that be have seen in portrait photography. Only these images are real. A little like Alice really going down the rabbit hole.Nice stuff with warm and honest feelings.
Stu 5, why are you jealous if somebody can have two keepers taken within 3 minutes?
Same boy, bunny, clothing, surroundings, I don't see a reason to mention EXIF here ...
Carlos Loff: Is this the best Nikon has to show in Las Vegas ??? Trash, trash, trash - Maybe next year we have a D5375, lol - One week from now, if the D400 is not announced - I swear for the most sacred saints - I buy the Pentax K-3
If you really are committed to stay DX, then nothing can beat K-3 ATM. Not only is it a professional, sweet and (esp. in silver) beautiful camera making the Df looking ugly. But the entire lens line-up (Limited's, 16-50/2.8 or 60-250/4 professional zooms) is nothing Canikon are coming even close to.
But compared to a D800, be prepared to give up a little in ultimate resolution or continous AF keeper rate. Of course, D800 with lenses is 2x the price of K-3, but a D400 wouldn't come cheap either.
It seems to be a maintanaince release targeted at the Japan home market where M sales isn't nil. Could as well mean Canon is abandoning the EOSM mount. They must have taken notice of the Sony A7 and its larger sensor format.
Stitzer23: Does dxomark publish reviews done by dpreview?
And I may add: DPReview has the much more meaningful presentation IMHO. DPR, continue the good cooperation, please! I like DxO tests but really dislike their cryptic undocumented score system.
It is a lot heavier and bulkier than an RX100ii, despite its much smaller sensor and similiar zoom.
Ben Herrmann: CAUTION: Be very careful - I just did the firmware update for the Nikon P7700, and now, 3rd party batteries no longer work. The camera will not respond to any of the 3rd party models that I have - including the Wasabi's that are superior. Once you turn off the camera (after firmware update), it will not start up again with a 3rd party battery (at least in my case). But it will function just fine with Nikon batteries. Way to go Nikon!!!! You Tu_ds....another way for you to make an extra buck now having to buy your batteries exclusively.
I guess the new firmware must identify EN-EL14 vs. EN-EL14a and the check fails with a 3rd-party battery. Probably a bug in the new firmware as Nikon may simply have skipped a test for 3rd-party batteries in the lab. Solution would be to fall back to EN-EL14 behaviour in the firmware.
Not sure though if there will ever be another FW update. Nevertheless, I still don't think Nikon did it on purpose or that all 3rd-party batteries cause problems.
Glen Barrington: I can't help but wonder if the soldier was ever identified. This was a great photo, and all. But the soldier died for a cause, he needs to be remembered, for more than being the subject of a cool photo, I think.
Hmmmh, only person killed. This interview has "each time the soldiers moved out they were mowed down". Strange at least.
Maybe, the "several" attempts were on several days. Has this been analyzed?
mrdancer: I was waiting for DPReview to do a full review of the GX7, but I suspect it will be very similar to this review. It looks like Olympus has adopted some of the in-camera features that the GX7 has, such as the color tool and intervalometer.
I've been shooting with a GX7 for a week or so now. It's low-light capabilities have surprised me. The starlight photos are, well, stellar! With shutter set to 60 seconds with the F1.4 lens, I can capture thousands (millions?) of stars in the backdrop of a sharply-focused tree or un-lit building(although the stars appear slightly blurry due to earth's rotation during the 60 seconds - at least they all blur in the same direction!). It even captures stars when there are bright landscape lights on the horizon.
Of course, shorter shutter speeds reduce star movement, but don't quite capture the depth that a million or so stars can create.
millions of stars create millions of white pixels, or a white wall :)
Number of stars visible to a human eye under perfect conditions is about 2000.
The challenge with night photography is to capture the starry night w/o trails and blur. A fast 35mm-equivalent F/1.4 35mm, or F/2.8 14mm, can do the trick. Exposure should be less than 30s, dep. on the focal length.
With a long exposure, any camera can capture the stars.
@anybody commenting on price:
The 3000$ claim was fake, there is nothing known about the price. DPR article has been updated too.
technotic: Any good for D800 in terms of IQ I wonder.
This lens is as heavy and large as a Nikon 24-70/2.8 and the latter is sharp enough for the D800. If the early comments here apply, the Sigma 24-105/4 won't be a match for the D800 and shouldn't be called Art. Chance missed for a LIGHT and sharp 24-70/4 for D800- like cameras on the road.
Well, the Nikon 1.4/58 has 9 elements (2 asph), the Zeiss 1.4/55 has 12 elements (1 asph, 6 ED). The published ZEISS optical MTF figures quote MTF for 40 lp/mm to stay at or above 50% across the entire image field and for *ALL* apertures (before diffraction hits), right into the corners. That's quite stunning and probably not matched by the Nikon.
OTOH, the Nikon has AF, is cheaper and may still be good enough to bring true medium format quality to the D800E. Will be interesting to watch :)
Looked up MTF figures on Nikon USA website: I was correct, it cannot compete with the ZEISS. Nikon publishes MTF at less challenging 30 lp/mm to be down to 25% in the corners. So wide open, the Zeiss seems to be *much* better in the corners.
The main difference is: the Nikon still is a rather traditional symmetrical design while the ZEISS is a rather challenging retrofocus design.
falconeyes: I mark this day in my calendar!
DPR, for the first time and eventually, seems to understand the notion of equivalent aperture.
I can only hope that NEVER AGAIN will DPR quote equivalent focal lengths mixed with non-equivalent aperture figures. I really really hope this nonsense will now come to an end.
@don_van_vliet: Both.Most people ignore that actual ISO must be adjusted to reflect same equivalent ISO (aka same noise level) too.
DPR didn't seem to get this either prior to publishing this article.
Some day, all enthusiast photo cameras will be like the A7r, i.e., high MP FF mirrorless, more or less. Who will own this market is an open race though.
Photato: FF stand for Fullframe Fixation.The high cost of 36x24mm sensor production will relegate this line of cameras to the niche of affluent enthusiasts and given it a competitive disadvantage.APS-H is the way to go. For 1/3 of the price and almost the same quality.You know, FF backward compatibility is no longer that important, specially with mirrorless much shorter flange distance where it makes a lot of sense to go with the much sharper native glass.
Do yourself a favour and forget about APS-H.
BTW, APS-H has no significant cost advantage anymore. Masks grew to accomodate FF and yield rates have improved to make APS-H a no option.
I mark this day in my calendar!
peevee1: Nikon - how about innovating, paying more to engineers, not lawyers?
It seems they do. Which is why they protect innovations by patents and design work by design patents. Seems Sakar infringed their US design patent. Nikon cannot but sue in such a case. It simply is against the law to infringe design patents. Design patents serve to keep products distinguishable which isn't a bad thing.
IvanM: After just skimming through the article it would seem that once the AF micro adjustment was sorted the 'normal' af was ok and as good as live view dual pixel focussing...so was this test not flawed in that the AF was off to begin with?
Keeping a consistent AF microadjustment table is not a practical option really.
However, I wonder why cameras can't still autoadjust their PDAF system, combining CDAF and PDAF. It could be as easy as pointing the camera towards a suitable target and press a calibrate button ...
It almost looks as if there were no competition anymore in the camera market.