Started by Michael Erlewine, July 25, 2017, 01:19:52 am
Quote from: shadowblade on August 23, 2017, 11:40:25 pm5D2 was all sensor with poor frame rate, poor AF, single card, etc. It was the high-resolution body of its time - Nikon was stuck at 12MP. Good for non-action photography and not much else. The 5D3 added much better AF and frame rate and the sensor was no longer top-of-the-line. It was a general photographer's camera, not a studio/landscape body. The D800e had taken the 5D2's mantle, with 36MP but slow frame rate and mediocre AF. Canon didn't release a true successor - prioritising high resolution, without regard for frame rate or other action-related factors - until the 5Ds.
Quote from: shadowblade on August 23, 2017, 11:40:25 pmI never said the D850 wouldn't have as much DR at base ISO. I said there may not be an improvement at base ISO. Big difference. And that, if they had to choose between high DR at base ISO and keeping up with other action bodies at ISO 1600-6400, it would make more sense to prioritise the latter.
Quote from: shadowblade on August 23, 2017, 11:40:25 pmIt's not a successor because it's obviously aimed at a different subset of photographers. The D810 was not an action camera. It prioritised resolution and base-ISO DR, at the expense of almost everything else. Even the D750 outperforms it when shooting action or at mid-high ISO. The D850, on the other hand, does everything the 5D4, D750 and D500 do, and almost everything the D5 does, but better.
Quote from: shadowblade on August 23, 2017, 11:40:25 pmThere may be a successor to the D810 in the works, but the D850 is not it. It's much more like a beefed-up D750, or a D5 that traded some speed for double the resolution, than a replacement studio/landscape body designed for the highest possible resolution. Look at the specs, not the name.
Quote from: BernardLanguillier on August 24, 2017, 01:36:46 amI don't agree, Canon put their best sensor in the 5DIII, the fact that it was behind the competition is a different issue.The requirements for non action photography did not evolve significantly between the time the 5D2 was released and the 5D3 was released. In other words the 5D3 was at least as good as the 5D2 for non action subjects. The fact that it could do more things thanks to a better AF, did not change its positioning as a body able, to some extend and to the best of Canon's abilities, to handle landscape.
QuoteI also don't agree that the D800's AF was poor. It was at least as good as the AF of the 5D3, using the same module as the D4, which Canon wasn't doing (the 5DIV is the first mid range Canon DSLR to use the same AF as their flagship).
QuoteStaying at the same level as the D810 would put it equal to MF sensors. Are you saying that these aren't suitable for landscape work or that this is a compromise?
QuoteI have used extensively my D810 with my 400mm f2.8 on various moving subjects and it is doing a great job, not as good as a D5 obviously, but great in absolute terms. Again, you are trying to present a biased version of reality to try to make reality fit in your model...Again, this is just your view of things that isn't share by Nikon nor by a majority of the commentators reporting about the D850 announcement over the web. Seeing how you have to bend facts to fit into your mold, I don't believe that you have a correct view of things.My view is that the D850 is a successor of the D810, but Nikon may release a new D5x or a D900 that expands their range towards even higher levels of resolution.
Quote from: Rob C on August 24, 2017, 06:23:06 amSo was the speculation here worth the ink you didn't use? Is it ever? The sweat, the research, the rising temperatures? So that's what it means to be a fanboy, then; hey ho.
Quote from: kers on August 24, 2017, 08:55:32 amIf i understand correctly Nikon has made Liveview its EVF. ( focus peaking , silent shutter etc)What i do not understand is that they ( still) do not make a dedicated Loop that is attached with magnets.Now I have to start making my own again.I always end up with a camera that needs gaffa tape to work in a proper way.
Quote from: BernardLanguillier on August 24, 2017, 03:19:56 amMay I suggest that we re-focus on facts related to the new camera and keep our view of its positioning for ourselves?
Quote from: BartvanderWolf on August 24, 2017, 09:22:09 amI was wondering. We'll soon be able to derive the actual information from Raw files ourselves, but aren't Back-Side Illuminated (BSI) sensors better in Quantum Efficiency (QE) but somewhat worse in Dynamic Range (DR), compared to front side illuminated CMOS devices?In all leaked information, there seems to be no specific mention of DR. Maybe that means that it's the same as earlier models, but with the change to BSI, one would expect more information about that aspect (similar/different/better/worse).
Quote from: BernardLanguillier on August 24, 2017, 10:28:53 amSure... Nikon would take the risk to fake their sample images...Who knows, perhars they stole a Sony prototype camera to produce better samples than their own?Cheers,Bernard
Quote from: BernardLanguillier on August 24, 2017, 09:52:54 amWe'll know soon enough. To my eyes the ISO 64 full size jpg samples available on the Japan Nikon side seem incredibly clean.
Page created in 0.041 seconds with 14 queries.