Trubbtele: I buy one last week. Great with nice details in the pics.AF is ok, but my D7100 far better.
When I read 'D7100 butter', I was wondering if that's a new way to refer to 'oil on sensor' problems (ala D600).
Then I saw the correction and was disappointed.
tecnoworld: As far as AF is concerned, this seems a different camera! Wow, zone af is simply great. It nails focus constantly on still subjects, even in low light and backlit situations!!! I'm excited.
I'll try it with my daughter at the beach as soon as the sun comes back, but is seems ultra precise and fast. Well done!
Too bad they did not implement more new requested features, but this is a very good 'second start'.
Dpr should definitely retest the camera and improve the rating to at least 90% now.
an example would be for the original Fuji X100?http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmx100
BaumBoyPhoto: I can confirm from my totally off the cuff testing in a poorly lit room, a minute after downloading last night, that the low-light AF has significantly improved. As in: it actually worked. The fact it wasn't hunting and was stupid fast is just icing on the cake.
I'm impressed. Good on you Samsung.
There is no 'average DLSR'. Name a model and perhaps BaumBoyPhoto can relate his experiences (if he has the named DLSR).
PostConsumerWat: anyone have any thoughts as to why the 40mm 2.8 is better than this lens?
probably because the optical design of the 40mm is almost 30 years newer than the design of Canon's 50mm (the above comment by Solar Eagle seem to indicate that this new 50mm f/1.8 is the same optical design as the old 50mm f/1.8)
Nevertheless, I'm looking forward to this one, and will probably pick up a copy
nikkornikon: They Need to, Like Fuji...to Step away from 16mp. It is time to move on. When 24mp is truly old...16 seems freaking ancient.
From my experience, (at least with the lenses I have) diffraction starts after f/8. And this has been found to be true by Ming Thein as well.
good point about the diffraction limit, fortunately (or unfortunately, depends on how you see it) as the sensor is small, the DOF is usually sufficient that I don't need to stop down beyond f/8
16MP is as high as it can go on a 4/3rds sensor. Any higher and the pixel pitch would be so small, it will suffer at high ISOs.
Jylppy: And where are the lens news for EOS M?
True, but the whole setup would still more preferable than say, a Rebel :/
Plus, the 18-55 EF-M kit lens isn't exactly small either.
Since the EOS M has the EF to EF-M adapter, all Canon has to do is release STM lenses for EF mount and EOS M 'automatically' has it. Guess that's why Canon has stopped releasing native EF-M mount lenses.
Since this 50mm STM seems pretty small, it should be a nice add-on to any EOS M kit.
Old Cameras: If it performs well (is sharp) wide open and has good focus mechanics it could be a bargain.
A nice dampened focus ring? Grit-free smooth focusing action? Not sure why it would be a bargain though, this lens is not exactly affordable.
nerd2: Why is it a big deal? We have 4K video on our PHONE, as well as upcoming mirrorless cameras (which has larger sensor than this and can accept multiple lenses too)
In my original comment, I mentioned 'other mirrorless cameras with big sensors do line skipping '. You countered saying that no 4K capable camera does line skipping and I concurred.
I also said that the bigger sensors do line skipping for 1080p (which is true for the A7, A7R and A7ii). To which you called BS, which is incorrect.
But whatever, you seem rather combative so I will end this discussion here.
"BS again. All like one do full-sensor readout."
You sure about that? The A7, A7R and A7ii does line skipping when recording 1080p.
I stand corrected, the bigger sensors only line skip when recording 1080p.
Yes, looks like they do crop when recording 4k.
Still a lot of pixel binning happening, I wonder if the processors can't do oversampling instead of binning.
Other mirrorless cameras with bigger sensors usually have to do line skipping to sample 4k (resulting in only half of the sensor being used), whereas with a 1" sensor you use most of the sensor already.
5inchfloppy: It's exactly the same size as the Panny GM-1, so I guess that's the market Nikon is targeting.
This plus the Nikkor 18.5/1.8 seems fantastic. Consider me intrigued. Yes, I can achieve the same with GM-1/5 with Oly 25mm or PL 25mm, but this will still be smaller and have accurate PDAF.
This is what the Pentax Q series could have been methinks.
@LegacyGT:When comparing sizes, I was referring to the size of the body itself, I know the exact sizes of the sensors, and which is bigger. But regardless of sensor size, IQ from the Nikon should be adequate, we have moved beyond the point of sufficiency and into territory of IQ for IQ's sake.
Didn't like m43? On the contrary, I am still shooting m4/3 and loving it. Just purchased the lovely Oly 45mm f/1.8 too :D When it comes to the stills quality I am very satisfied with m4/3.
Just that CDAF on m4/3 doesn't lend well to video work (continuous AF tracking) which is an area that Nikon's 1 Series (due to PDAF) does really well.
J5 dimensions:98 x 60 x 32 mm
GM-1 dimensions:99 x 55 x 30 mm
5mm and 2mm isn't exactly that much of a difference.
I know the 4/3 sensor is bigger, but Nikon has blazing fast PDAF. And most focal lengths are already covered by their lineup (probably could do with a fast pancake though).
p.s. Plus no AA filter!
Raist3d: Ok, excellent- no AA filter- found at the Nikon global website.
REMARKABLE IMAGINGLeading-edge Nikon technologies deliver beautiful photos and movies.Newly developed, backside illumination CMOS image sensorEXPEED 5A image-processing engineNo optical low-pass filter <---------------
It's exactly the same size as the Panny GM-1, so I guess that's the market Nikon is targeting.
steelhead3: Another needed FW update for a Fuji, why are they getting such a pass by the media?
Because I know of a lot other cameras from other manufacturers that could do with a firmware update, but have gotten exactly zero.
Fuji on the other hand, updates firmwares with the frequency of an Android release. Which is good. And commendable.
JaimeA: It is hard to believe that in this time of advanced camera development this camera does not have stabilization of any kind.
If you're shooting video with any Fuji X100 series, you're using the wrong tool for the job