sandro

Hi can you show samples at very high ISO?

So the rumor is that the sony a7s3 will have more MP then the non-S version? it doesn't make sense...

2 hours ago, jjj said:

Hi.  I rented a Z6 for this weekend.  It just arrived so I can't say much about it, but, I can speak to the performance of two Tamron lenses using the FTZ adapter.

1.  Tamron 15-30/2.8 (version 1) works fine in both stills and video.  AF works as expected.

2a.  Tamron 35/1.8 (version 1).  No AF in stills.  MF works fine, and the Z6 has a nice zoom button and peaking to allow precise manual focusing.

2b.  Tamron 35/1.8 (version 1).  Does not work in Video Mode, neither MF or AF.  The Z6 loses its mind in video mode.  The aperture jumps around willy/nilly and sometimes error messages pop up.  Pretty weird, since the 35/1.8 is fine using MF in stills.

 Thanks, just curious how much is the renting per day?

do we know already if the ztf adapter will work even for third party lenses like Tamrons for vr, aperture and focus?

20 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Thinner dies in the OLPF I'm guessing. Better s/n, less precise color discrimination. The A7III also does a lot of NR, so look at detail rendering between the two as well.

seems like the details is there, that's the thing

for video from your experiences what is the maximum ISO you would use? 

I remember the xt2 had nice grain up to 12800.

I saw a comparison between a73 and z6 and noticed the sony wins hands down in low light performance. I wonder what sony does differently considering they're both full frame and have the same MP.

is there a good low light comparison with other cameras?

2 hours ago, Henry Ciullo said:

today i did a bit of filming in city, all handheld with the 18-55. Nothing really artistic, just trying out the same scenes in varios modes (8 bit-10 bit , f-log, Eterna,DR200 vs DR400)

trouble now is editing the files, I don't have access to my main pc at moment, and my i7 laptop just can't play back files... you'll need to wait till sunday I guess before I can edit footage.

 

Buy the way, I did find out how to set 1/50 shutter speed, with rear dial... but I found it by testing, couldn't find it in the manual.

 

Is it a windows machine? if you have a i7 7xxx series you have hardware acceleration for playback, for 10 bit only with the 8xxx series.

13 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

The results showed it had a little more noise but there was more detail in the image and less color shift if any. 

If it has the same grainy look I'm ok with that... will have to wait for more comparisons!

15 hours ago, jonpais said:

There are already tests online and over at DPReview showing the difference in high ISO performance between the X-T2 and X-T3. Most seem to agree that the increase in performance outweighs the slight loss of low light ability if I remember correctly. Check out the DPReview video I posted above.

I will, do you own the x-t2? What do you think it's the maximum ISO you can go and still get an usable image?

Do we have any comparison for high ISO in video mode? Maybe to other cameras and the XT2 (to see how much of a "downgrade" that is looking at pictures)?

7 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

How does the rolling shutter, 10-bit, 4k60p, log profile and lens selection with the NX1 compare to the XT3? Are you really focusing on the 120p crop and not looking at the entire package? You can shoot 30 raw still images per second with the XT3 and 4k 10-bit internal with a true log profile, come on.

The NX1 was a nice camera, but the XT3 is a NX1 that goes to 11, with a much better ecosystem.

Chris

Isn't 4k60p cropped also?  I was just saying that I was expecting in 2018 to drop these freaking crop factors for >1.5k cameras that clearly shows they just can't handle the data.

So did you check the ISO?

Funny fact: no one (for the price) still can't match the NX1 processing power.

IBIS not there is bummer but God still cropping the sensor even for 1080p 120fps???

Did you see for pics the ISO performance is much worse than the x-t2?

fake "rumor" i guess

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

In theory the NX1 is the best here

H.265 is double the efficiency of H.264 and it cranks to 160Mbit reliably with the hack.

That is equivalent to 320Mbit/s IPB H.264.

It's a very stable image.

Yeah but the algorithm is different.

One word: LOL.

I wonder if those features (still) missing and crippling are because they're really not able to do it technically or is it the trend CanonSony started? = "since others won't innovate that much let's just do little to no upgrades as well so we can get all the money that we can with zero costs".

Did we get ourselves a new Canon/a6xxx?

The NX1 was amazing until the Samsung marketing department came in and decided to make the image look like their TVs = oversharpening, supercolors and "wow effect" as if this product was the for mass to be sold in stores by people who knew nothing about cameras.

You really seem to forget the horrible ISO performance, really horrible, looking like a handycam above 1600. 
Lenses for low light? Sure get the premium S lenses, used, and you can just trash them after you decide to switch system.
Need more low light? Sure buy the adapter for the price of a low end panasonic mirrorless, again that you will trash since it can't be used in the future.

It was an amazing product no doubt,  anyway let's not forget about its flaws for low light when others were way better already. And fixing those issue by giving away for money for a DEAD system is not something I would advise or feel good about it, honestly.

However if the NX2 was real........

On 16/2/2018 at 1:27 AM, لطفي بوعكاز said:

thanks I know about twixtor just haven't explored it further but how higher of a shutter do you have to be to get it right? at 30P my shutter is 60 in normal mode. 

Another new NX1 100% video footages, the night shots just 1 small LED light with ISO 400 the rest all natural lighting. 

 

Great, lenses used?

14 hours ago, jonpais said:

If cropping was the only issue, I’d have bought ten Fuji cameras by now.

Sorry, what else then?

13 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

I'm sure they would glady accept any profits that it would yield. I'm just saying with a company this scale and reach profiteering may not always we the direct catalyst. Keeping in mind there's several ways a company like Samsung could "profit". Clearly, Samsung can afford to play the long game. 

So why don't they?

I wonder how many years it would take other companies to remove those technical limits, Sony can't avoid overheating, Fuju can't avoid cropping...

20 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

I don't think Samsung will release an NX2, but I feel like some of you are getting stuck on looking at Samsung as if they're always doing something for profit, as if they need it. This could very well be another pet project with zero intention to recoup investment, just because they can. Even at Microsoft we did the same thing. I worked on a team of designers and we were developing MS's version to Apple's Carplay for about 2 years and a big wig came in one day and shut the whole thing down in a matter of minutes, it's how it is.

Samsung's 8 of 9 companies could go down and they'd still be insanely profitable. I think some of you are underestimating the scale and reach of the company. It's insane how huge they are.

Actually we're saying the same thing, that's why I used Google as an example. Basically they could just do it just because they can and they could destroy every company out there just for fun (on performance and tech, of course).

BUT if they did that in the past and left even while closing down factories... well my friend,  they are actually interested in profit.