Michael1 35 Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 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. mercer 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hansel 60 Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 @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... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Super Members Mattias Burling 3,000 Posted October 25, 2017 Super Members Share Posted October 25, 2017 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. TwoScoops and webrunner5 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Administrators Andrew Reid 10,315 Posted October 25, 2017 Author Administrators Share Posted October 25, 2017 You notice lens shortcomings more in 4K but character is more important anyway. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Liam 439 Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 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) hansel 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Michael1 35 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 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. IronFilm 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Super Members Mattias Burling 3,000 Posted October 26, 2017 Super Members Share Posted October 26, 2017 To bad dxo marks haw zero to do with image quality and how nice the sharpness is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Michael1 35 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Super Members Mattias Burling 3,000 Posted October 27, 2017 Super Members Share Posted October 27, 2017 Image quality and sharpness is subjective. You can't measure and say camera x did better than y. Its just your personal feelings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
maxotics 442 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 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 ssrdd 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Super Members Mattias Burling 3,000 Posted October 27, 2017 Super Members Share Posted October 27, 2017 Since you have no power over what type of sharpness I like that statement becomes false. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Michael1 35 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 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. ssrdd 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Kotlos 912 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Anything can be quantified, all it comes down to is a common definition. Sharpness = Acutance + Resolution http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sharpness.htm kaylee and maxotics 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Super Members Mattias Burling 3,000 Posted October 27, 2017 Super Members Share Posted October 27, 2017 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Michael1 35 Posted November 2, 2017 Share Posted November 2, 2017 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
A Y 13 Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 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. jonpais 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hansel 60 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 @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. Adept 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Morrow 0 Posted December 17, 2017 Share Posted December 17, 2017 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Matthew Capowski 2 Posted May 29, 2018 Share Posted May 29, 2018 What is the approximate maximum dynamic range of the D850 video? What existing camera is it comparable to dynamic range wise? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
webrunner5 2,464 Posted May 30, 2018 Share Posted May 30, 2018 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 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.