Nothing in those specs is outlandish at all, easily achievable if they have the will. 20fps @ 46MP gee that sounds familiar. Dual CFExpress, gee that sounds familiar, 8K30p gee that sounds familiar.
Industry News: The first Nikon Z 9 specifications
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
More cameras that would produce great photos if only you cold get them to focus reliably..
Huh? What on earth is that to do with the mark 2 cameras? In my shots on the Z6 that are all wildlife I have never had so many sharp in perfect focus shots before. Only about 100 out of 18000 has missed focus. I am usually struggling to pick what pose of the wee critter I want to keep.
The Nikon Z only lack the CPU grunt to make the fancy eye af and tracking box modes reliable in the real world and that’s what the mark 2 seem to be addressing. All the traditional af modes are fast and reliable and get the shot.
I don't think Bert is complaining in general about the AF of the first generation mirrorless from Nikon and Canon - they are great for static shots or easy birds in flight. He, unlike you, is a bird photographer, and they are not great for more demanding bird action photography - good DSLRs beat them hands down for flight photography. The new R5 is a real breakthrough. It's competing with the Nikon D500 and D850 for the action shots and is great for finding and tracking small animals and birds running around on the ground. As you imply, the extra grunt from a second or newer processor will make them fine for BIF or insects in flight.
Say they can get 2.5Gb in with out heat and power issues, is the disk system in this camera fast enough to feed 2.5Gb?2.5 Gb has worked its way down as a good compromise. It doesn't need the massive head spreaders anymore and even the 10Gb in my Mac mini canny be all that big. I think we will see 2.5 Gb sooner than later, it is good enough and doesn't require recabling.
2.5 Gigabit Ethernet PCI-e x1 Network Card
SD-PEX24065,ethernet card; 2.5 gigabit ethernet; 2.5gb switch; 2.5gbe switch; ethernet adapter; gigabit ethernet; 2.5gb ethernet; 2.5gb ethernet card; 2.5 gigabit ethernet card; 2.5gb network card; 2.5gbe; 2.5gb nic; 2.5 gigabit switch; gigabit ethernet cwww.sybausa.com
Aye, CF Express read is 1700 MB/s so it'll be a long time before that is the bottle neck on a system that can only transfer 2500 Mbps. The controller may be the limiter they're in read speed.
1700 MB/s is 13,600 Mb/s and ethernet is 2500 Mb/s. The only way to offload the data at full speed would be to install a TB3 port and tether via some TB3 fibre cable... that'll cost more than every piece off camera equipment in the stadium.
And aye as it stands 2.5 Gigabit ethernet is less or equal heat to 1 Gigabit at the moment and equal or less power, depending on the age of the chip. It is making its way into just about everything as it is good enough of an improvement without needing to spend potentially $???????????'s on 10 Gigabit, cable upgrades and the reassuringly expensive switches.
Last edited:
If diffraction occurs, more megapixels just mean enlarging a photo without any sharpness benefit. It reminds me of a "digital zoom". If I have more megapixels, I do not want to lower the resolution afterwards. It very much turns me off to see a high resultion image at 100% zoom and noticing all those imperfections in an image that show me that the resolution was just to high for the circumstances the photo was shot in.
An image should have the perfect sharpness, if you look at it at 100% zoom on a screen with a resolution that still allows you to see individual pixels.
Similar threads
