xentar: That does not look ergonomic at all...
Make a fist. Now straighten your fingers and thumb while keeping your fingers together. That space in your hand is where this grip goes. It's ergonomically inspired.
peevee1: They should have higher resolution in Green, not in blue. Only about 5% of cones in our eyes are responsive to blue light. We are adopted to see detail in green foliage, not in a blue sky.
If only the entire development team at Sigma were as smart as you. Shame they didn't have your number really.
Donnie G: It appears to me that the Panasonic GH4 is a video camera, first and foremost, that just happens to do stills too. The fact that the camera comes dressed in traditional stills camera ergonomics may help to sell it to a larger customer base than would be possible if it were wearing video only clothes. It's kind of a "poor man's" Canon 1D-C aimed at schizophrenic video/stills photography hobbyist. I'm sure we will see a lot more of these hybrids, at this price point and below, from the other gadget makers in the very near future, as they continually hunt for a way to turn a profit from their camera businesses. Fortunately, Panasonic has the necessary background in video to do a good job of it. :)
Think about it this way. 8MP images at 24 fps till the battery runs out.
This has a place in sports photography and opens a new way of shooting to the public. The opposite of the decisive moment. Very appealing to be able to pull a high-quality still from a video stream.
You mouth blow glass, not hand blow it. Your hands don't blow.
RRS stuff is over-rated and your money helps fund anti-human rights legislation which targets the families and rights of gay people sponsored by the owner. For those who care it's worth giving them a miss for that reason alone. I know I don't want my money going to fund hate.
I am still surprised at this. Does Sigma not have an official license to Nikon's lens communication protocol? Even if not and it's reverse engineered why would the Df break compatibility?
What am I missing here...?
nikos theodosiou: Leica's S2 is a great camera I have used done, however as with most things Leica they are about three years behind everyone else!37.8MP is not that special nowadays with the Phase One IQ backs going up to 80MP and Hasselblad having 60MP.Probably the best MF camera out there at the moment is the Hasselblad H5D 200MS yes 200MP! If you compare the files the HD5 takes against the S2 its like Halina compact! If Leica really want to get pros to use their S2 they need to speed things up hugely! Nice camera but they live in the past!
The Leica was built ground up as a digital camera. Even the newest Sony, Nikon and Canon DSLR's are built to take legacy lenses. That puts Leica ahead of everyone bar m4/3 as a digital native system.
Also pixels aren't the same as resolution and acuity. Look at the Sigma DP cameras for how much you can get out of 15MP without a bayer filter. Similarly the Leica S out-resolves Phase One in many circumstances due to better lenses and integration.
I own Hassy's and I want to buy a Leica. The Leica is better now and - when the resolution improves, those S lenses will remain capable. Simply the best glass available.
marike6: Other than price there doesn't seem much to complain about considering that most large aperture lenses are not bitingly sharp straight from max aperture.
But the 58 f/1.4 has some crucial differences and advantages over similar lenses:
* Color/contrast easily surpasses other 50s as expected from a high grade Nano Coated Nikkor. * Resolution as good or better than to other 50s* Bokeh is significantly creamier, more refined * Metal barrel, high build quality as expected for the price
58 f/1.4 Lens Review (vs 58 f/1.2 Noct-Nikkor, EF 50 f/1.2, Sigma 50 f/1.4)
58 f/1.4 full-sized samples
No you can't. You can amp what's there. You can't create color and contrast that weren't captured. Sharpness is defined by contrast. Better lenses have more contrast at finer scales. Increasing contrast in photoshop exaggerates what you have. What you don't have isn't there to adjust.
If what you said was true, the difference in sharpness between a Leica S lens and the cheapest Samyang would be the contrast slider. It's not.
People can see well beyond 300 dpi. It's not about pixels, it's about smoothness and perception. It's why a photo of an orange on a 300 dpi display doesn't look like a real orange - even when lit correctly and without clues like glare which tell you you're looking at a screen.
We need to get to 5,000 dpi+ before our displays become windows and images look real. Bring it on. The sooner the better.
samhain: Leica just released an official statment reguarding this lens 'invoking the spirit of Noctilux':
"Aw, isn't that cute".
Canon couldn't be reached for comment but was reported as simply 'smiling' after learning of the aperture. :D
Jokes aside- if I shot with Nikon, I'd probably get it. (assuming its as good as the description/price indicates).
So you're reliant on the 1.2 Canon and the 1.4 Nikon is too slow? Okay. You think Nikon can't make a 1.2? Okay...
Wait to see the pricing on a Canon 1.2 which competes with this at this length and Nikon's approach will make sense. Canon prices are on an elevator to space. They won't be able to match this lens under $2K. They don't make their own glass. Their constraints are greater.
Of course an 'L' label is all you need right?
ryanlee: Hahahahahaha oh Nikon..
A. Noct? This isn't a f/1.2, f/1.0 or f/0.95. It makes it sound like you couldn't work out a formula and just compromised and made it an f/1.4.
B. USD1,695.95 for a 58mm f/1.4?? See above. It's not like there's VR in it to hike up the price.
c. Who was asking for a 58mm? Who?? I've seen Nikon users ask for a new 24-70mm f/2.8, for f/1.2 primes, for a 17mm tilt shift, for >1x macro lenses. Who was asking for a seventeen hundred dollar 58mm f/1.4?
VR would lower the image quality, increase weight and price, and it's not needed at this length for this use-case.
Everyone has been asking for a decent 'normal' lens. Check my past threads on the subject and the responses to them. All the other current AF Nikon 50's are average. This counters Canon's 1.2 and for prime shooters becomes the go-to. Nikon's 35 isn't nearly as good as the 24 and the Sigma is superb. With a 24mm and an 85mm this completes a prime-kit at 1.4 for many people.
This doesn't look much better than my K-01 with a FA limited lens. More testament to the Pentax than a slight to the Fuji though wow that lens is soft up close with the white flowers.
TJGKG: Why would I get this camera when the more flexible G1X is available and much less expensive? In fact, the updated G2X(?) is probably right around the corner that will address any shortcomings of the first generation. A 28mm lens is not really going to be all that useful. And maybe 2.8 is not as bright as a prime should be. And is Nikon studying pricing from Sony?
I had a G1X. It's a great camera but has the same dynamic range issues as all current Canon sensors. At high ISO they simply can't match the IQ of Sony, Nikon or Pentax in the same generation.
The G1X has a great lens and wonderful controls. It's not the equal of the K-01 or NEX 5N, same price, same generation -when they're sporting equally good glass.
I can't afford a camera this focused and I'm angry damnit. Nikon is a stupid. WAAAAAAAAA!
Sorry - I meant to say:
A fixed lens is ridiculous at this price point and the X100 has a beautiful retro design that evokes the classic Leica's which I also can't afford.
Correction - I actually meant to say:
A camera without a zoom lens can't be used by any serious on-the go shooter except for the RX1 which is one stop faster, I step bigger and three times the price. Damn do I want that.
MrSkelter: 1. Viewfinders are for old people. I'm only half-kidding. The idea that a camera without a viewfinder isn't useful, useable or professional is comically out of date. Many professionals shoot through iPads - I watch them do it. Only egotistic armchair pro's bemoan any design that's not reminiscent of 1965.
2. Zoom with your feet. This camera is aimed at someone who can afford more than one device, or who knows they're not going to try and use it in a bird blind.
3. Thank the FSM Nikon aren't catering to pensioners with hokey faux-vintage design. The Fuji's are more hip-replacement than hip.
4. Dials! A thousand times more useful than a 3X zoom. Nikon can't magically invent a tiny, fast, cheap, APS-C zoom by simply bending physics. Bigger sensors mean bigger optics.
5. Someone who makes money with a D4 doesn't want to learn the foibles of a new set of menus. There's a built in audience for a camera like this regardless of the quality of the competition.
For some of us IQ is all.
@Plastek - Staring at a screen makes you a zombie teenager? You mean like Ansel Adams with his view camera? Or do you mean like any fashion photographer with their medium format look-down viewfinders?
(I'm getting off your lawn now)
I'm so sick of this. When is Nikon going to give us a pocketable camera with the D800 sensor, a 14-400 zoom lens and 4K video for under $500? It's time to take the lead!
1. Viewfinders are for old people. I'm only half-kidding. The idea that a camera without a viewfinder isn't useful, useable or professional is comically out of date. Many professionals shoot through iPads - I watch them do it. Only egotistic armchair pro's bemoan any design that's not reminiscent of 1965.
Sanford: Nikon tossed the name "Nikkor" around far too liberally, applying it to just about every one of their run of the mill compacts. Now that they have produced a premium compact, "Nikkor" has no special significance.
Nikkor simply tells those who know that the lens is 100% Nikon made - from the design to the glass. Most lenses aren't made that way (i.e. Canon do not make optical glass of their own)
They said tablet. They're not in the PC business. This will be an accessory like this other products. It'll work with an iPad or phone and because it's Wacom it'll be considered the industry standard.
Your iPad will be the display. The Wacom tablet will provide the touch sensitive, pressure and angle sensing input.
Henry M. Hertz: still no DNG support.useless crap... and this claims to be a major program.
if not LR then look at this one:
great demosaicing. fantastic detail rendering.
What do you mean? DXO reads and writes DNG just fine.