tkbslc: Since I am sure someone will say it is too expensive, how much is a high-grade 21mm f1.9 for FF?
This is what I wrote in my true reasons for FF white paper. Every system has a sweet spot. And using close to F1.0 aperture lenses on any system means to use it far outside its sweet spot. A system with larger sensor and smaller aperture will be cheaper overall. As the abobe comparison demonstrates nicely.
BobYIL: Very hard competition for the new Nikon 1: Two successful cameras in this category, Sony RX100 III and Panasonic LX100... Both have hi-speed zooms (f1.8 and f1.7); not f3.5 . Also, the new trend is to employ at least the m43 size sensor (which secured the future of the LX series..)
I have gone through some math. The N1 series certainly cannot compete with fixed lens premiums like the ones listed above. I would simply assume a J5 would have to complement an, e.g., RX100m3. Question then is, can it?
Answer is yes, because of:- portrait option (32/1.2)- tele option (300/4 PF with FT1 adapter)- wide angle video (6.7mm VR)
The tele option is matched by the FZ1000 but at a lesser image quality and higher price, assuming you already own a 300 PF for your FF body.
zorgon: Nikon's lens selection does not realise the potential of the smaller sensor in key areas such as long telephoto wildlife photography and macro photography.
I would like to see a dedicated 100mm macro in native CX mount. And for birding, I want to see a 300mm f4 PF or 400mm f5.6 PF in CX mount. I don't want FF lens designs with a new mount fitted, but lenses that are optimised for the smaller sensor and the higher pixel density.
If Nikon release these lenses, I would absolutely buy into the Nikon 1 system. I'm tired of carrying around a heavy DSLR and tele lens, and the image quality of super zoom cameras (e.g P900) just doesn't cut it.
I said BIF and not birders for a reason ...
falconeyes: Sounds like the ubiquous Sony 1" 21MP BSI sensor.
However, there is a slight resolution mis match, so, may be a different source.Any info on source of sensor?
The sensor was a weak point with past Nikon 1 cameras.
The PD points are just a modified microlens array, not a modified sensor. Yes, the microlens array is fused to the CMOS in fab, but Sony does this as specified by the customer anyway.
However, previous N1 sensors may have had an especially fast sparse read-out for PD position pixels, don't know for sure though.
Sounds like the ubiquous Sony 1" 21MP BSI sensor.
A 300mm design or longer doesn't depend much on the image diagonal if not larger than medium format, or in general, if f >> d.
The diffraction limit for this camera is around f/6.3 (the limit beyond which you can't recover diffraction blur via sharpening). I assume all Nikon primes incl. the 300PF are capable of diffraction-limited resolution below f/6.3 near the image center.
I.e., you do have the lens you are looking for now. If AF is working with them.
However, don't think any small camera/lens can do BIF in a decent manner. Speed and reach combined always requires the level of light only a larger camera can capture.
WayneHuangPhoto: $3,400? Wow. I'll just get a Samyang when they release their own FF UWA prime.
$3400 for a *sharp-in-the-corners* 11mm FF lens is a bargain.
Samyang won't do one, it is out of their price league. It cannot be made cheap because there are too many technical burdens to be overcome (aspherical, super ED, coating etc.). Nikon's 13mm Holy Grail was *much* more expensive, Sigma's 12mm isn't useful in the corners. Maybe, Sigma could do a 11mm Art now, but it won't come cheap.
Samyang's 10mm are cropped which is easy to do. In the affordable range anyway, it may be better to use a fisheye lens and convert to rectilinear in software (as pano software does). However, it still does lead to blurry corners when going to extreme UWA.
mjordan1: Please, please! No more reference to "fluorine" coatings. Fluorine is a gas at room temperature and very reactive. The coatings used are " fluoride" coatings e.g. calcium/magnesium fluoride, both of which are ionic compounds and not elements like fluorine.
There are names for elements and names for molecules. First is physics, second is chemistry.
RichRMA, yes, correct. But as I said, fluorine simply is the more generic term for anything containing the element F. Fluoride can be more accurate in some instances, fluorite in others (e.g., if used for the element's glass composition itself).
It is like talking about a magnesium alloy shell. Nobody thinks the shell would be made of pure magnesium. Same for a fluorine coating, nobody thinks it is made of pure fluorine anyway ...
Fluorine is an element (F). If it is contained in a coating, like a fluorite coating, it is technically correct to call it fluorine coating (well "coating containg fluorine" to be precise). Less accurate than fluorite (CaF2) coating, but not wrong.
Dvlee: Thumbs up for the real circular flash tube instead of a pair of tubes under a diffuser or a ring a LEDs.
Thumbs down to no TTL.
Besides freezing the motion of constantly moving little creatures or flowers swaying in the breeze, one of the advantages of using a flash for macro is being able to hand hold the camera while stalking bugs flitting from flower to flower. At a close working distance a small variation in the distance between the light and the subject can result in a large difference in the brightenss of the light.
I used a manual flash for macro for many years, but TTL has been a game changer! No more fiddling with apertures and power settings between shots.
If I have to weigh having a true ring flash tube against TTL, I'd choose TTL. It seems like a half decent unit otherwise. A bit pricey for no TTL.
Dvlee, I agree on the false advertizing from Adorama.It is in their press release, full text e.g. here:http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2015-03/33087966-flashpoint-adds-the-new-ring-li-on-ring-flash-to-collection-of-battery-powered-strobes-flashpoint-s-ring-li-on-is-a-lithium-powered-self-contained-256.htm
Dvlee, you seem to confuse what this thing is.
It is a studio ring strobe, also usable outdoor, e.g., for fashion shots against the sun. Strobes are gauged in Ws and are way more powerful. Studio strobe users almost always shoot manual.
It is NO camera flash, there already are ring flashes out there (e.g., Sigma). Flashes are gauged by their guide number. Almost all flashes support TTL.
I use the Bowen ringlight converter BW-1790 in my studio to great success. It is cheaper and lets me keep my studio strobe system and its remote control integration, including ability to shoot 1/8000s at full power. I.e., this Adorama flash would be both more expensive and less value for me.
Maybe, it is an overlooked option, here's a review:http://www.wexphotographic.com/?/saves/reviews/bowens_ringlight.html
He says, between high end compacts, mirrorless and entry dSLRs, the race is open.
I share this opinion although not expressed very often.
It may be that high end compacts eventually take over the current mirrorless and entry dSLR markets. Leaving high end SLR and system cameras with full frame and larger sensors for the interchangeable lens market.
Already now, the A7 seems to drive the system camera segment rather than the small mirrorless ones it all started with.
Did he really say "photojournalsts" rather than photographers?
Did he really mix up pixel level quality and image quality?
Aur: Sigma and Carl Zeiss need to force Nikon and Canon to open their autofocus patents or drop them stone cold. Many people have a bad experience with Sigma autofocus and never buy one again.
I remember Carl Zeiss ranting about it a few years ago when a person asked why none of their lenses for Nikon autofocus. Their response was one of anger with Nikon and Canon, Nikon and Canon refuse to let any other manufacturer use their autofucs system.
Sigma and Car Zeiss should make it clear to Nikon and Canon and they're not the ones with dropping sales and losses. Nikon and Canon are more irrelevant every day and Sigma and Carl Zeiss have many other avenues and OEM who aren't stupid and who do allow them to access their autofocus system.
It could be worth a DPR article ...
IIRC, the Japanese optical industry has decided NOT to license patents to anybody outside Japan after some lost legal battle (about autofocus, I believe) with some US corporation.
This leaves Sigma building AF lenses while Zeiss and Samyang don't.
The camera market belongs to China.
The only things which will remain strong outside of China are:- optics (which saves companies with proprietary mounts (FE, F, EF, K)- image sensors (Sony)- high end pro bodies
It is simply too easy to build, e.g., a good mFT body to have any defense line against China. It has happened before, when Japan took over the German camera industry.
Yxa: Why is it called Super 35 its smaller than the still 35mmIt should be called sub par 35 (that would be more true)
@Yxa, the only one promoting confusion is you.Super 35mm is a standard size in video just like 35mm in still. The fact you didn't know it doesn't mean anybody tries to confuse you.
Eric Nepean: Capture One Pro is another good alternative. In the big picture, I think vendors should separate the DAM function from the editing function, allow various editors to plugin into a DAM framework which not only manages the images but also the editing history. IMO Apples problem with Aperture was that they had a very good DAM solution but couldn't keep up the pace regarding editor and RAW conversion features.
@Eric, you are correct, that could be done. But you would have no access to editing meta information except by opening the editor.I believe i like the current approach by LR better. It is no full DAM tool, just images and a tad movies. But I can avoid the cluttering of sidecars and I can open its database with open source tools. It allows me to manipulate images which are offline, something I do depend on on the road and a less integrated tool wouldn't allow me to do.Any editor opened from LR could write its editing history into the LR catalog (or a sidecar), so most of what you suggest is there already.I see where you are coming from but at the end of the day, you would still depend on a single DAM tool when it comes to your meta data. So again, we would need some standards first.
Provia_fan: Current experience with Serif software for image editing as a user and teacher is a no go folks.Stick to Adobe. Crashes behind crashes and weird memory bugs, plus memory munching for the simplest of things. Stick to Adobe.My two cents worth.
@Provia_fanSoftware isn't patentable, not according to EU law which is applicable to Serif from Nottingham, UK. Moreover, code which handles CMYK can be written by any IT professional with a proper degree.While your experience with PhotoPlus is valuable and worrysome wrt Affinity Photo (AP), I assume AP is a complete rewrite based on prior experience with things like PhotoPlus. Let's hope they learned their lesson.
P.S.Innovative enough algorithms are patentable, even in the EU. Things like the SIFT key extraction in panorama software. But they must be licensed by anybody, Adobe included ...