Nikon D850 vs everything

[Michael1 35]

DP Review just put up their 4K sample video.  Looks beautiful to me.  Great colors.  Sharp image.  Good shadow detail.  No moire that I could find.  Impressive.

 

[hansel 60]

@Andrew Reid I would be super interested how this beast is working with old glass? I have heard a lot that high res cameras need "new" glass to make use of the resolving power but it would be great to have a kind of A-B comparison of that. Body wise  the d850 is ticking all the boxes for me but I think it is a bit of resolution overload. No idea what lenses you have that fit the F mount but if you fancy it I can let you have a play with my old 28. 2.8 AIS, 50 1.2 AI and 85 1.4 Af-d...

[Mattias Burling 3,000]

45 minutes ago, hansel said:

@Andrew Reid  I have heard a lot that high res cameras need "new" glass to make use of the resolving power

That's just Nikon trying to sell you modern lenses.

[Andrew Reid 10,315]

You notice lens shortcomings more in 4K but character is more important anyway.

[Liam 439]

if you're talking about resolution in video, you can get the idea based on your experiences shooting photos with vintage glass (so, probably fine)

[Michael1 35]

I think a lot more has been made of replacing glass because of the higher resolution sensor than needs to be.  The D500 has the same pixel density as the D850, but I don't hear the same arguments.  In general, a higher resolution sensor will make any glass look sharper.  You can see that by looking at DXOmark tests.  Higher quality glass will just look even better.

[Mattias Burling 3,000]

To bad dxo marks haw zero to do with image quality and how nice the sharpness is.

[Michael1 35]

23 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

To bad dxo marks haw zero to do with image quality and how nice the sharpness is.

What objective measure are you basing this on?

[Mattias Burling 3,000]

Image quality and sharpness is subjective. You can't measure and say camera x did better than y. Its just your personal feelings.

[maxotics 442]

8 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Image quality and sharpness is subjective. You can't measure and say camera x did better than y. Its just your personal feelings.

My personal feeling is sharpness is objective

[Mattias Burling 3,000]

Since you have no power over what type of sharpness I like that statement becomes false.

[Michael1 35]

12 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Image quality and sharpness is subjective. You can't measure and say camera x did better than y. Its just your personal feelings.

Yes, sharpness absolutely can be quantified.  Image quality is a vague term that doesn't really mean anything from person to person.

[Don Kotlos 912]

Anything can be quantified, all it comes down to is a common definition. 

Sharpness = Acutance + Resolution 

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sharpness.htm

[Mattias Burling 3,000]

51 minutes ago, Michael1 said:

Yes, sharpness absolutely can be quantified.  Image quality is a vague term that doesn't really mean anything from person to person.

You didn't read my post, I said "nice sharpness"

So no, iq is not measurable. Not even sharpness.

[Michael1 35]

On 10/27/2017 at 10:52 AM, Don Kotlos said:

Anything can be quantified, all it comes down to is a common definition. 

Sharpness = Acutance + Resolution 

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sharpness.htm

Nice article.

On 10/27/2017 at 11:15 AM, Mattias Burling said:

You didn't read my post, I said "nice sharpness"

So no, iq is not measurable. Not even sharpness.

OK, I see what you are talking about now.

[A Y 13]

I'm curious if anyone has been cross-cutting Nikon footage shot in flat profile and Panasonic Cine-D footage. I've been using the D500, D810, and G85, and will soon add a D850 to the mix, and while the Nikons are relatively easy to match (they're not identical despite using the same manual WB and profile settings), I've had a really hard time getting the G85 footage to match. The G85 is nice because it's small and can be flown easily on a gimbal, but still has great image quality.

[hansel 60]

@Andrew Reidburning to hear if you still got the d850 and if yes how is it going for you? I would love to hear what 120fps and "dual" IS (digital and VR) is doing for you. ALSO, would die to see a sick video done with it like you did with the NX1 in Portugal. 

[Daniel Morrow 0]

I've been using the Nikon D850 for a while now, you don't have to leave live view mode to change the resolution or frame rate. Was this something that was included in an update and that's why it wasn't there when you reviewed it?

[Matthew Capowski 2]

What is the approximate maximum dynamic range of the D850 video? What existing camera is it comparable to dynamic range wise? 

[webrunner5 2,464]

8 hours ago, Matthew Capowski said:

What is the approximate maximum dynamic range of the D850 video? What existing camera is it comparable to dynamic range wise? 

Well since it is probably using the same sensor as the Sony A7r mk III, whatever that is is probably a little less on the Nikon D850. Probably around 12.0 stops video wise which is damn good. They are probably claiming more but it really isn't. Nikon's FLog is more like Sony Cine 4 than like SLog 2 or SLog 3. And even SLog 3 on a A7r mk III isn't really doing in reality more than 13 stops I think. You have to be doing 12 bit Raw to get any higher than that. Sony might claim 15 stops but that is bullshit. A Red in 14 bit Raw is lucky to pull that much. That is Arri territory.

His results for photo always seem low but at least they are consistent, and truth be told maybe really right!

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M10,Nikon D850