Why still no Nikon D850's

[Jim Kasson]

you'd _NOT_ = as Jim Kasson shows @ http://blog.kasson.com/a7riii/better-d850-autofocus-accuracy-presentations/



unless you focus manually using live view on LCD.

I am quite happy with my D850. There are some lenses with which the AF has some untoward variability in some modes with some lenses. It doesn't correct for focus shift, at least in any consistent way. There are ways to get excellent AF results out of the camera, by the standards of DSLR PDAF AF. Of course, no such system is going to have the accuracy of on-sensor PDAF-with-a-CDAF-tweak AF systems, or of using CDAF under live view on a DSLR.

Jim

[DP]

There are ways to get excellent AF results out of the camera, by the standards of DSLR PDAF AF.

indeed ... by them, dSLR stardards

[Jim Kasson]

indeed ... by them, dSLR stardards

This isn't bad at all, especially the 135/1.8:

[DP]

This isn't bad at all, especially the 135/1.8:

every rule has an exception  ... plus the amount of work to find out how your combo of camera with its PDAF module vs sensor alignment works with your lens (w/ its specifics) simply begs the questions - why'd Nikon design today's lenses with focus shift and why 'd it not use focus shift compensation in D850 (with more of smaller sensels than D5)...

[Jim Kasson]

every rule has an exception  ... plus the amount of work to find out how your combo of camera with its PDAF module vs sensor alignment works with your lens (w/ its specifics) simply begs the questions - why'd Nikon design today's lenses with focus shift and why 'd it not use focus shift compensation in D850 (with more of smaller sensels than D5)...

With finder-based wide-open SLR-style shooting, the only way that I know of to compensate for focus shift is with LUTs, and, since in general focus shift is distance sensitive, the population of the LUTs can be a lot of work. I know of very few f/1.4 lenses that don't exhibit focus shift in the first place. The is an issue that's been with us a long time, and probably won't go away completely until SLRs use on-chip focus trimming.

To say an SLR is a bad camera (and maybe I'm misinterpreting the thrust of your remarks) because it doesn't do some things as well as mirrorless is, IMO, going too far. It's like criticizing a horse for not being a cow.

Of course, I love the accuracy of ML/LV AF, and use it whenever I can on my GFX, a7RIII, and D850.

Jim

[BAB]

Doug
Have you tried lumenzia? It would eliminate all of the halos between sky and rocks in your images.

[DP]

To say an SLR is a bad camera

of course it is ... alignment (focusing screen - mirror & submirror - PDAF module - sensor) issues, mirror shock, oil spattering, shutter shock (now EFCS in OVF shooting for unknown reasons) and so on...

[kers]

of course it is ... alignment (focusing screen - mirror & submirror - PDAF module - sensor) issues, mirror shock, oil spattering, shutter shock (now EFCS in OVF shooting for unknown reasons) and so on...

Not to mention, while making great photographs

My observation of the d850 tells me shuttershock or whatever-shock is a non issue, also without using the electronic shutter/ first curtain...

[BernardLanguillier]

of course it is ... alignment (focusing screen - mirror & submirror - PDAF module - sensor) issues, mirror shock, oil spattering, shutter shock (now EFCS in OVF shooting for unknown reasons) and so on...

Interesting how D850 users are all super happy about the performance of their camera, including its AF that remains the second best after the D5, while people not owning one appear to know better it just cannot work. 

Cheers,
Bernard

[DP]

Interesting how D850 users are all super happy about the performance of their camera

usually they don't know better ...

, including its AF that remains the second best after the D5

by that you of course mean for erratically moving targets only ... and not @ 1.4 either mind you

[DP]

Not to mention, while making great photographs

great photographs are orthogonal to the gear...

My observation of the d850 tells me shuttershock

get analog oscilloscope ... and shoot it's beam drawing a strait line (I bet JKasson did).

[BernardLanguillier]

usually they don't know better ...

You have absolutely no ground for stating this.

Cheers,
Bernard

[armand]

What DP is saying is provocative BS and I hope he’s aware of it otherwise he has issues.
Apparently he has a love relationship with mirrorless, m43 in particular maybe and definitely not Fuji despite it being mirrorless, and he cannot see clearly anymore. While mirrorless will be the future currently they all have various issues and are not there yet.

[kers]

get analog oscilloscope ... and shoot it's beam drawing a strait line (I bet JKasson did).

Of course it can be measured and it will turn out so low that you do not have any problems in real life.
At least that is my observation using it for 4 months and also testing it for any shuttershock problem.

[Jim Kasson]

of course it is ... alignment (focusing screen - mirror & submirror - PDAF module - sensor) issues, mirror shock, oil spattering, shutter shock (now EFCS in OVF shooting for unknown reasons) and so on...

The combined effects of the first mechanical curtain and the mirror are moderate in the D850 -- these effects exist to a greater or lesser degree in all DSLRs:



Details here:

http://blog.kasson.com/d850/nikon-d850-mirror-shock-with-otus-851-4/

Jim

[DP]

The combined effects of the first mechanical curtain and the mirror are moderate in the D850

that was on a tripod... how about hand hold it and plot vs the range of exposure times ... A7R3 with IBIS & EFCS vs D850 w/o IBIS and w/o EFCS 

[Jim Kasson]

that was on a tripod... how about hand hold it and plot vs the range of exposure times ... A7R3 with IBIS & EFCS vs D850 w/o IBIS and w/o EFCS 

I've found that it's very difficult to make handheld tests repeatable, and the required sample size is burdensome. However, I'd be interested in seeing your results.

Jim