Nikon D600 already shipping - 5 days after announcement

Nikon tends to stockpile a camera body before announcing it. This is part of the reason for so many leaks, since printers are printing manuals and other documents to stuff in the boxes, and someone always leaks information.
Actually, I think it works to Nikon's benefit, since they get free advance advertising, and interest builds up. If only they had good lenses for FF at reasonable prices. They had optimized many of their older FF lenses for crop as well as continuing to spend resources turning out new crop lenses such that they find themselves with fine FF cameras, but a limited selection of high quality FF lenses.
Its becoming pretty obvious that FF cameras are rapidly moving to mainstream for photo enthusiasts and they find themselves in a hole.
Upvote 0

Dynamic Range & Camera IQ

hjulenissen said:
ecka said:
I suggest you start reading more carefully. I never said that I care more about the cow than the milk. I care about both actually.
My initial critique was that you seemed to care most about per-pixel performance. That may be ok if you are an engineer. If you are a photographer, one would expect you to care more about the final image than the individual pixels.

Often the two will be correlated, sometimes they are not.
The thing is - if "cows" are fine then the "milk" is fine automatically, but not 'vice versa'.
If you care about milk, then it is the milk you should care about. The cows health may affect the quality of the milk, but other factors may as well. If the shop is leaving the milk for too long outside, it may be sour. No amount of checking of the cows well-being will reveal that the super-market has a lazy milk handler.

For your reference (removed irrelevant parts):
hjulenissen said:
ecka said:
...For me it's all about camera's per-pixel color reproduction performance.
I care about images, not pixels. People that obsess with per-pixel image quality seems to be less interested in images that I am.
Like I said earlier, a 3 MP camera might have fantastic per-pixel performance - and poor image quality. A 36 MP camera might have mediocre per-pixel performance and fantastic image quality. If you purchase a camera in order to obsess with 1:1 displays on your screen, then by all means use per-pixel quality as a guide. If you are interested in photography for the images, I suggest using images as a guide.

-h

3mp camera with fantastic per-pixel performance won't produce poor quality images. It will produce fantastic 3mp images. Why it is so hard to understand? :-\
If 36mp camera has mediocre per-pixel performance and fantastic image quality, then perhaps it means that you don't need 36mp for what you do. 20mp camera may be just as good and even better in term of high ISO, fps, file size, etc. Why do you need those useless, false, made-up bits of information?
Upvote 0

No compact 'standard' L zoom?

dhofmann said:
Brymills said:
Nothing interests me less than another average zoom lens that doesn't have a constant aperture..... :( If you're spending that much on a body, why compromise on a crappy lens?
Why would the lack of constant aperture make a lens crappy? Are the 100-400 and 70-300L lenses crappy?

I'll chime in here, I guess it's convenience when shooting with a constant (stopped down) aperture and need some light. I don't mind an aperture range from f/3.5-4.5. You can stop that down to f/5.6 for the entire range for instance and still have a reasonably wide aperture. I usually do the same with an f/4 lens. A short zoom that ends in f/5.6 is not fun when struggling for light as that would result in f/8 to or so to get optimum sharpness especially with a cheapie.

Of course this all assumes that you need to stop down some for best sharpness as is the case with most zoom lenses. and there are a very few exceptions.

I love my 100-400 but almost always use it with apertures stopped down to f/6.3 at least.
Upvote 0

Canon A2E

compupix said:
It's a lot of work:
1. selecting the worthwhile images
2. cleaning
3. scanning
4. touching up

Other than the scanning step, I don't see how that process is any different from digital photographs captured on a digital camera.

Oh, perhaps you forgot to include the biggest issue :P which is the developing, and the ~$10-$15 per roll it costs to purchase the film and develop it after. Probably more now with the increased prices of film.
Upvote 0

5Diii pink picture problem

EDIT: Nevermind, I figured out what happened. Sounds like the lighting was the issue and not the camera...so weird because I've NEVER seen it before...(but that's a relief)

original post below
_______________________

Played with a 5D3 in the store today and noticed something very weird...just wondering if 5D3 owners have run across this one:

Shooting in fluorescent lighting (what the store had), seemed to occur at higher ISOs (3200+) there was a weird yellowish cast across over part of the photo. It was usually across the bottom ~1/4 but it's occasionally in other parts of the photo as well. Very odd...was wondering if it was the white balance or something...even in RAW can't seem to fix the color cast since it's only in 1/4 to 1/3 of the pic... maybe it's isolated to the store model or something, but I've NEVER seen this before on either the T2i or my 60D (or any other camera I've shot with)
Upvote 0

Any update on 1DX / 5D3 AF point display?

Mt Spokane Photography said:
I would not call baseball stadiums and football stadiums as being horribly lit. They have reasonable lighting, unless the teams are playing in the dark.
The issue comes when literally using the camera in the dark with only extremely dim lights.
I have to agree. I think stadiums have reasonable lighting. The problem for me is when photographing weddings in the evening, sometimes by candle light or the equivalent. The AF point display is the only detail that I would like fixed on the 5D3, which is otherwise excellent for my work.
Upvote 0

60D actually doesn't need AFMA?

Act444 said:
Anyone know if this problem has been fixed (or how it performs on the newest bodies like the 5D3)? While contemplating my move to FF, I've been thinking about trading in 35 1.4 for the 50 to get equivalent FOV.

It's not really a problem to be fixed, except by a redesign of the lens with different priorities. The intentionally undercorrected spherical aberration that gives the lens its renowned, creamy bokeh is also responsible for the focus shift.
Upvote 0

Is there analogous 'cinestyle' flat settings for stills photography?

cayenne said:
Sorry noob question.
Can someone tell me what "HTP" and the "black frame subtraction" mean?

Thank you in advance,
cayenne


The answers are:

[quote author=jrista]
Highlight tone priority is a camera mode that internally fiddles with exposure to preserve as much detail as possible in the "highlight range" of tones...the brightest tones in a photograph. It does this, however, at the cost of tones in the shadow range, as the ultimate effect is a shift of the histogram down towards the shadows. The cost of shadow tones is a bit less than the gain in highlight tones, however it is something to be aware of.
[/quote]

[quote author=Wikipedia]
In digital photography, dark-frame subtraction is a way to minimize image noise for pictures taken with long exposure times. It takes advantage of the fact that a component of image noise, known as fixed-pattern noise, is the same from shot to shot: noise from the sensor, dead or hot pixels. It works by taking a picture with the shutter closed.
[/quote]
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
37,434
Messages
973,335
Members
24,792
Latest member
Rigel1959

Gallery statistics

Categories
1
Albums
29
Uploaded media
372
Embedded media
1
Comments
25
Disk usage
1 GB