forpetessake: When will DPR stop publishing misleading numbers? It's NOT "a mind-blowing F2.8-6.5 24-2000mm equivalent zoom".
You either provide conversion for both f-stop and focal length, which are mind-blowing F14.6-33.8 24-2000mm FF equivalent. Or provide the physical parameters, which are F2.8-6.5 4.6-385mm.
It's hard to believe DPR continues making honest mistakes -- writing a F14.6-33.8 4.6-385mm would have been an honest mistake, and I've never seen that.
@mosc, not totally exact:Use a FF200mm f2.8 on FF or APSC, full open you always use the 71mm aperture, and it's what give the light on the sensor or film by area unit, so You can use the same result of an external lightmeter to setup both cameras.But as you say, the APSC sensor is 43¨of the FF sensor, so the total of light light/area*area is 43% less. That's why you for a similar picture, you have around 1stop more noise. Then for DOF, with the same physical aperture, as the angle of view is shorter, you have to go back 1.5x the distance to get the same shot, and so the DOF is 1.5x the one of a FF body, because you don't shoot the same picture at the same distance. If uou shoot at the same disatnce, you have exactly the same DOF if you shootyour 200mm at 2.8, but you have not the same picture.
"By forpetessake (4 hours ago)Please refrain from the silly f2.8 is f2.8 comments. It's good to know the subject before commenting and embarrassing onesel"perhaps you don't know the difference between physical f2.8, and the quantity of light the sensor gets per area unit or in totality ?Sorry 2.8 is 2.8. Then you can speak of equivalent for focal, DOF or overall quantity of light the sensor gets.
En Trance: Finally, a manufacturer correcting shortcomings for free. Wish there were more out there.Too bad, I do not like Nikon. Don't know why?
@ En Trance I love Nikon, I dislike Sony, but I love the A7 line, size and look, and I sold my Nikon gear, bought A7 and A7II and try to live with all their shortcomings...As you say, many persons and many roads
Wow !What a cool garage ... ! :)
Stigg: hmm, no matter the weather you just keep taking boring snapshots. even antsy bad-breath adams could make more interesting mediocre shots than these. try throwing your camera at some rocks or off a cliff. they'll definitely be more lively than your usual.
hmmm, boring unintersting comment, threw your keyboard against the wall, it will definitely be better than your usual.http://www.dpreview.com/members/296810275/comments
vscd: I don't understand why Nikon doesn't use the number 5400 for it. The 5xxx is not unlimited with numbers and I think the series will go on for some more years ;)
That's why no D400 :) :)
m43er: That cat photo sold me...I want one.
You want a cat ?
Cane: Why does Sony let Zeis make almost all their FE lenses. It's like Ford having Ferrari make all their engines. Just because a camera is FF doesn't mean only $1000 + lenses are the only thing you should attach to it.
Maybe this is such a great plan that Canon should follow and only sell L lenses.
The 35 1.4 was annouced before,but you're right I didn't see they put it in the list;)
le_alain: Thanks !as startup time with an FE lense on A7 is 3x the start-up time with a legacy lenseOn A7II the startup time is better , around half the A7
No, on A7 series, before update, it makes near 3s to boot with an FE lense. Try it with a chrono ;)on A7 II it's far quicker
Heuuuu none of the FE lenses announced today are Zeiss .....
Thanks !as startup time with an FE lense on A7 is 3x the start-up time with a legacy lenseOn A7II the startup time is better , around half the A7
Fogsprig: Epson R-D you again?
Ok for the CMOSIS Sensor ;)
Good alternative, even if I had preferd an Epson R-D with an A7 sensor, Epson wich doesn't need at all to switch LCD on for any setting, even ISO or exposure compensation.
adhemar: Oh my, oh my, a compact 24-600mm and a 1" sensor. And quite bright, I am sure. The laws of physics have stopped applying.
But only for fixed lens cameras. Isn't that weird?
"With a fixed lens they can adjust for the optical aberrations with software more easily." why ?
sharkcookie: 8% wider than the Nikon 12-24, but the Nikon is twice as fast (one stop equals double the light). The Canon is 50% more expensive.
you give one yourself.You can like it or not, but don't say there is no other FF lense in th 11-13mm range.and you didn't say "zoom" at that time, You can had CV12mm wich works great on Leica and Sony A7 séries, but of course not on DSLR.
Only ??? Nofor Canon DSLR yes
Couscousdelight: And today Samsung presents it first Organic Sensor :http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.fr/2015/02/samsung-presents-organic-on-si-cmos.html
Fuji/Panasonic in 2013http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n130611.htmlbut not in the same way
le_alain: ISO 16000 is very good on first picture;)
So DPR change the 1st photo of conclusion from ISO 16000 to ISO 2000.but quite good to for ISO 2000;)
ISO 16000 is very good on first picture;)
ozturert: Well, Sony needs to remove all AA filters ASAP. These samples are way too soft. Even the ones with Zeiss 55mm. Actually they need to switch to something like Faveon to remove that "smoggy-smudgy" look. I'm saying this to all, Canon-Nikon-Sony-Pentax etc..
as an A7 owner, not so different sensor wise,NR at base ISO and not AA filter faultDetails can be incredible with raw conversiotn and a sharp prime;)