Nikkor

Thanks, the lens was wide-open, you can notice this looking at the booked balls not showing aperture blades and spherical aberration making everything soft.
The other shots are medium format pentax 105 2.4mm

I only sort of like the nikkor 50 1.2 at night. I wish I had the money to buy the noct 58 1.2

Thanks, the lens was wide-open, you can notice this looking at the booked balls not showing aperture blades and spherical aberration making everything soft.
The other shots are medium format pentax 105 2.4mm

I only sort of like the nikkor 50 1.2 at night. I wish I had the money to buy the noct 58 1.2

Thanks, the lens was wide-open, you can notice this looking at the booked balls not showing aperture blades and spherical aberration making everything soft.
The other shots are medium format pentax 105 2.4mm

Thanks, the lens was wide-open, you can notice this looking at the booked balls not showing aperture blades and spherical aberration making everything soft.
The other shots are medium format pentax 105 2.4mm

Thanks, the lens was wide-open, you can notice this looking at the booked balls not showing aperture blades and spherical aberration making everything soft.
The other shots are medium format pentax 105 2.4mm

I only sort of like the nikkor 50 1.2 at night. I wish I had the money to buy the noct 58 1.2

I only sort of like the nikkor 50 1.2 at night. I wish I had the money to buy the noct 58 1.2

I only sort of like the nikkor 50 1.2 at night. I wish I had the money to buy the noct 58 1.2

And you didn't loose all your pictures because of the Single Card Slot 

@Nikkor I’d have to agree with @HockeyFan12 ‘s assessment. The 28mm f/2, even the SC version that I have is pretty nice and clean wide open. Whereas the 24mm f/2 is kinda funky wide open, as he said... similar to the 35mm 1.4. But both have a ton of character. I was surprised to find that the 24mm seems to have more Pop than the 28mm but I only messed with them side by side for a few minutes. I really need to do some further tests. I’m hoping the 35mm 1.4 I just bought is in as good of shape as the seller stated. And if that’s the case, I’ll probably sell the 28mm and go with the 24, 35 and eventually pick up an 85mm f/2 and maybe the 105mm 2.5 or 135mm f/2.
I think the imperfections in these lenses wide open are really part of their charm. A couple months ago I bought the Japanese market version of the 50mm 1.8 to replace my Series E and even though the Nikkor gets way better marks, I found the Nikkor to be too good and kinda boring looking.

Had a chance to get a few shots with the Canon 35mm f/2...


And here’s one from the Nikkor 24mm f/2 ai-s...

That last one could have used a little more diffusion on my Aputure M9 (awesome little light btw) but you can still get an idea of the characteristics of the lens wide open. 

If you were Sony, would you unleash all of this tech in the next A7s? I don't think so...

Hi yes I tried it and it works fine. although liveview is a bit crazy with the screen heavily stretched vertically. When corrected in post, the image comes out at an aspect ratio of 4.6:1 which isn't very useable. You can crop the sides off down to 2.35:1 ratio but then you loose quite a bit of resolution. I'll test it further though.
There's someone who stuck an anti-aliasing filter into their EF to EF-M adapter using sellotape, sounds like an interesting solution! I might try that one day!

My experience with my own log profile on the d800 was that you want underexpose /protect highlights and denoise after. The log profile will hold your detail in the shadow and the under exposure will give you nice highlights. 
Afterwards, instead of applying a S curve, try to just darken below midtowns. This way everything looks natural/cinematic.
External recording will protect the noise more.
 

I think it is your beta software, You have got this test between D750 and Z6 and surprisingly when you consider Dpreview lab test, the z6 is better than the D750. I don't doubt the test because the pink shadows is typical of the older Nikon camera and it has been better since the latest ones.
 

I don't have a 14bit screen either. 16bit raw is very nice, my Medium Format digital back 16bit files have lots of Info that come in handy to make Natural HDR 8bit Images 

My Friends over at arri told me they don't know you.

My Friends over at arri told me they don't know you.

My experience with my own log profile on the d800 was that you want underexpose /protect highlights and denoise after. The log profile will hold your detail in the shadow and the under exposure will give you nice highlights. 
Afterwards, instead of applying a S curve, try to just darken below midtowns. This way everything looks natural/cinematic.
External recording will protect the noise more.
 

Canon 24-70mm f/4 on the 5D Mark III. Processed through Resolve using its basic Rec709 conversion in the Raw Tab and then some curve adjustments...

Meanwhile at DPReview:

So much for free speech!
And their feedback section has plenty of concerns about the amount of sponsored content they have been running lately
https://***URL removed***/forums/5001
Which I criticised... Hence the ban on my links.
Are we living in China or the west?

Its very informative that Canon have a relationship with a site like that and then get their knickers in a twist with them about mention of Magic Lantern.
So they'll happily contribute to the creation of speculation and fake news about their own products in order to keep people on the hook but actively discourage the awareness of actual facts about enhancing ones you may already own.
Honestly, them having any sort of relationship with a rumour site is a pretty sad indictment of the way things are with regard to the chicanery of the camera business.
If you can't even trust the sites that are actually set up for making shit up to actually make that shit up in an unbiased way then he game has gone!