KW Phua: From the improvement on D810, we can confirm that D800/E have certain defects by design. The improvement is actually the correction. Luckily, Nikon not using sensor stabiliser. The vibration caused by the shuttle will also vibrate the sensor. This is a good learning cure for all Camera manufacturers when designing hi MP camera. Too bad, we have to pay for their mistake.
The D800's mirror slap is waaay less than the D3's was. I was always fighting mirror shake with in the studio with my D3.
Nukunukoo: I don't get it. With or without an OLPF is a binary thing: you either have it or not. It's like saying a woman became "slightly" pregnant! So all this while that we have been hearing that the D800e has no OLPF, it actually has and the "effect" is created automagically? So does that mean that the D7100 without the OLPF will suddenly be like the D800e when the D7200 comes out? Kindly clarify.
OLPF's don't actually remove information (light, in this case), they spread it out slightly so its less likely to create moire. That's why the inverse method worked - it could refocus the light back to its original configuration, although there would be a slight margin of error surely.
Jim F: Excuse me folks, but could someone explain what a zebra stripe display option (mentioned in shooting video live view) is? Not sure I'm following this.
Highlights that are close to clipping are displayed with a zebra stripe pattern over them. Makes it easy to discern what is merely bright, and what is actually clipping.
Some cameras let you configure the level the stripe appears at so you can consistently set highlight brightness for things like faces.
JKP: Has enyone figured out, what specifically Nikon means when that say D800E has effects of AA filter 'canceled', while 810 has it entirely left out? What is the difference between the two cameras?
To keep the optical path the same length as the D800 (which had a low pass filter), the D800E needed to use a somewhat complicated system: https://www.nikonusa.com/en_INC/IMG/Images/Learn-Explore/Camera-Technology/D-SLR/2012/Moire-D800-D800E/Media/OLPF_schematic.pdf
If they had left it out of the D800E entirely it would have required a number of manufacturing line changes and different calibrations that would have made it cost prohibitive for the smaller run of D800E's.
Since the 810 is only offered in one configuration, there's no need for the complexity. The D800E does exhibit moire in some instances, which are correctable in post, but I'm thinking this new processor likely does some moire reduction on chip.
Dov Isaacs: Generally, US airlines allow 22"x14"x9" (or 45 linear inches for all three dimensions) for carry-on although on so-called regional aircraft, you often cannot fit something that large on-board and it much be checked at the gate (and returned at the gate when you disembark). That could be very problematic for sensitive and valuable equipment.
The problem is international where there are some airlines with very restrictive carry-on policies where the maximum dimension may be less than 22" (often 21" or 21.7") and with draconian weight restrictions (such as 8 to 10kg) which are very strictly enforced. This case by itself is about 5kg which doesn't leave much capacity for heavy cameras, lenses, and computer equipment.
Yep.. as nice as it would be to have the laptop in the same bag, if you carry a pro-sized camera (or one with a vertical grip attached) it makes for an outsized case that can stretch past 9" and hits weight limits easily. I keep the laptop in a separate shoulder bag to avoid problems.
TLD: It's a nice idea, and one I suspect was not to hard to code, but in real world terms it is not super useful, because the shallow DoF images the feature will work on already respond really well to Refine Edge. I think it will be a slight time saver though, and that is always welcome.
Call me sad, but I am like a kid on Christmas eve waiting for the full announcements on the 18th :-) (I have a full CC subscription)
If you look closely, Refine Edge is still used. This provides a quick way to knock out a complex background with differing shapes of light and color. Compare with Quick Select, where you'd have to do a lot of dragging the mouse around, and refinement especially if your subject has similar colors to part of the background.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Excuse me if I sound profoundly naïf, but isn't it much more fun to do with the lens? I mean, once you've mastered the technique?I do agree with the commenter below who deemed this as a 'bone-tosser'.
You're not understanding what this tool does. It makes a selection in Photoshop (more precisely, a mask) based on whether or not the area is "in focus".
To save time in Photoshop, a retoucher makes a selection based on how an area stands apart from the other pixels in an image. Contrasting lines, color ranges (for example, choose blue areas to select a sky) are just a couple of them. This adds focus to that toolbox.
So if you have a subject in front of a busy out of focus background, this will speed up the task of isolating that subject. Before, you'd might use the quick select tool, but would end up doing a lot of refinement to select just the subject and not bleed into the background, especially if they were of similar color in places.
Jogger: Im surprised this is just being developed now. The underlying algorithms are probably similar to focus peaking.. with the added step of creating the selection mask.
I've found the focus mask in C1 to be nearly useless, at all settings in the preferences. Perhaps it works better with some cameras than others.
Frank_BR: Ove Bengtson, Hasselblad Product Manager said: "… This CMOS sensor model represents a major leap forward in camera development and breaks new grounds for medium format photographers…"
It sounds almost ridiculous when someone says in 2014 that CMOS sensor is a "major leap forward in camera development". In 2000 the Canon D30 already had a CMOS sensor! That is, the sensor technology of medium format is lagged 14 years compared to other formats. The technology in the MF field develops so slowly that in 2028 Hasselblad (if it survives until then) will be bragging that its MF cameras can shoot 1080i video…
CCD has previous had the quality advantage and more dynamic range. In MF digital quality was always consideration #1 above all else. Recent generation CMOS narrowed this gap, but there was still the problem of making large CMOS chips - it was prohibitively expensive to mass produce.
The breakthrough here is in the chip fab lines and material science that increased the yields of large sensors enough that they can be priced at something the larger market will bear.
marike6: These updated 190 series look quite nice actually. I'm using a Benro CF Travel Angel now that is just great but I do occasionally miss the quick locks of my Manfrotto 3021 which are faster to set up than Gitzo style twist locks.
The only drawback of the 190 series is that most of them only supports 11 lbs considerably less than my current tripod.
The 055 series supports a little over 17 lbs. It's pretty much the 190 series beefed up a little, and thus a little more expensive. I wonder if this line is also being updated? I'm in the market for new legs and like these new locks.
VadymA: I was surprised to see how aged their equipment is; by the look it is probably from the 80's. No wonder they have to test every lens. Still koodos to Sigma for producing some nice lenses on such dated equipment.
These machines look plenty modern and in excellent condition.
Machine tool manufacturers produce in low volume and so re-use as much as they can from one generation to the next. The business end of things, the software controllers and actual tooling are where development takes place, while things like the outer casing and attachment points might be the same as it was 25 years ago because there's no need to spend an engineer's time on that.
Sad Joe: Well well, back in the early 1980's when I used to work in the camera trade (Tecno cameras) Paul Bird & I discussed the possibility of camera shutters being produced from LCD panels - so they could be switched on and off REALLY quickly - well 30 years later we have a sort of shutter arrangement via LCD - of course back then AA filters, sensors and digital were totally unknown...every idea has its day......
Sinar has had something like that for awhile now for technical cameras. About a decade ago I worked with a Sinar digital back that used an LCD shutter to allow an early form of live view.
TakePictures: What you see a lot on photo sites like dpreview are endless sequences of beautifully shot clichés (birds, bees, flowers, cats, grainy B&W portraits with shallow DOF, gloomy street shots, overprocessed HDR shots, oversaturated landscapes, etc.). I don't see too many clichés in this gallery. I guess that's the difference...
(By the way, I'm a cliché photographer myself and my greatest ambition is to shoot something more inspiring. Long way to go.)
You've got it. This isn't a competition in the typical sense of the word, but rather meant to put the spotlight on artists who are making an impact on the "higher" end of photography.
In that world, which is miles from dpreview, cliches and pretty pictures hold no cachet. Anyone can learn to make a pretty picture. It is instead about concepts and work that may be of interest to professional editors, advertising producers and gallerists.
I am an ad and editorial photographer with a number of national titles and brand campaigns. Photography has earned me a pleasant living - but I started out shooting cliches and pretty pictures too. Broaden your horizons and keep on working. Keep it interesting.
Anyone know why only 64 bit version is available?thanks
Software maintenance on legacy hardware has an overhead cost. A 32 bit computer is an old computer. 64 bit has been common for several years now.
AbrasiveReducer: Honestly, I hope it's great and sells for $49. But another thing to bear in mind is that because everything in a TS lens is adjustable, there won't be any profiles for correcting barrel, or other distortion. In other words, there won't be any auto corrections in Lightroom, Photoshop or even DxO (because everything is dependent on how the lens is adjusted). This is a problem even with Nikon and Canon PC/TS lenses, if you need everything to look straight and square.
Pt lens has a method for correcting distortion with PC lenses. I have found in real world practice that the general unshifted profile actually works quite well even with shift, at least on my Nikon 24 and 45mm.
photogalleryonline: T2.9 is that like F1.4 or f2.8 or f4, does anyone have a chart for comparing T stop to F stop?
F-stop relates to the maximum aperture, but t-stop relates to the amount of light transmitted by the lens. This is important in filmmaking because the same scene may be filmed with different lenses, and some lenses will absorb or transmit more light, thus those parts of the scene will appear brighter or darker if they were not calibrated in t-stops.
So the idea is two T2.9 lenses will transmit the same amount of light. Due to light absorption, it might naturally be 2.86 or 2.81 etc. It is of course easier to make a lens darker than brighter, so its customary to take a F/2.8 design, and add coatings until it is T2.9.
I've been a long time adobe customer and their monopolistic behavior has led to terrible customer service and absurd pricing schemes. It was a fiasco updating to 5.5, for which I paid considerably more for the upgrade than the one previously. Their CS also ignores complaints, or takes days to send pithy responses.
Frankly, the best way to hit Adobe in the wallet is the pirates. It takes an extra 5 minutes to install a well-tested trusted-source pirate version with easy step-by-step directions (and even youtube demonstration videos). And the pirates have better 'customer service' to boot!
I'd gladly keep paying Adobe, but only if the gouging ceased. And I was a customer of theirs for over a decade. But for now, I'll take the friendly pirate who likes sticking it to Adobe.
aarif: A mirrorless FF with a tweaked D3s sensor and a reliable AF system would be great news for me, not the 2.7 crop
35mm chip costs ~20 times an APS-C sensor to produce. The yields are far lower because wafer defects increase with the square of the area. There are also more processing steps in the photolithography stage of production. Replacement cost if you damage one is on the order of $1500 typically, so the part price is likely around $1200.
Brian Lund: Why the tripod mount? No tripod thread on the MFT cameras!?!
If it's for the long lenses it won't help since you still risk bending the mount, but instead of the camera it's now the adapter you ruin... I guess that's cheaper than ruining the camera though!
Most really long/heavy lenses do come with a tripod collar though.
The tripod mount helps with stabilizing the camera setup on the tripod. Yes, these cameras have 1/4-20 on their body, but even a relatively small 35mm lens makes them tip & bobble forward a bit with its added weight.
if you've ever mounted a heavy collar-less 35mm lens on a small body (like nikon's 28-70), the sagging effect is noticeable.
love_them_all: Canikon missed the opportunity to launch a new APS-c ml system before Sony and samsung. If they are serious on this market they should offer a least an FF ver for m lenses owners. The beauty of ml is the mount loyalty can be cross platform. I'm a nex owner but would not need to think twice to get a FF ml body if it is under $2-2.5k, depending on features. On the other hand if they are going to go small they should consider a 4x crop or so, laying the grounds for a format with super reach.
It makes the most practical sense to use an APS-C sensor and put it right up against the lens flange to keep the shape compact.
One reason I see that canikon would wait and see is that removing the mirror box and putting the sensor close to the lens flange requires a redesign of lenses - so they would be introducing a third lens line in addition to DX and regular 35mm. I bet on launch there is a small zoom and a pancake wide angle available.
I have an NEX-5 with a nikon adapter and all the adapter is (besides providing an F-mount) is a tube that is the same size as a Nikon mirror box, providing the necessary gap to allow full focus to infinity.