Zv said:
Actual user experience reviews are more reliable anyway and that is what ultimately affects a company's reputation. No offense to DPR or what not, they're just doing their job of reporting what they see (the specs), and Canon specs never really look that impressive to begin with.
Nikon tend to embellish a bit don't they, I mean come on 3million ISO? Give us a break!
I really hope that 'just reporting specs' isn't what you actually think we do. Much the opposite. ISO 3 million didn't move us like it did some others; in fact, I didn't even mention it in my D5/D500 piece. ISO performance isn't defined by your upper ISO limit; it's dependent on sensor size, efficiency, and upstream read noise.
We try to prioritize reporting things that lead to marked improvements for actual photography, typically based on our tests and understanding. That's why we emphasized the RGB metering sensor resolution increase - because we know it works wonders for subject tracking in Nikons. That's why we emphasized the 80D's dual-pixel AF implementation - because it's the first time we're seeing the real potential for DPAF due to its implementation in Servo (not just for bursts, but more generally for moving subjects). That's why we reported on and showed the new Sigma adapter's ability to offer all AF-C modes on the a7R II with Sigma lenses - something not only everyone missed, but Sigma themselves didn't even claim. I.e. we try to dig deeper beyond simply spec.
We could do better though, and we'll constantly try. This year we'll try our best to shoot as many real-world side-by-sides for these pro-level cameras as possible. Particularly sports, and use-cases emulating wedding/event photography, hopefully.
To answer unfocused question: we haven't had a chance to try automated fine tune yet. My understanding from talking to Nikon, though, is that you can just set the camera somewhere (it has to be still) in Live View, and let it do its thing. Meaning you should be able to fine tune on-the-spot wherever you are. This is important, as I've seen the optimal value change sometimes based on lighting, temperature, phase of the moon, alignment of the stars... OK kidding on the last two
There's another thing we'd ideally test - how robust AF modules of different cameras are. I have a feeling some cameras vary less from day-to-day, and I particularly notice this because I shoot fast primes often. I have a hunch that Canon's long baseline F2.8 center points are phenomenal for a DSLR, e.g., and I'm looking into a way of showing this and comparing it vs. other bodies/lenses (it's lens dependent, it appears). It'd be interesting to get an idea of precision of all AF points in a particular body/lens combo, then compare to others. It's extremely cumbersome though.
Anyway, it's a great year for cameras - owners of every brand have a lot to look forward to.
