leeys

You know, Nikon's PR company is inviting me to an event next month. Surely it's not for the D810, because an event three weeks past the announcement for a camera that's just an update is just...

Raw. Dxomark measures sensor data before demosaicing. I think you'll find examples online where the A7R is *slightly* worse.

Possibly due different algorithms? I find the A7R images slightly worse than the D800's.

Of course faster is always better. Just a matter of how much. I think the integrated GPU difference is not as much as the difference between the dual and quad core difference. Just make sure your programs are multi-threaded (I don't use a Mac, so have no idea how FCPX performs).

Focal lengths are focal lengths. The sensor size they cover is independent of that. EDIT: To be clear - always calculate based on the focal length. To base FoV equivalent calculation on the projected image circle is like saying a pound of feathers is lighter than a pound of iron.

Purely from a stills perspective: 1. Nikon has a proper lens lineup, with a much better AF system. 2. Nikon 14 bit RAW loseless vs some weird semi-lossy RAW format Sony uses 3. Much better ergonomics on the Nikon.

Well, thanks for the info. Things to consider when upgrading the computer some time next year.

Doomed. Isn't Resolve OpenCL enabled? The R9 290X is pretty much a high-end card.

First up, I want to ask: How is autofocus with this thing? Because it might be useful for stills here. This might be tricky, because 95% of Nikon lenses require a mechanical arm to move the aperture (iris). There's a reason why the Nikon 1 adapter is more expensive than the Canon EF-M adapter. My guess is that without Nikon helping them out, reverse engineering a fully electronic Speed Booster is going to be harder than the Canon one. There is the Olympus 12mm f/2 you can use for the latter. I just want longer lenses with IS. Its compelling for that reason. Don't forget that you need the adapter to work with G lenses if you're going to use the newer Nikkors!

Aha, so that last post was sort of a setup for this. Nice idea. Looking forward to it.

I doubt it's Western either - give the Chinese half a chance and you'll see something similar, if not worse! It's just... capitalism. And human greed.

Do this first. Panasonic's colour processing by default is very neutral, especially at Natural. Canon, especially for their consumer grade cameras, tend to jack up the contrast levels and mid-tone saturation levels by quite a bit. I still remember the time I had with a 6D... I didn't know my home was *that* colourful!

I think if you can, you're well on your way to building GIANT DEATH ROBOTS

Not until there's a hack to to disable the EU limit. I am assuming you're from the EU!

They definitely can. They took a look at their projected income and said, "fuck this". What they're not, are corporate sympathisers. That's true, and also depressing. Sometimes makes me want to give it all up. -_-

Oh yes. That is simple yet great. Do you think most musicians will be happy with that though?

I have to say, you're quite right on this. Many consumers love the skin tones from the Canons. This extends to the stills as well, so a lot of wedding photographers use the 5D series cameras.

Ok, so I downloaded RawTherarpee and managed to get the RAWs working. Better than the JPEGs, so certainly looks good. Definitely not super duper THREE STOPS ZOMG good though. And seriously, some of the posts I see here...

This is pretty much how most sensors tweaked for high ISO respond. Average low ISO DR but fantastic high ISO DR. I am pretty sure that the 15 stop claim is not possible unless Sony had some breakthrough in sensor tech, which doesn't seem to be present. As I mentioned, the JPEGs are fantastic. No one has any public tools available right now to decode the raw files though. I'd love to see what they're like.

I have A7S sample images that I personally took. While I forget to set some settings (notably AF), my impression from the JPEGs is that I'm going to side with Andrew here. It's simply not that clean. I might try some video another day.

Really, given state of the art sensors, the difference between a GH4 and a A7S should be theoretically 2 stops. I guess it shows the GF3 being quite a bit further behind!

Looks good. Can't wait to see how it performs. For video I doubt that it has an equal that, but stills-wise Sony has disappointed when placed next to similar Nikons.

Oh, and that 14mm has been discontinued, with the 14-24 taking its place. I never shot with it, but it's not a very highly regarded lens.

These tests are pretty good, but you must understand them, and never ever look at the summary alone. For one thing DxO judges based on 8MP images, which when downsizing might affect the final image quality. I do like what the D800 sensor can do. It's an amazing sensor. Actually, even the 24MP APS-C sensors are quite amazing too. It's really Canon that has dropped the ball here. As I was saying - look at the entire suite of measurements across all ISOs. It's actually not that straightforward some times. eg. a D4 has worse dynamic range than a D800 at first glance, but at high ISOs it easily pulls away, making it such a great high ISO camera. The tone curve plays a part too, so some settings let you eke out a bit more. The main thing here is that with raw you get a lot of data that you can post process with. Not so with baked images/video.

I'm astounded. How can you absolutely know for sure? I've been using cameras for 20 years, and reviewing them for the past few, and I'd *never* make assumptions like these until I actually have spent some time with either the camera, or a substantial number of sample files. Also, don't be surprised if the sensors are the same.