Im excited to what these cameras can do... :D
Im excited to what these cameras can do... :D
Be interested to see the D800. Also be interested to see what Nikon are going to do with the D300 since alot of people have been saying the D7000 is actually overall better than the D300. Maybe a D400 in the works ?
when are they saying the d400 coming out?
Feb/March huh? Where did you get this info. I'd say we won't see a D800 release before August and it won't hit shelves until December.
Probably cause there was some rumour with book "How to take good pictures with D800" or similar blabla, that was supposed to hit stores in March. But, it was just a book and Im pretty sure they can hold release of that book until D800 will be in stores.
Ofc it can mean something.. but theres pretty high probability it wont. Personally, Im more interested in A77 or SD1. D800 is big unknown for now and Nikon isnt too much willing to share specs with us.
No press release, no specs, no pre-sale = not coming out for a while
I am looking forward to the 5D MkIII's RAW video capability.
Me to, but only if Canon begins capturing properly without skipping lines.
I want to see what's going to replace the D3s. Recently sold mine and I'm going to wait to see what the D4 specs are before deciding on picking up another D3s or new D4.
Keep waiting. You won't see a D4 until late 2012.
What I am really looking forward to is a lower-end full frame body, around the $1.3k range.
By lower end I mean slower burst rates as well as a lower viewfinder coverage, or even removing the video capability.
you're prolly right...im still hopingQuote:
Originally Posted by itznfb
yepQuote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
raw video ...you need so much ram to process that lol...Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
any links to this problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
d4? d3x just came out...its going to be a year or more before this happens..Quote:
Originally Posted by StickyRICE
1.3k for full frame? i doubt that this will happen..Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
Well, a 5d classic spec'd body works too.:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
the old 5d had focus issues...unless you do manual focus
You are looking for second-hand Sony A850 (or A900 if very lucky). Currently it costs around 2k, but I guess it can be bought for less.Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
AF system in 5D and 5DMK2 is identical. Just stick with that center AF point and everything is ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
Resolution test shows this pretty clearly:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22517
(Of course its worse than RED and any other high priced dedicated video camera, but its not much to expect that it should do better than cheap video cameras.
Also there is Moire issues, example:
http://vimeo.com/8990500
The canon 7D is even worse on for example Aliasing. Example from my camera (Video snap shot):
http://kirkedam.mine.nu/kwk/Diverse/...h02m43s246.jpg
Camera is set to neutral and with the lowest sharpness in the picture style. Removing this with a soft filter would turn the already slightly unsharp image to something even worse.
i heard differently...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mescalamba
wow very good read there..thanks:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
@ hondacity you mean the D3s just came out? D3x been out a while.
Np ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
It's dangerously interesting stuff btw, watch the time! ^^
I am waiting for the 5D MK III fo so which I may have save up money for it :)
Just to make this discussion more interesting. Lets try to answer the question why we want these new cameras (assuming speculations because they HAVE NOT released any specs yet) and why they are going to take our photography to the next level.
I recently bought a D700 and a couple lenses thinking the ISO performance would help indoor shooting without a flash. I found out that I prefer my flash. The full frame goodness was awesome for depth of field but not particularly important because I can always adjust in post processing. For me the lack of resolving power and its performance high points didn't match my needs. I'm not excited to see a D800. I like the 5D Mark III if it gets more megapixels but I don't own any Canon stuff so I dont see myself buying one. I also like really hardy weather sealing. I hope that improves in the new models.
The D7000 was a complete let down so I'm not really excited for any new releases. This is the first time I've been completely happy with what bodies I currently own. There is nothing I can't do with the D300s/D700 combo. Hopefully by the time I finish my basement and turn it into a studio the D4x will be out and I can get a less expensive D3x.
I like the way you think about cameras. As for the D7000, its supposed to be a D90 upgrade but most people would rather just buy the D90 and save money for a lens.
Lol, that's what I did with my D3s bought it used it for a trip to China, and then sold it and will probably buy it again when its couple grand cheaper.Quote:
Originally Posted by itznfb
What happened to it? What are the things which you don't like?Quote:
Originally Posted by itznfb
It's just not any better than what was already out. A couple more useless megapixels... less than a 1/3 stop better ISO over the D90. The people that claim it has better ISO performance than that drank too much koolaid. This was basically confirmed when the D7000 teardown took place and revealed it actually had the old Sony sensor and not the new Nikon sensors everyone expected.Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
And from the ones I've tried and the people I know that own them about 60-80% of the bodies are flawed in that the images rendered just aren't sharp at all. Example, we took several bodies set them up in a test scenario and one was able to produce sharp images while the others just could not. They weren't out of focus, they just couldn't produce a sharp image. There are a lot of complaints about this and the main reason people think the Body Only boxes were only available for sale for a few minutes and then pulled, and just became available again this week.
Bottom line is Nikon most likely had a success with marketing and sold tons but I don't know a single person going from D90 to D7000 or D300s/D300 to D7000 who is happy about their purchase. If buying today I'd get a D90 over a D7000. It just doesn't offer anything over the D90 worth the extra $400-$500.
That's just too bad. One of the things that was most hyped about was the ISO - up from 6400 to a whooping 25600. You also mentioned that it used the same exact sensor as the D90, but with more pixels jammed in there. I just can't imagine how the picture will look like in ISO 25600:shakes:
Some friends of mine even took the D7000 in place of their D300S. I just can't see the reason behind it. If you are talking about a D90-D7000 step up, that is a bit justified. But why D300/s "step-up?!"
Lucky for my uncle, he went from the D80 to the D7000, but returned it right away.
Yea I mean as long as the D7000 you're shooting with can produce sharp images then yea it's still a great camera. But the ISO performance is no where near where it was hyped. It's not the same sensor as the D90 but it is an old Sony sensory that has been around just as long. The D3100 however does have a new Nikon designed sensor. Yea I can't see anyone that knows how to use a D300s trading it for a D7000. They are in completely different leagues. I've been seeing new in box D90's going for close to $600. Even at $800 the D90 just blows away the D7000 in price/performance as well as consistent well established performance.
I just don't think this is going to be an exciting year for Nikon. 2nd half of the year maybe. The D800 and D4 won't be anything special either. Maybe a slight bump in ISO performance. Dual card slots for the D800 hopefully. They will only be 16-18mp not the 24mp people are hoping for. Some of the nice features of the D300s will make it into the D800. Really when you look at anything created since the D3 (3 years ago now) DSLR evolution has been rather stagnant. Something significant would have to change in the overall way the DSLR functions in order to really make waves and get real photographers excited. I see the same across most forums as well. Most lifer photographers who are also gear heads have shifted their focus from cool technology in bodies to hopeful improvements in lenses and accessories.
Even on the D700 which I had for about a week and a half, I can say I never got a "good" picture above ISO 6400. Anything above 800 I used noise reduction in post processing to make it acceptable. I would be willing to argue that some shots just cannot be taken well without flash or lighting. I commend Nikon for really pushing the ISO, but it just doesn't work for me.
It all depends on the conditions. Anything above ISO6400 on the on the D700 is software rendered sensitivity not physical sensor sensitivity. You're basically going to get noise and washed out color no matter what. At ISO6400 though you should be able to shoot without degradation given the right lighting and exposure. I shoot quite a bit at the zoo at ISO3200 just to get 1/1000+ action shots or just when it really low light like here, this shot is straight out of camera:Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
http://www.mgroberts.com/Nature/zoo/...00_mHXc6-M.jpg
In the larger version of the shot you can definitely see where the high ISO took a hit in the lower right side of the shot and especially in the shadows. If I had spent some time in post that could be cleaned up.
The only thing I'd like to see from new FX sensors is clean shadows at high ISO. I don't know if it's possible but it'd be nice to not have nice high ISO shots without blotchy noisy shadows.
I wonder.. why is D7000 not that good as K-5. Or K-5 isnt that good?
When I saw high-ISO samples from D7000, I wondered how it could be hyped for high ISO when its pretty much same as before. D700 is really much better..
Though, DxOmark compares it normalized to 8 mpix, thats probably where that "high ISO" came from.. quite logical that if SNR is decent, higher mpix downsized to 8 mpix will be better than 12 mpix. Though, 12 vs 16 mpix is in real life almost zero difference in size. Cause even 12 vs 24 mpix isnt 100% increase. 100% increase is 48 mpix..
Reminds me, that if Sony makes decent 24 mpix APS-C in A77, there should be some visible increase in quality (though I doubt bit about high ISO they claim).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mescalamba
That doesn't make sense to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by geek.com
I'm not camera tech-savy.. but will the 5D-MkIII do away with the stupid 4GB/~12min video footage limit? (oh & some kind of auto-focus during video shooting would be nice too! :D )
The 4GB limit all depends on if Canon is willing to switch from the FAT32 filesystem (I guess they could always split the video into 4GB chunks, but I don't know if there's enough I/O bandwidth to do that yet - maybe DIGIC V?...)Quote:
Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss
yeah I knew it had to do with FAT32.. dont see why they dont move away from it :shrug: :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Metric
I'd imagine they would but many of the >4GB filesystems are either proprietary (ExFAT) or not "easily" readable across all OS platforms - ext3/ext4 would be great if Windows properly supported it :(Quote:
Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss
I was going to suggest NTFS.. but then all the crapple users out there would whine & moan :rolleyes::mad: stuff 'em I say! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Metric
May just be that Canon doesn't hire the greatest group of programmers. I don't build cameras so I don't know how in depth that transition really is. But if the big guys aren't doing it, then you know its probably pretty difficult.
i'm waiting for 5d3!
...so the prices of 5d2 would drop a notch and i could upgrade in peace. :)
By the way, can someone explain to me what is a SLT(single-lens translucent) camera? What make it different from SLR (besides the obvious) and especially, the mirrorless interchangable lens cameras (such as the NEX series). What is the advantage and disadvantage between those cameras?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mescalamba
Mirrorless is just a point and shoot with a bigger sensor and interchangeable lenses. Translucent is a 1 way mirror that doesn't need to move out of the way in order for the image to hit the sensor.Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
Pro's: EVF good for overlays, framing, previewing post processing, FPS is super high, theoretically less wear
Con's: Not analogue.
Differences not really that important for most people. I prefer optical but its what I grew up on.
Its not that much different from SLR, just mirror is translucent (blocks around 30% of light, so its around 1/3 EV slower).Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
Advantage is, that it can use same AF system as regular dSLR, so it has very fast AF. Another is, that you dont need to flip up and down mirror, so it can shoot very fast (A55 has 10 FPS).
Disadvantage, well, it looses that mentioned 1/3 EV. It can sometimes show some ghosting (double lights usually). For now, its EVF only, so no OVF. Though, A77 is supposed to have hybrid OVF, which will be similar to one in Fuji X100.
Another disadvantage is, that heat from sensor and sensor stabilisation stays where it is, so A33/A55 tends to overheat when shooting video (it overheats faster when stabilisation is enabled). I guess Sony will eventually solve this in future model, anyaway A33/A55 are pioneer models, so no wonder it has some bugs. One more bug is viewfinder blacking out when you shoot 10 FPS. Its bit too much for that current EVF.
Yea and it can be slightly smaller, cause you dont need to have OVF and mirror doest need any moving mechanism. Not sure if being smaller is exactly advantage, definetly not for my hands.
Both A33/A55 are good cameras, with pretty fast AF, stabilisation in body and fast framrate. And EVF if you like that kind of stuff. If you want you can remove mirror and shoot in manual focus mode without worrying for ghosting. :)
feb13....
d700 prices droped to 2199.....
indicates.............new camera? :D
Or indicate that others are eating sales of Nikon. Sony is currently making quite a lot of trouble to others (not mentioning that its making sensor for D7000). K-5 is very tempting even for Nikon users. I think that its quite possible that theres nothing new incoming, just Nikon needs more money.
Though they should release something new, cause they are bit loosing face now.. D7000 is in shadow of competition, compacts generaly sux, nothing to fight m4/3s or NEX. It wont kill them, but something turning attention to Nikon would definetly help them.
yep differing perspectives..
k-5....we tried the pentax..their focus system is the worst.
yep mirrorless is interesting...they're selling good.. Nex is good but i think its still limited.
I own an E-P1. Its just a high end P&S. If I was going to buy again, I would spend my money on the new Fuji X100. Primarily because of looks and a larger sensor. The switch from APS-C to 4/3 is noticeable. I felt like I lost a lot of control with DoF and ISO. The mirror-less system is very very good as a second camera or a high end P&S but if you are willing to sacrifice size, there are some bridge cameras that are a lot nicer than the m4/3 camera offerings.
I've also heard that the Pentax k-x offers an extremely good image quality compared even to the high ends offered by Canon and Nikon. Some claims that the image quality is comparable to the full frames.
It is my opinion that the increase in sensor size vs image quality is a function of diminishing returns. There is a fantastical allure to full frame that leads people to believe that they need to buy full frame in order to have top notch image quality.
k-x.Quote:
Originally Posted by lkiller123
image stabilization issues...
focus tracking...
yep thats your opinion...Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
Yes, there are still such things as bad cameras...
FF DSLR cameras do deliver better image quality as far as technical aspects are concerned, ISO noise especially.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
I feel FF has some sort of buttery smooth degree to them which I can't fully explain, probably just my mind getting in the way.
Awaiting reasonably priced FF bridge cameras with EF mount :D
This however is not the bottleneck, the "idiot" behind the dials are ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
So true. It appears that there are a lot more of those than bad cameras.
I would also prefer if you all ready my post more carefully. I never said full frame was equal to or worse than APS-C. I was just explaining that there isn't a quantum leap between them that so many people think exists. I also argue that the price doesn't justify the purchase if you are looking for top notch pictures. I've taken outstanding pictures, with an Olympus E-3, which is a quarter of the size as full frame. All this goes back to what Kallenator just said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
i agree wit yah both...
but then again i can get these..so yeah
I will upgrade from the D5000 to the D800 when it comes out... Want a new nikon body to match my lenses bouffet.. Nice thread BTW
No can do without changing out your lenses. D800 will be FX format.
You don't what kind of lenses he has ;)
Modern FF cameras (current production) are better than APS-C. Maybe not in every aspect (AF in 5DMK2 is quite in/famous), but in final image quality, they are.
And probably they will continue in that, cause you simply can squeeze bit more of electronics and pixels on bigger sensor and in bigger body. In case of cameras, bigger is usually better.
But you can make great photos even with old film camera. :)
Wholeheartedly agreed. I don't have a spectacular camera, only a little P&S, but I think I take okay pictures.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
Not necessarily true. The D300s has higher image quality than the D700 at base ISO. The D300s/D90 have a nearly perfect pixel density and the sharpness capabilities are second to only the D3s/D3x. In available light I'll take my D300s over my D700 every time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mescalamba
Woot! Would you mind showing us? Just out of technical curiosity.
preferably shots from your 70-200mm. That lens is spectacular! I'm not looking forward to using the Sigma version for the SD1
Yea. I'll most likely be out shooting in the morning on Friday so I'll see if I can setup some test scenarios.
good point, then the new DX body should be the D400? the D300s sucesor with the new improved sensor and the full HD video capabilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
Yes the D400 should be the next APS-C professional body.
I'm betting 5D Mark II successor will be announced at March 1 press conference. So far Canon has released consumer lineup for 2011 but no Pro stuff.
D300s over D700? Huh.. want to see that. I saw lots of really good photos from D300s but never thought its that good..
I went to the zoo today but I didn't really get a chance to setup an actual test. There were too many people there and I had to leave early for a work issue. Plus it was too bright with many clouds so the light kept changing between shots... I might have taken a few that I could directly compare but I'll have to go through them later.
No rush, take it when the opportunity invites itself =)
A 5D3 and D800 release is good. Adds pressure to the prices of used 1Ds2s :D
Just found the Lumix DMC-L1 around the Internet; wonder why no one has done this yet.
Through the use of Porro Prism, you can achieve a small, rangefinder-style body without being forced to eliminate the optical viewfinder. This is awesome!
Its called the Leica M9. Look it up, love it, and then, as one reviewer put it quite nicely, "sell the baby to buy one" (look at price tag)
No, the M9 is a rangefinder, but the DMC-L1 is a legit SLR.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
Also, the M9 does not have a mirror viewfinder.
if someone wanted to send me one of these for a few weeks i would be more than happy to prove just what more megapixels will get you....
http://www.amazon.com/Phase-One-Came...8412335&sr=1-9
some stores aren't restocking d700s...
some even have them d700s on clearance...
:D
Canon has a press conference on March 1, Nikon is slowing down production. I have a feeling that we may see new cameras by the end of March.
I think the latest Nikon rumors are D800 around August. Not sure if they meant announcement or product release at that time. If product release then a March announcement would make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ke
I don't think D800 will be August. If Nikon announces in March, then their pro line drops in sales for 6 months. Typically camera guys announce and launch very quickly afterward. Nikon appears to have press conferences in April so I'd expect D800 in May.
a few more ...hours to go :D
Im not stayin up all night for press release but you folks in Germany can stay up all day! ;)
Press release was just a bunch of printers :(
Guess we gotta wait for more cameras.