New Full-Frame 24.6mp DSLR to consider...

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

08/31/2009 12:34:46 PM · #51

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Lenses have different characteristics on different formats. If I was shooting 35mm full frame on Canon and needed a 300mm lens I would acquire a 300mm lens. If I was shooting EF-S or DX I would get around a 200mm lens to get the same focal length and FOV coverage. Shooting with Olympus I would get a 150mm lens. As far as I know, a 300mm is a 300mm when it comes to DOF but not when it comes to focal length or FOV on different formats and most people will purchase their lenses based on the focal length they need for a given shooting situation. Would you mind explaining what you mean by "crippling effect." I think I understand the terms field of view and camera crop. The latter does not happen in an Olympus 4/3rds camera.

I shot with an E300 and an E-1. Both with Olympus Zuiko lens and with OM lens. Camera cropping does happen in the Olympus 4/3rds cameras. They multiply the 35MM range of the lens x 2. The 7-14 lens is a 14-28 equiv in 35MM. The 55-200 is 110-400 in 35MM. The only difference is Olympus doesn't put the full amount of glass in the rear of the lens. They "optimize" it for the smaller sensor.

The crippling effect I'm referring to is the effect that crop cameras have on the lens attached to them. Same with my 1DMKIII camera it makes my 300MM lens appear to be longer, but in reality I'm just using less of the original lens because of the smaller sensor.

Matt

MattO

Nikon D4

08/31/2009 01:28:12 PM · #52

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

As far as I know, there is no cropping of the Olympus lens image circle by the sensor. Zuiko lenses are optimized for the sensor size and they provide a smaller image circle than your 35mm lenses so that most of the projected image the lens supplies is being covered by the 4/3rds sensor. Yes, the 7-14 lens is 14-28 in 35mm terms, but this is a focal length multiplier meant for reference only and not a crop factor. Your 300mm lens on the smaller APS-H sensor camera, though, is getting cropped because it's optimized for 35mm and so acts as a 390mm focal length lens with a different FOV. It is discarding part of the image circle and in this sense is "crippled." (Though I think that's a bad term.) Again, the Canon 300mm lens should be compared with the Olympus 150mm, and the Canon 600mm with the Oly 300mm.

Yes, Olympus optimizes their lenses for the smaller format and they have advertised that as a benefit (whether you believe that or not is another story). Nikon is doing the same with their DX and new FX lenses and I assume that Canon does that with their EF-S lenses. When you say: "Olympus doesn't put the full amount of glass in the rear of the lens," what does this mean? Zuiko lenses don't need to provide as much coverage because of the smaller format so will probably have less glass. Or are you talking about lens baffles? If so, yes, Olympus uses them, as does all lens manufacturers, including Canon, and in their L lenses. Their purpose is to improve contrast and reduce light scatter by squaring off the round edges of the image circle projected by the lens. As long as the lens projects a high quality image that is optimized for the sensor format who cares.

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Lenses have different characteristics on different formats. If I was shooting 35mm full frame on Canon and needed a 300mm lens I would acquire a 300mm lens. If I was shooting EF-S or DX I would get around a 200mm lens to get the same focal length and FOV coverage. Shooting with Olympus I would get a 150mm lens. As far as I know, a 300mm is a 300mm when it comes to DOF but not when it comes to focal length or FOV on different formats and most people will purchase their lenses based on the focal length they need for a given shooting situation. Would you mind explaining what you mean by "crippling effect." I think I understand the terms field of view and camera crop. The latter does not happen in an Olympus 4/3rds camera.

I shot with an E300 and an E-1. Both with Olympus Zuiko lens and with OM lens. Camera cropping does happen in the Olympus 4/3rds cameras. They multiply the 35MM range of the lens x 2. The 7-14 lens is a 14-28 equiv in 35MM. The 55-200 is 110-400 in 35MM. The only difference is Olympus doesn't put the full amount of glass in the rear of the lens. They "optimize" it for the smaller sensor.

The crippling effect I'm referring to is the effect that crop cameras have on the lens attached to them. Same with my 1DMKIII camera it makes my 300MM lens appear to be longer, but in reality I'm just using less of the original lens because of the smaller sensor.

Matt

Perhaps you need to do a little reading on Crop factor to understand what it really means, has nothing to do with the amount of image projected on the sensor. Crop Factor

Matt

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

08/31/2009 02:16:50 PM · #53

What is it you want me to take away from this article? Seems all of what I've said above is stated in the article. 35mm is used as a reference format because this is what most photographers are familiar with. When using an APS-C or H format cameras, the projected lens image circle of your Canon 300mm, which is optimized for 35mm, will be cropped. In the case of 4/3rds lenses there will be no cropping as the lenses have been optimized for that format and so the term focal length multiplier is more apt. Zuiko lenses are not "crippled" but perhaps the Canon 35mm lenses on smaller formats are? We started out comparing lenses and in order to do that with different formats in digital, one has to take into account how the image circle is handled by the sensor. Your statement that a 300mm lens is a 300mm lens is meaningless without taking into account the format the lens is made for.

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
As far as I know, there is no cropping of the Olympus lens image circle by the sensor. Zuiko lenses are optimized for the sensor size and they provide a smaller image circle than your 35mm lenses so that most of the projected image the lens supplies is being covered by the 4/3rds sensor. Yes, the 7-14 lens is 14-28 in 35mm terms, but this is a focal length multiplier meant for reference only and not a crop factor. Your 300mm lens on the smaller APS-H sensor camera, though, is getting cropped because it's optimized for 35mm and so acts as a 390mm focal length lens with a different FOV. It is discarding part of the image circle and in this sense is "crippled." (Though I think that's a bad term.) Again, the Canon 300mm lens should be compared with the Olympus 150mm, and the Canon 600mm with the Oly 300mm.

Yes, Olympus optimizes their lenses for the smaller format and they have advertised that as a benefit (whether you believe that or not is another story). Nikon is doing the same with their DX and new FX lenses and I assume that Canon does that with their EF-S lenses. When you say: "Olympus doesn't put the full amount of glass in the rear of the lens," what does this mean? Zuiko lenses don't need to provide as much coverage because of the smaller format so will probably have less glass. Or are you talking about lens baffles? If so, yes, Olympus uses them, as does all lens manufacturers, including Canon, and in their L lenses. Their purpose is to improve contrast and reduce light scatter by squaring off the round edges of the image circle projected by the lens. As long as the lens projects a high quality image that is optimized for the sensor format who cares.

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Lenses have different characteristics on different formats. If I was shooting 35mm full frame on Canon and needed a 300mm lens I would acquire a 300mm lens. If I was shooting EF-S or DX I would get around a 200mm lens to get the same focal length and FOV coverage. Shooting with Olympus I would get a 150mm lens. As far as I know, a 300mm is a 300mm when it comes to DOF but not when it comes to focal length or FOV on different formats and most people will purchase their lenses based on the focal length they need for a given shooting situation. Would you mind explaining what you mean by "crippling effect." I think I understand the terms field of view and camera crop. The latter does not happen in an Olympus 4/3rds camera.

I shot with an E300 and an E-1. Both with Olympus Zuiko lens and with OM lens. Camera cropping does happen in the Olympus 4/3rds cameras. They multiply the 35MM range of the lens x 2. The 7-14 lens is a 14-28 equiv in 35MM. The 55-200 is 110-400 in 35MM. The only difference is Olympus doesn't put the full amount of glass in the rear of the lens. They "optimize" it for the smaller sensor.

The crippling effect I'm referring to is the effect that crop cameras have on the lens attached to them. Same with my 1DMKIII camera it makes my 300MM lens appear to be longer, but in reality I'm just using less of the original lens because of the smaller sensor.

Matt

Perhaps you need to do a little reading on Crop factor to understand what it really means, has nothing to do with the amount of image projected on the sensor. Crop Factor

Matt

MattO

Nikon D4

08/31/2009 02:54:18 PM · #54

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

So if I grab my E300 and my OM 50MM lens then grab my 1DsMKII and my 50MM lens neither of these will have a crop factor? That is what you are saying, and if so, then I should have the same field of view through them as Crop factor and FOV or focal multiplier have the same effect correct? I can assure you they have very different FOV and there is def a crop factor involved with the Olympus cameras. My OM 50 is equiv in 35MM to a 100MM lens.

The format that the lens is made for is the same standard that it has always been. 35MM. And a 300MM lens or a 200MM lens or a 100MM lens has been and always will be just that. Otherwise your Zuiko lens would have the effective focal length put on them and not the 35MM standard.

Matt

08/31/2009 05:39:40 PM · #55

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
... If Sony is unwilling to take the same steps as other camera makers to make their products easy to use, how is that a good thing for the customer?

I'm not sure how this point is valid when talking about Sony DSLR's. ???

They will use CF (my A700 does) or SD cards (A850 & A900). I'm not sure about the various other DLSR's available (3xx & 5xx series).

Third party software vendors work with Sony also (PSP X2, SilkyPix, ACDSee Pro, etc...) all recognize Sony RAW file formats.

His problem is he is not aware of sony products. He hates them and does not take interest. So his thinking is mostly dependent on what other people in the sony-haters bandwagon say.

This thread raised few issues about sony:
(now he will again call me sony spokesperson :-D )

1. Sony raw files are NRed. which is false. (except in start of a700).

2. Their products fail and can not be trusted - ex my playstation, tv etc etc.
Truth is sony as camera company may be different people than who make playstation etc. Its just common sense.
(When I showed him that the brand he bought showed more problems than sony product released same time, he ran out of arguements and started shouting things like you are fanboy etc., happens when nothing substantial to say.).

3. They have something "proprietary" thus evil.
Every company has something "proprietary" . .

4. Their memory cards. Nonissue really because of two slots , most of nikon canon, pentax has only one slot.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

... If Sony is unwilling to take the same steps as other camera makers to make their products easy to use,

Has he ever bothered to ask a sony user what he/she feels.
Does he know that one of the biggest thing sony users always boast is ease of use of their slrs.
(except new 3XX camera, which was complete disaster in terms of holding, my hands still hurting by holding a380, but these are only exceptions).

Nothing sensible can come out of arguement with someone who has pre-conceived notions about something and does not want to change or listen to others.

All camera makers make good products we shall buy what is good FOR US. No matter how evil is maker X, i will buy their products IF THEY get my WORK DONE. I am selfish in this regard.

Message edited by author 2009-08-31 18:01:06.

08/31/2009 05:48:58 PM · #56

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
What is it you want me to take away from this article? Seems all of what I've said above is stated in the article. 35mm is used as a reference format because this is what most photographers are familiar with. When using an APS-C or H format cameras, the projected lens image circle of your Canon 300mm, which is optimized for 35mm, will be cropped. In the case of 4/3rds lenses there will be no cropping as the lenses have been optimized for that format and so the term focal length multiplier is more apt. Zuiko lenses are not "crippled" but perhaps the Canon 35mm lenses on smaller formats are? We started out comparing lenses and in order to do that with different formats in digital, one has to take into account how the image circle is handled by the sensor. Your statement that a 300mm lens is a 300mm lens is meaningless without taking into account the format the lens is made for.

So if I grab my E300 and my OM 50MM lens then grab my 1DsMKII and my 50MM lens neither of these will have a crop factor? That is what you are saying, and if so, then I should have the same field of view through them as Crop factor and FOV or focal multiplier have the same effect correct? I can assure you they have very different FOV and there is def a crop factor involved with the Olympus cameras. My OM 50 is equiv in 35MM to a 100MM lens.

The format that the lens is made for is the same standard that it has always been. 35MM. And a 300MM lens or a 200MM lens or a 100MM lens has been and always will be just that. Otherwise your Zuiko lens would have the effective focal length put on them and not the 35MM standard.

Matt

what you said in your first response was terse and correct. A 300 MM lense is 300MM lense.
Anyway while discussing crop factors etc do not forget effect of DOF.

If someone says a 300MM lense is 450mm lense on some camera could he show that DOF is same of 450mm lense on 35mm SLR (standard).
FOV is one thing DOF is another important issue.

Anyway 300mm lense is 300mm lense because this is how it was prepared.
My takumar 55mm lense still has 55mm written on it despite using it on APC slr. Last time I checked it did not change to 80something mm.

08/31/2009 11:16:55 PM · #57

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
... If Sony is unwilling to take the same steps as other camera makers to make their products easy to use, how is that a good thing for the customer?

I'm not sure how this point is valid when talking about Sony DSLR's. ???

They will use CF (my A700 does) or SD cards (A850 & A900). I'm not sure about the various other DLSR's available (3xx & 5xx series).

Third party software vendors work with Sony also (PSP X2, SilkyPix, ACDSee Pro, etc...) all recognize Sony RAW file formats.

His problem is he is not aware of sony products. He hates them and does not take interest. So his thinking is mostly dependent on what other people in the sony-haters bandwagon say.

This thread raised few issues about sony:
(now he will again call me sony spokesperson :-D )

1. Sony raw files are NRed. which is false. (except in start of a700).

2. Their products fail and can not be trusted - ex my playstation, tv etc etc.
Truth is sony as camera company may be different people than who make playstation etc. Its just common sense.
(When I showed him that the brand he bought showed more problems than sony product released same time, he ran out of arguements and started shouting things like you are fanboy etc., happens when nothing substantial to say.).

3. They have something "proprietary" thus evil.
Every company has something "proprietary" . .

4. Their memory cards. Nonissue really because of two slots , most of nikon canon, pentax has only one slot.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
... If Sony is unwilling to take the same steps as other camera makers to make their products easy to use,

Has he ever bothered to ask a sony user what he/she feels.
Does he know that one of the biggest thing sony users always boast is ease of use of their slrs.
(except new 3XX camera, which was complete disaster in terms of holding, my hands still hurting by holding a380, but these are only exceptions).

Nothing sensible can come out of arguement with someone who has pre-conceived notions about something and does not want to change or listen to others.

All camera makers make good products we shall buy what is good FOR US. No matter how evil is maker X, i will buy their products IF THEY get my WORK DONE. I am selfish in this regard.

You don't know shit about me.

I don't know as much about Sony DSLR's as I do about their other products. I do know that a single company drives quality processes across the whole company, so while different people may be building, designing their cameras, they are all done under the same leadership and to the same standards.

My experiences with Sony products is that they suck and they treat their customers like shit...period. If you want to buy something from a company like that...go ahead...I don't care...when it lets you down and the company gives you the shaft, you're just getting what you deserve.

08/31/2009 11:40:52 PM · #58

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

I can hate a company for any reason I damn well please.

This is your right. Our argument is not about whether you hate or not, its about what you are saying about sony.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

You don't know shit about me.

I do not need to know you already have created quite an impression so far.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

I don't know as much about Sony DSLR's as I do about their other products. I do know that a single company drives quality processes across the whole company, so while different people may be building, designing their cameras, they are all done under the same leadership and to the same standards.

My experiences with Sony products is that they suck and they treat their customers like shit...period. If you want to buy something from a company like that...go ahead...I don't care...when it lets you down and the company gives you the shaft, you're just getting what you deserve.

If Sony is unwilling to take the same steps as other camera makers to make their products easy to use, how is that a good thing for the customer?

you again claim to know their customers. Guess what you are again wrong.

Here is what Sony's customer think about sony. And they are happy bunch.

//forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=32865121

You sound very pissed and I think I have extracted enough sadistic pleasure from it.

I am done with you now, won't reply to you.
Goodbye

08/31/2009 11:53:54 PM · #59

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I can hate a company for any reason I damn well please.

This is your right. Our argument is not about whether you hate or not, its about what you are saying about sony.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You don't know shit about me.

I do not need to know you already have created quite an impression so far.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

I don't know as much about Sony DSLR's as I do about their other products. I do know that a single company drives quality processes across the whole company, so while different people may be building, designing their cameras, they are all done under the same leadership and to the same standards.

My experiences with Sony products is that they suck and they treat their customers like shit...period. If you want to buy something from a company like that...go ahead...I don't care...when it lets you down and the company gives you the shaft, you're just getting what you deserve.

If Sony is unwilling to take the same steps as other camera makers to make their products easy to use, how is that a good thing for the customer?

you again claim to know their customers. Guess what you are again wrong.

Here is what Sony's customer think about sony. And they are happy bunch.

//forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=32865121

You sound very pissed and I think I have extracted enough sadistic pleasure from it.

I am done with you now, won't reply to you.
Goodbye

I'm simply relaying my experiences and impression of Sony from a customer's point of view (mine), you seem to take issue with that. Deal with it.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

09/01/2009 08:19:13 AM · #60

Originally posted by zxaar:

... I am done with you now, won't reply to you.
Goodbye

Phheewww! Glad that's over.

09/01/2009 09:46:05 AM · #61

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by zxaar:
... I am done with you now, won't reply to you.
Goodbye

Phheewww! Glad that's over.

:-D

well it was fun till it lasted.

09/01/2009 10:08:34 AM · #62

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by zxaar:
... I am done with you now, won't reply to you.
Goodbye

Phheewww! Glad that's over.

:-D

well it was fun till it lasted.

You're funny.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

09/01/2009 12:18:18 PM · #63

Matt,
You are 100% correct. Your OM 50mm lens on an E-300 will have a crop factor because the image circle that lens projects onto the 4/3rds sensor in the E-300 is larger than the sensor and it can't use the entire image circle available to it. That OM lens is an old one, though, designed in the 70s and optimized for the 135mm film format that Olympus was using in their OM cameras at that time. Most people are not using OM lenses on their 4/3rds cameras and they can only use them with an adapter. Today's Zuiko digital lenses, the ones designed and built in the 2000s and sold for the current crop (no pun intended :) of Olympus cameras, are optimized for the 4/3rds format, and as such, do behave as the focal length numbers that were "put on them" because this is the measured focal distance of the lens. In other words, a 50mm Zuiko digital lens behaves like a 50mm lens does on a 4/3rds camera. 4/3rds lenses have their own characteristics on 4/3rds cameras regardless of how a Canon 50mm lens (for example) behaves on a Canon camera. It doesn't matter one iota what it's effective focal length is in 35mm terms (this is only used for reference). 4/3rds is a different standard entirely just like 6x7 medium format is, or 4x5 large format is. Lenses built for these larger formats have their own set of characteristics and they can not be used on any other mount except their own. And that's the rub, because Canon wants their consumers to be able to use their existing 35mm legacy lenses they already own on new digital SLRs, they use one mount size for three different sensor sizes, and so the term: "form factor" came into existence as a way for their customers to have a reference. Except for their 35mm full frame cameras, their APS-C/H cameras are in fact cropping the image circle.

Olympus took a different tract. Since they did not have a large user base of OM glass and since those lenses are not made with autofocus anyway, they designed and started a the brand new 4/3rds format with brand new lenses. One way lenses are optimized for a format is to design them so the edges of their image circles correspond with the edges of the sensor (though not at the corners). Olympus did this with 4/3rds and it can be considered a full frame format, although not as large a format as 35mm full frame. In 4/3rds land a 25mm lens is considered standard. For reference only (because this is what most people are familiar with today) it's focal length and FOV behave like a 50mm lens that was designed for the 35mm standard, but no part of the lens image circle is being cropped. However, it still has the DOF characteristics of a 25mm lens which is why 4/3rds has greater DOF than APS-C or 35mm full frame. (A smaller focal length will always have greater DOF than larger focal lengths.) In this sense of DOF a 50mm lens is a 50mm lens. The Olympus 300mm lens you cited earlier in this thread with an accurate quoted price of $6,000 is not on OM Lens and was not optimized for the 35mm standard. It's designed for 4/3rds and is considered a super-telephoto lens for this standard. Again, the image circle this lens projects is not being cropped and it can be compared with a 600mm Canon lens that has the same FOV.

Originally posted by MattO:

MattO

Nikon D4

09/01/2009 01:31:13 PM · #64

Olyuzi, I gotta be honest with you, I'm not sure why you think I don't understand the Olympus system seeing as I shot with it for over two years. Here is a thread from an Olympus site that I was one of the first members of. That discussion even talks about the 2X crop factor from several members who still shoot the brand. Perhaps they can make you understand what you are confused about. As for me, I have work to do and you tire me.

Matt

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/02/2009 12:31:18 PM · #65

Originally posted by MattO:

Olyuzi, I gotta be honest with you, I'm not sure why you think I don't understand the Olympus system seeing as I shot with it for over two years.

Because your claims are meaningless without context and you insist on something that is wrong in order to give false impression.

Originally posted by MattO:

Here is a thread from an Olympus site that I was one of the first members of. That discussion even talks about the 2X crop factor from several members who still shoot the brand. Perhaps they can make you understand what you are confused about.

I'm not confused but rather clear on the subject. You've posted two web sites that state exactly what I've been saying all along.

Originally posted by MattO:

As for me, I have work to do and you tire me.
Matt

So be it, sweet dreams.

*** Apologies to the OP for having hijacked this thread.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

09/02/2009 12:37:27 PM · #66

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

*** Apologies to the OP for having hijacked this thread.

No problem. Didn't figure it'd stay on track for long anyway. :-D

dd1989

Fujifilm x100

09/08/2009 08:32:26 AM · #67

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Someone over at Dyxum mentioned that dpreview is going hot & heavy in the Canon/Nikon threads about Sony's new FF release. I took a look at the Canon thread - OMG, what a fun read that was! Some serious brand defending going on. DPC is fairly tame in that regard, thank goodness. :-)

OLYMPUS
OLYMPUS
OLYMPUS
OLYMPUS

Nope, no brand defending on DPC, hehehe.

That thread is damn funny, some real fanboy-ism going on!

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

09/08/2009 08:55:31 AM · #68

Originally posted by PaulE:

Sony is evil! For the following reasons:
- they have added hacktool rootkit spyware to some of their software delivery - software they in fact pirated in order to monitor other folks potential pirating. Very naughty.
- their proprietry music tool SonicStage when installed on a pc with pre-existing sony atrac codec music files (also proprietry) locked all the music for use. And reuse to unlock under ant conditions - maintaining that if the music was legal (which it was) we could re-rip. At how many hours? And how when you are an expat with original Cds in storage?

Originally posted by zxaar:

PaulE these are some understandable reason to hate a company. But laughable is statements like my playstation failed thus their cameras are useless. I just do not understand how one can extrapolate how camera will behave based on experience with play-station.

But it wasn't just a PlatStation for me.....it was THREE PlayStations, and an entire home entertainment component system that died one component after another.....and their f*cking TV, too!

Then they pretty much took a "Too bad about your luck!" attitude about it all.

Gee.....isn't it odd that MY experiences mirror almost exactly another disgruntled Sony customer in this thread?

It's simple.....everything I got from them over a period of a few years died and they didn't care. I'll spend my money elsewhere.

BTW, I have *never* had the problems I had with Sony with all of my other cameras and electronic equipment combined in my entire life.....ALL OF IT!

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

09/08/2009 09:26:54 AM · #69

Sigh...thanks Daniel (dd1989)! :-) This had died a semi-peaceful death.

IMO - Everything BUT Sony sucks!!! :-D

Morgan

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

09/08/2009 10:39:42 AM · #70

Here are some rumours to speculate about:

August 2009

Nikon D3000,
D300s,
AF-S DX Nikkor 17 to 65 mm f/3.2-4G ED VR
Nikon D3000: Effective pixels: 12.3 million â�¦ Image Sensor Cleaning, Image Dust Off reference data â�¦.
[S] 4.288 x 2.848 â�¦ pentamirror â�¦ 95% coverage â�¦ 0.78x magnif. â�¦. Compatibility AF-S and AF-I â�¦
1 / 4000 p. 30 â�¦ p. 3.5 fps â�¦ 420-zonal RGB sensor â�¦
Auto modes (auto, auto [flash off]), Advanced Scene Modes (Portrait, Landscape, Child, Sports, Close up, Night portrait, Night landscape, Party / Indoor, Beach / snow, Sunset, Dusk / dawn, Pet portrait, Candlelight, Blossom, Autumn colors, Food, Silhouette, programmed auto with flexible program (P), shutter-priority auto (S), aperture-priority auto (A), manual (M)
Exposure compensation + -5 EV in 1 / 3. Exposure bracketing - not known, ISO 200 - 3200, steps 1 / 3, N-1 Lo, Hi +1 (?)
AF MultiCAM 380 (* new) - 7 focus points, 1 cross type, AF-S, AF-C AF-A, M + electronical rangefinder,
AF area mode: Single point, dynamic area, car area
Live View focus - contrast - detect AF, face priority
Movie - not known!
Active D-Lightning: Auto or Off
Internal flash sm. number 17/56 at ISO 200
LCD monitor: 2.7-in, 230 to-dot â�¦ FIXED
HDMI - N
Battery: EN-EL9a
124 x 92 x 62 mm, 480 g.

Nikon D300s - differences from the D300:
Continuous high-speed mode: 7 fps, without batterygripu, 8.5 fps with batterygripem, 14-bit mode included
1 Release mode addition: Self-timer + MUP
2200-pixel RGB sensor
LCD monitor: 920 to-dot, 2.9-inch, VÃ½klopnÃ½
Enhanced contrast detect AF
Enhanced phase detect AF: new 2,200-pixel RGB sensor cooperates with 3D Tracking, Auto-Area AF-C is dynamic area,
flashing auxiliary section plus focusing direction â��display in the viewfinder with theâ�� user-control â��change of direction
The new processor speeds up AF and significantly increases the quality Movie mode as compared to the D90 and D5000,
Movie - mode: 1920 * 1080 at 24 fps Quicktime MOV, H.264 codec
3.1-fold compared with the cache memory D300
795 g
Extra High Lightning D-mode
AF Fine Tuning enhanced: -30 to 30 for the near focus distance, infinity, the shortest and longest focal length
CF + SD slot
â�¦. I do not see a price anywhere!
AF-S DX Nikkor 17 to 65 mm f/3.2-4G ED VR:
- Lightweight zoom middle class at an affordable price for use with the new D300s with other Nikon DX cameras,
2 ED and 2 aspherical members, 72 mm filtrov thread, enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode (??!)
â�¦.. 15. October 2009: presentation

Nikon D700x,
AF-S Nikkor 24 to 135 mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
AF-S Nikkor 35 mm f/1.4G,
AF-S Nikkor 85 mm f/1.4G
Nikon D700x - differences from the D700:
effective pixels: 24.5 million â�¦ Image Sensor Cleaning, Image Dust Off reference data â�¦.
[S] 6.048 x 4.032
Continuous high-speed mode: 5 fps without batterygripu, 6.5 fps with batterygripem
1 Release mode addition: Self-timer + MUP
2200-pixel RGB sensor
LCD monitor: 920 to-dot, 2.9-inch, VÃ½klopnÃ½
Enhanced contrast detect AF
Enhanced phase detect AF: new 2,200-pixel RGB sensor cooperates with 3D Tracking, Auto-Area AF-C is dynamic area,
flashing auxiliary section plus focusing direction â��display in the viewfinder with theâ�� user-control â��change of direction
Movie - mode: 1920 * 1080 at 24 fps Quicktime MOV, H.264 codec
AF-S Nikkor 24 to 135 mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR:
lightweight and affordable zoom with high image quality, 77mm filtrov thread, 610 g, 7 rounded blades diaphragma,
3 aspherical and 2 ED members, enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
revised lens for maximum optical performance in the digital FX zrcadlovkÃ¡ch Nikon,
VR II for up to 4 stops, filtrov thread 82 mm, 1530 g, Nano - Crystal Coat, enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode
AF-S Nikkor 35 mm f/1.4G:
peak lens completely revised design, Nano - Crystal Coat, enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode
AF-S Nikkor 85 mm f/1.4G:
top portrait lens with SWM focus and Nano - Crystal Coat, enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode
Q1/2010: performances:
AF-S Nikkor 14 to 28 mm f/3.5-4.5G ED:
77 mm filtrov thread!, Enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode
AF-S Nikkor 120 to 450 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR
VR II for up to 4 stops, 82 mm thread filtrov, 1480 g, enhance contrast-detect AF-S mode
Q2/2010 time:

Nikon D4,
Nikon D400
Nikon D4 - new features:
effective pixels: 15.7 millions, FX sensor completely new design with maximized by increasing the sensitivity of more than 1 EV
as â��ultra-fast pixel register cacheâ��, which allows to double the frame rate or increase dynamic range, including
effective aid noise reduction with natural lodging details.
[S] 4.852 x 3.234
Continuous high-speed mode: FX & DX mode 11 fps, 16 fps mode FX with a double-exposure with the phase detection AF & mirror up 8/sec.,
DX mode 18 fps with a double-exposure
FX & DX DR enhanced double-exposure mode: 5 fps for dNEF (* new) JPEG, and without the composition, 3 fps for the car, the JPEG
DR enhanced double-exposure mode: Auto, manual setting of time for both the ISO and exposure in â��Mâ��,
in the â��Aâ��, â��Sâ�� and â��Pâ�� mode with a semi-double exposure corrections in the range of + -5 EV in the range of 1 s. and 1 / 8000 p. and ISO 200 - 6400
Format dNEF,
ISO 200 - 12800, Lo-1, Hi 2
100% Viewfinder, 0.78x magnification, integrated hledÃ¡Ã¨kovÃ¡ magnifying glass for the DX cropping
Integrated sensor management Nikon CLS
Movie - mode: 1920 * 1080 at 30 fps
Multi-CAM 4500: 61-point AF, Auto / User Drive dynamic AF-C, intelligent co-operation with 2200-zÃ³novÃ½m 3D Color Matrix meter
to achieve the elusive success of autofocus, the possibility of combination with contrast-detect AF final doostÃ¸enÃm
for specific uses. The possibility of the electronic image projection or additional information to the entire area of a large viewfinder.
Dual histogram for the double-exposure mode. Highlite map.
Nikon D400 - new features:
effective pixels: 13,8 millions, DX sensor completely new design with maximized by increasing the sensitivity of more than 1 EV
as â��ultra-fast pixel register cacheâ��, which allows to double the frame rate or increase dynamic range, including
effective aid noise reduction with natural lodging details.
[S] 4.550 x 3.034
Continuous high-speed mode: 8 fps, 10 fps with BG,
12 fps with a double-exposure phase detection AF & mirror up 6/sec.,
14 fps with BG to double-exposure with the phase detection AF & mirror up 7/sec.,
ISO 200 - 6400, Lo-1, Hi 1
Movie - mode: 1920 * 1080 at 24 fps
Multi-CAM 4500 DX 61-point AF, Auto / User Drive dynamic AF-C, intelligent co-operation with 2200-zÃ³novÃ½m 3D Color Matrix meter
to achieve great success autofocus.
Screening of additional information across a large area of the viewfinder.
Dual histogram for the double-exposure mode.
Q3/2010 time:
AF-S Nikkor 300 mm f/4G VR
Nikkor AF-S VR 400 mm f/5.6G
AF-S Nikkor 70 to 240 mm f/3.5-4.5G VR
AF-S Nikkor 105 mm f/2G DC
AF-S Nikkor 24 to 85 mm f/4G VR
AF-S DX Nikkor 60 to 95 mm f/2G VR
AF-S DX Nikkor 17-60 mm f/2.8G VR
Nikon Coolpix P1DX
Compact camera with DX 12.3 MPx sensor.
Hours outbreaks distance from 28 to 85 mm, f/3.5-5.6 speed, stabilization sensors,
2.9-inch LCD for the 920-dot, VÃ½klopnÃ½, head-up viewfinder, the internal flash
TelepÃ¸edsÃ¡dka 1,8 x
Q4/2010 time:

Nikon D4X - new features:
effective pixels: 30.2 millions, FX sensor completely new design with maximized by increasing the sensitivity of more than 1 EV
as â��ultra-fast pixel register cacheâ��, which allows to double the frame rate or increase dynamic range, including
effective aid noise reduction with natural lodging details.
[S] 6.736 x 4.490
Continuous high-speed mode:
FX 6 fps, 10 fps with a double-exposure phase detection AF & mirror up 5/sec.,
DR enhanced double-exposure mode: Auto, manual setting of time for both the ISO and exposure in â��Mâ��,
in the â��Aâ��, â��Sâ�� and â��Pâ�� mode with a semi-double exposure corrections in the range of + -5 EV in the range of 1 s. and 1 / 8000 p. and ISO 200 - 6400
Format dNEF,
ISO 100 - 6400, Lo-1, Hi 1
Movie - mode: 1920 * 1080 at 30 fpsâ��

09/08/2009 04:44:41 PM · #71

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by PaulE:
Sony is evil! For the following reasons:
- they have added hacktool rootkit spyware to some of their software delivery - software they in fact pirated in order to monitor other folks potential pirating. Very naughty.
- their proprietry music tool SonicStage when installed on a pc with pre-existing sony atrac codec music files (also proprietry) locked all the music for use. And reuse to unlock under ant conditions - maintaining that if the music was legal (which it was) we could re-rip. At how many hours? And how when you are an expat with original Cds in storage?

Originally posted by zxaar:
PaulE these are some understandable reason to hate a company. But laughable is statements like my playstation failed thus their cameras are useless. I just do not understand how one can extrapolate how camera will behave based on experience with play-station.

But it wasn't just a PlatStation for me.....it was THREE PlayStations, and an entire home entertainment component system that died one component after another.....and their f*cking TV, too!

Then they pretty much took a "Too bad about your luck!" attitude about it all.

Gee.....isn't it odd that MY experiences mirror almost exactly another disgruntled Sony customer in this thread?

It's simple.....everything I got from them over a period of a few years died and they didn't care. I'll spend my money elsewhere.

BTW, I have *never* had the problems I had with Sony with all of my other cameras and electronic equipment combined in my entire life.....ALL OF IT!

Okey lets assume that what you saying is absolute truth, means all sony products are lousy and they breakdown after some use.
since sony is multibillion dollar firm and made profits decade after decades it only implies that people do buy their products. So all you are saying that people are damn stupid to buy lousy products. Common sense is not so common.

All my sony products survived. I have a music system from year 1989 still works and sound quality is nothing less than fantastic. I had camera from year 2005, still in perfect shape and works well. Happy with image quality too.

So as i understand rules of this thread, if someone had bad experience and bad mouth a company it is alright. But if someone had positive experience he is not allowed to share. Is this what you guys are doing.

After 2 sony playstations that failed you bought another one. Either you are not good at handling things or you are not smart to make decisions about which products to buy.
I had wonderful experience with sony on music system but still when i bought my new one recently i did not buy sony. I bought what was good product. And yes it works wonderfully. Buy right products and they will last. Buy or do not buy things based on brand name, experience will be similar to yours.

09/08/2009 06:48:34 PM · #72

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by PaulE:
Sony is evil! For the following reasons:
- they have added hacktool rootkit spyware to some of their software delivery - software they in fact pirated in order to monitor other folks potential pirating. Very naughty.
- their proprietry music tool SonicStage when installed on a pc with pre-existing sony atrac codec music files (also proprietry) locked all the music for use. And reuse to unlock under ant conditions - maintaining that if the music was legal (which it was) we could re-rip. At how many hours? And how when you are an expat with original Cds in storage?

Originally posted by zxaar:
PaulE these are some understandable reason to hate a company. But laughable is statements like my playstation failed thus their cameras are useless. I just do not understand how one can extrapolate how camera will behave based on experience with play-station.

But it wasn't just a PlatStation for me.....it was THREE PlayStations, and an entire home entertainment component system that died one component after another.....and their f*cking TV, too!

Then they pretty much took a "Too bad about your luck!" attitude about it all.

Gee.....isn't it odd that MY experiences mirror almost exactly another disgruntled Sony customer in this thread?

It's simple.....everything I got from them over a period of a few years died and they didn't care. I'll spend my money elsewhere.

BTW, I have *never* had the problems I had with Sony with all of my other cameras and electronic equipment combined in my entire life.....ALL OF IT!

Okey lets assume that what you saying is absolute truth, means all sony products are lousy and they breakdown after some use.
since sony is multibillion dollar firm and made profits decade after decades it only implies that people do buy their products. So all you are saying that people are damn stupid to buy lousy products. Common sense is not so common.

All my sony products survived. I have a music system from year 1989 still works and sound quality is nothing less than fantastic. I had camera from year 2005, still in perfect shape and works well. Happy with image quality too.

So as i understand rules of this thread, if someone had bad experience and bad mouth a company it is alright. But if someone had positive experience he is not allowed to share. Is this what you guys are doing.

After 2 sony playstations that failed you bought another one. Either you are not good at handling things or you are not smart to make decisions about which products to buy.
I had wonderful experience with sony on music system but still when i bought my new one recently i did not buy sony. I bought what was good product. And yes it works wonderfully. Buy right products and they will last. Buy or do not buy things based on brand name, experience will be similar to yours.

Yay for you...OBVIOUSLY you are a genius with prescient knowledge of what makes a good product.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/08/2009 07:43:14 PM · #73

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Yay for you...OBVIOUSLY you are a genius with prescient knowledge of what makes a good product.

of course i am , if i make right decisions in my life.

Nothing wrong in being more intelligent than others. Huh.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

09/08/2009 07:51:06 PM · #74

Originally posted by zxaar:

Okey lets assume that what you saying is absolute truth, means all sony products are lousy and they breakdown after some use.

No.....LISTEN UP, and READ.

*I* had nothing but trouble and bad service so I choose to spend my entertainment dollars elsewhere.

They may very well have some good products, but I've certainly not seen them. Period.

We did get my daughter a PS3 after they were out for a while and so far so good......yet I've heard (HERE at DPC in a current thread!) that the laser can burn out watching some of the epic director's cut three hour plus movies.

Originally posted by zxaar:

since sony is multibillion dollar firm and made profits decade after decades it only implies that people do buy their products. So all you are saying that people are damn stupid to buy lousy products. Common sense is not so common.

Don't put words in my mouth.

I won't buy their stuff, and any time someone raves about their products, I am going to mention that I've had nothing but bad luck. If you were looking for a product review, wouldn't you want to know (A) Whether or not people liked their products, and (B) If people had trouble with the products and/or customer service?

That's WHY you got to a forum and ask!

Originally posted by zxaar:

All my sony products survived. I have a music system from year 1989 still works and sound quality is nothing less than fantastic. I had camera from year 2005, still in perfect shape and works well. Happy with image quality too.

Good for you.....you've stated your case. How does that make my experiences less valid?

Also, like it or not, Sony has a history of the proprietary nonsense that you seem so intent on disputing (Remember Beta?).

This isn't a case of you're right and we're wrong, or whatever it is that's rattling around in your head.....we are merely both relating our experiences.

Originally posted by zxaar:

So as i understand rules of this thread, if someone had bad experience and bad mouth a company it is alright. But if someone had positive experience he is not allowed to share. Is this what you guys are doing.

Where do you get this? What rules? Please show me where this discussion has some ruleste 'cause I would appreciate knowing what they are. To my knowledge, the only one who's been squawking about what others have said has been you.

We have explained what has happened, when and why, and how we feel about the company......you don't want to hear it, fine, but don't try to make us think well of a company that by our *continued* experiences has proven to us that they manufacture crap and don't care about their customers.

It won't happen. And we *will* state out opinion. Since it's based on some experience (In my case, quite a bit) it may actually make an impression on someone's choice.

Originally posted by zxaar:

After 2 sony playstations that failed you bought another one. Either you are not good at handling things or you are not smart to make decisions about which products to buy.

That's the choices? Either I manhandled and broke them or I'm stupid?

Up yours!

They failed on my daughter.....burned up.....twice. A ten year old, quiet girl.

No abuse.

Too stupid to make a decision at that point to move on? No, they actually were under warranty, so why would I buy something else if *theoretically* they were going to be replaced at no charge?

And the freakin' things were *SO* bad that it took months to fill the backorders for warranty.

If you know so much about Sony, surely you knew about the horrid PS2 warranty backorder, did you not?

It wasn't 'til they did a total redesign that the f*cking things worked.

And again back to the proprietary thing......what was I supposed to do about the pile of games that my kid had?

How freakin' happy do you think I was that I couldn't provide my kid with a product 'cause the things were such trash, and so far backordered, you couldn't even BUY one retail?????

Would you care to discuss that year lag on the release of the PS3?

You really don't know anything about any of this, do you?

Originally posted by zxaar:

I had wonderful experience with sony on music system but still when i bought my new one recently i did not buy sony. I bought what was good product. And yes it works wonderfully. Buy right products and they will last. Buy or do not buy things based on brand name, experience will be similar to yours.

Well.....explain that to me. If your Sony is a good product, why didn't you buy another?

Come to think of it, why don't you have a Sony camera?

Is it possible that you're just being garrulous and argumentative?

I've had somewhere in the neighborhood of a dozen pieces of Sony equipment and they ALL turned out to be junk......and I understand that there's a possible problem with the PS3 I have here if I watch a three and a half hour movie.

So perhaps I have more overall experience with Sony's products than you, eh?
What would YOU think??????

Truly, it seems to me that you're just arguing for some unfathomable reason, and to tell you the truth, you've done nothing but cement my thinking that Sony sucks.

Think whatever you like; I *know* what experience I have had with their company and I do not like the failure rate of the equipment I had nor their total abysmal service.

Now if you can't understand that basic premise of the free market society, you NEED to get a grip, and stop arguing about something you know nothing about.