sportyaccordy: If this is anything like the 20MP camera in my Z3, pass on it. The JPGs out of it are smeary, flat and just generally awful, and it doesn't do RAW. Even if it did, it wouldn't be worth the time spent processing files. I think the big issue is the lens. If they haven't fixed that it's DOA. The phone is excellent otherwise but the camera was a huge let down.
That's a real shame, and provides some insight into how complicated digital cameras actually are. In any case, if I'm out with my wife and we need to snap a photo with our phones I always reach for her Iphone 6. A real missed opportunity here.
If this is anything like the 20MP camera in my Z3, pass on it. The JPGs out of it are smeary, flat and just generally awful, and it doesn't do RAW. Even if it did, it wouldn't be worth the time spent processing files. I think the big issue is the lens. If they haven't fixed that it's DOA. The phone is excellent otherwise but the camera was a huge let down.
ProfHankD: To me, the one obvious lesson here is that at 50MP FF, even 11mm @ f/5.6 has quite limited depth of field. I can't imagine anyone consistently nailing focus using manual focus with an OVF at 50MP. This will be a challenge even for focus peaking and magnified live view....
You are really getting into the weeds with the semantics/pedantry here. It looks desperate. Just admit you are wrong.
Bottom line, pixel level sharpness will be an issue with even moderately fast lenses due to the heightened AF challenges.
Again sports photographers shoot at 200mm f/2.8 all the time. 200 f/2.8 300 ft away (aka a football field's length) has much less DoF than 11 @ F/5.6 where he says he saw issues. So we might be bumping onto the limit of diminishing returns.
50/2 shooting moving objects is hardly exotic. A 70mm at 2.8 at the same distance has less DoF. A 200 anywhere closer than 33 feet has the less DoF as 50/2 at 10ft. And the 70-200/2.8 is kind of the defacto action lens. So like I said the problem is progressively worse as FLs increase for a given subject distance, which comes right back to ProfHankD's point. If the thing is having trouble focusing with 11mm stopped down it's going to be very problematic anywhere more tele wide open.
@HowaboutRAW, no, the dogs were still. But 50/2 is hardly exotic, and 50MP makes that FL/F-stop tough for even still subjects. Especially with an OVF with no focus zoom. So your implication that this would only be an issue at unreaslistically wide angles is wrong, it gets worse with longer FLs.
For a given distance and F stop longer FLs have narrower DoFs.
Your example has a DoF of a foot and a half. That's pretty tight. And for tack sharpness it's even tighter. I was just shooting MF with 50/2 today, trying to catch my dogs at about that distance. If they turned their heads their eyes were out of focus.
@HowAboutRAW, no, most people shoot at longer focal lengths, with even narrower depths of field for a given F stop, which speaks to ProfHankD's point. What good is 50 MP if the only time you can nail focus 100% of the time is either in a studio or some infinite DOF landscape?
Artpt: To DPR, would isovariance be a standard then for ranking sensor performance considering the variable of electrical noise? I see the studio tests...is their a way to quantify it?
Perhaps I missed that in the article...
Thank you in advance.
The data on Sensorgen.info is a start :-) If you know what you are looking at they present things in a pretty straightforward manner. With DPR's much better site design and technical knowledge base that kind of data could be presented in a very valuable way.
Yes- check out sensorgen.info... they re-calculate DxO test results to report QE and read noise.
Nice work Canon. Hopefully an equally cheap 35 STM will follow.
Mssimo: Im willing to bet we will have a autofocus crisis when this camera hits the market. This is the beginning of the end of phase detection auto-focus and one of the last popular DSLRs before the big decline. Mirrorless is going to hit strong and hard, only obstacle they still have is subject tracking and lens selection. Auto focus accuracy, single shot AF speed, image quality, shutter speed, HUGE viewfinders, and tons of momentum. I will miss SLR but im excited to see the biggest change in photography since analog to digital.
Leica is MF... that combo is irrelevant to DSLRs. No DSLRs have AF F/1 lenses in production.
You are jumping all over the place. Bottom line phase detection AF works great. If it didn't, manufacturers wouldn't continue to develop it and tout PDAF points as selling features. Sony and Canon wouldn't have bothered developing OSPDAF for their mirrorless bodies.
Plus since SLRs were invented before CDAF was possible, all the old AF lenses are built around phase detection. The whole operating concepts of PDAF vs CDAF are different, and there is no way Canon is going to abandon PDAF, which all of its pro lenses and bodies are designed around, for no reason. At best there will be the combo we are seeing now... PDAF to get to the distance and CDAF for fine tuning/microfocus (which is exactly what Canon and Sony do on their mirrorless bodies). But conceptually and practically PDAF is too integral and works too well to abandon.
Mirrorless cameras don't have much better AF accuracy, and their AF systems are slower and quicker to give up in low light. Plus F/0.95 is the absolute extreme of lenses in general. From what I know there is only 1 Canon lens that even comes close to that- the 50 1.0, which has been out of production for 15 years.
Not to mention, below F/2 is diminishing returns. Sensors generally can't collect any more light than that due to pixel vignetting, and general vignetting, especially on wide angle lenses. The DoF of an F/2 lens is generally pretty shallow, but not impossible.
Properly configured mirrorless has an advantage here in that you could use the AF to get within range and then have it zoom while you dial in focus manually. But in any case if DSLRs cant handle F/0.95 mirrorless definitely can't.`
Why would this yield an AF crisis? Canon's AF is the best in the business, and DSLR AF in general is measurably better than the on-sensor stuff used by even the best mirrorless bodies. If anything autofocus is the issue keeping mirrorless from really reaching prime time, with a weak AF lens selection (for FF) being in a close second.
If Canon or Nikon come out with a pro grade camera that dumps the mirrorbox, keeps the native lens mount and can AF with the best action DSLRs then maybe mirrorless will begin to make headway.... but pros and well heeled discerning customers who need good AF are not going to gamble on mirrorless for critical work.
Looks really good. Don't have an EXIF viewer here but it seems to have much better saturation than the Nikon and even the Pentax at higher ISOs. Real shame they clipped it at ISO12800, it could go 2-3 stops higher and still be usable.
Mr Birk: Wow, High res.... Wonder How Nokia could achieve 38 mpix without shift ;)
I doubt the bulk of those MPs actually yield useful info. That setup is probably beyond the diffraction limit wide open.
jukeboxjohnnie: I don't understand the market for this lens you choose a great brand like Canon or Nikon to enjoy the best optics or flash they produce and then go for a cheapo copy inferior accessory like this? I wouldn't have this for free....
Sounds like a brand insecurity problem. Who cares what brand it is if it works? You don't even know how the lens performs and are already writing it off out of pure fear. If some fly by night Chinese company can reproduce a Canon lens for 1/5th the price then Canon isn't as great as you thought.....
Lapkonium: Do photographers who use copied gear have a moral right to prevent copying of their work? I'd say no.
This is silly. So if I use a non-OEM battery or flash I'm giving up my copyrights? As if Canon invented the first 35mm lens.
sportyaccordy: They should make one for Sony FE! I would buy 6!!!!
The extra speed would be worth it to me. 35mm is my go to indoor/walkaround FL.
They should make one for Sony FE! I would buy 6!!!!
Can I buy one of these new sensors and slap em in an old body?