« on: September 12, 2014, 06:02:39 PM »
that 50MP sensor from sony was nice...but where is it!!!!
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
To support Thom's assertion that the D750 is two years too late: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html
you should update the title with "in korea"
This is the kind of camera that makes people change systems.
Maybe a little will change but not many.
some D700 and D300 users will feel this is not real replacement to them, 1/4000 top shutter speed and flash sync only 1/200, No AF-on button, body style.
This is more like D620, upgrade from D600/D610 to D750.
This camera will kill the sales of the newly announced D610, which killed the newly announced D600 few months earlier. It's a good competitor to the 6D though, and I hope Canon's 6D Mark II will have a real focusing system, not that desperate 1 cross type point one.
Sorry, that's totally false.
Go try it yourself. There are A7 / A7R test scene samples at multiple sites.QuoteFurthermore, if you need to upsample, starting with more data means the upsampling process is more accurate, as it has to fabricate LESS artificial data than s 24mp or 20mp or 18mp file.
That's true in so far as there's more real data (lpmm at a given MTF) to begin with.QuoteHang out on a print forum sometime. For all the bickering we do over pixels, they do 10 times more over paper quality, ink quality, dMax, L*, metamerism, bronzing, ink emulsions, etc. It matters to the people at the lab who do all the printing for...millions of people who order prints from labs.
Any of the current Epson Professional series printers/ink sets on a paper like Hot Press Bright...you're looking at the very top end of what can be laid down on paper today. I won't order laser photo paper prints (Frontier or Noritsu) when I can print or order Epson.QuoteYou yourself know it isn't just about looking at two images strait out of camera. The editing latitude differences matter as well, the response to things like NR or white balance or exposure changes that better data with richer information that gives us the ability to reduce noise more effectively with less effort, that all matters. Maybe not to everyone, maybe not even the majority (at the moment), but to a lot of people...to an increasing number of people, IMO.
There's not a significant difference between an A7 and an A7R in these respects.
I want a 50MP camera and the 55mm and 85mm Zeiss Otus as kit lenses.
And why not 50MP?
Some peeps who are serious about big prints will sure love a small camera with MF quality. They will pay the price for the best glass. The more options the better.
so they now have the world's best 85 and world's best 55. time for a wide angle otus? I really need to try one of these out. The Nikon/Canon mass produced 85's are ok but if the 55 was any indication, this lens will make them both looks like toys.I can't remember where I saw it, but supposedly they have said that a 35mm f/1.4 is the next Otus. I was hoping for a 24mm, but I'm sure it will be amazing.
Also, I'm I the only one wondering about 86mm filters...those aren't going to be cheap!
- price is about that of the 5D3 on special.
- similar number of AF points, suggesting similar AF capability
- more megapixels
- at least the same video, if not 4k
- similar fps rate (6.5 or
- it will be the Sony Exmor sensor, so clean shadows, good DR, etc.
- we can expect an oil or dust issue to be uncovered in the first 3 months after release, taking another 6 months to resolve and a D760 to be released next year.
This looks like the successor to the 5D2 that many of us expected but then Canon decided to plunder our wallets with 5D3 pricing.
scale up and sharpening isn't going to yield the same benefits than scaling down which is essentially going to oversample the bayer artifacts that plague digital. While what you did was basically create data which asn't there to begin with you also magnified the digital artifacts that degrade IQ. Then there is noise. Noise gets smaller and finer without detail killing algorithms when you downsize but larger and more bloated when you upsize.QuoteI would argue that 22 MP vs. 36 MP is negligible with any lens. You need a 50% or greater gain on each axis before it really becomes evident in print.having shot both, it isn't. But it depends on what you're doing. If you're web publishing at full HD or approximate, then yes.
I was printing samples to an Epson 3880, some crops scaled to appear as if they were being printed on a larger printer (i.e. up to 36" eq).
I'm open to evidence that with some scenes 22 or 24 vs. 36 has more of an impact in print. But when I tried it as long as I was working with RAWs and scaled the 24 MP file up to 36 MP with light sharpening, the impact in print was negligible. It's not that I could never see a difference, but I had to really be looking for it.
Well, first Nikon owners are not very proud of Nikon behaviour during the D600 dustgate .
Second, I observed more frequently Nikon camera for sale second hand than Canon (subjective as I have not counted them). I concluded that Canon owners were happier so keeping their camera longer.