Full Version: Nikon Z launched
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
(10-15-2018, 10:52 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: [ -> ]BC, your weird claims about eyesight and what you consider as enough DR is very tiring. A copy of an eyesight alone is not what photgraphy can do this days.

You can consider X f-stops as sufficient for your photography. But your photography is no scale to us who want more DR for good reasons. And it's not your business to decide what's wrong or right. As well as photography is a recording of a short moment of reality, an interpretation. I don't get why you continue stubborn donkey mode, just because some photographers want to show what's in the shadows or what's in the lights.

According to you, Ansel Adams should have stayed satisfied with the limited range of grey scales and don't make a fuss with a complicate development of the  zone system. If you don't like or are not able to use tone-mapping, no problem, you don't have to. For me a bigger tone scale is one option - but no obligation to use it all the time, it's just rather handy to have it. And if someone throws a camera away, because it has only 13.3 instead of 13.5 stops DR, it still is not your problem - only rather stupid.

JoJu, I post about how our eyes work, and what DR we see at any one time because of others claiming ridiculous things (like that cameras still have lower DR than our eyes, or that our eyes can see 24 stops EV at one time, nonsense like that).
I am not saying that no one can/should like lifting shadows and unnatural scifi-like HDR landscapes, or that noone can find it important to rescue totally missed exposures.

And for myself, indeed, I find the current DR fad going around on forums, a fad and not important at all.

And a lot of nonsense gets written about mr Adams, he even has written nonsense about his system himself in the past. He did like stark contrasts, and was not afraid of whites (something now seen as "blown out highlights"), nor of black (the dreaded "shadows not showing detail").

And, just to point out the obvious.... If a 7 stop tonal range is "normal", guess how much headroom to "tonal map" I have with 12 stops of DR? A lot.

That you call "my claims" about eyesight weird, is very trumpian. It is what science finds, I am just quoting what are the scientific facts, and point to simple to understand proof (6 EV DR of paper, and we perceive the "black" in prints indeed as black, and we perceive the "white" in prints indeed as white, for example).
(10-06-2018, 07:22 PM)martind86 Wrote: [ -> ]Initial Z7 Impessions by venerable Thom Hogan:


 I'm not quite enthusiastic about Canon R and unfortunately this also seems to be first gen product with several unpleasant quirks. Esp. the sub par AF.... for this kind of money, come on! It should have delivered more!  
Again, it also proves my initial point that Nikon Z is  substantively behind where the Sony A7Rm3 is for continuous autofocus sequences.... :-(.  

The banding kind of hampers the usability of the great dynamic range of the sensor too which is disappointing. 

Again, despite being Nikon user at the moment, I consider the current Z line a kind of beta products for rather undemanding users. But yes, I'm demanding for a camera in key areas - sensor, autofocus, overall responsivness.
If you are not, it may be a great choice. But no doubt D850 is still a better option at the moment.

 I just don't like to see I was so right in my initial judgement but... unfortunately I was. Precisely.

 I'm interested in how quickly Nikon manages to improve the  AF tracking performace in the next model which - for the price - is just ridiculous on Z7. Sorry, the other cons of Z7 are quite annoying, too. :-(  But the competition is good in this segment and I'm really looking forward to the next gen products.
Instead of behaving as if Nikon has insulted you personally, you can simply decide not to buy it. At the moment I think the price is less ridiculous than your posts, and that means something as I think the price isn't justified if they keep this firmware version. 

And I wonder how perfect your first gen project would be. Big mouth, small skills...


If only dynamic range was a measurement of fair and open minded reasoning of photographers!.................
Compared to other first gen MILCs, the Z is rather good - as a first gen. But others have their third gen and more lenses. I can do what I want, I fail to see this banding stuff. I use rarely ISO 64, maybe that's why. But I see other problems, such as weird rainbow spots around highlights, if a strong LED street light becomes part of the scene.

I'd like to investigate that more and compare it to D850, I suspect it has to do with the shorter flange distance.
(11-06-2018, 10:07 PM)JJ_SO Wrote: [ -> ]Instead of behaving as if Nikon has insulted you personally, you can simply decide not to buy it. At the moment I think the price is less ridiculous than your posts, and that means something as I think the price isn't justified if they keep this firmware version. 

And I wonder how perfect your first gen project would be. Big mouth, small skills...

LOL, of course :-)) Actually a hater like you keeps me cool - I would be much more nervous if a person of your level would tend to praise me.  

How typical and always the same - when facts and arguments are lacking, the personal attacks must follow. I wonder you brought you, thought. The low self-esteem and arrogance you are displaying usually has its roots in the childhood.

If you were able to control your emotions, you would have to admit I was absolutely right in most conclusions. Who cares that something is the "1st gen product". Customers do not care when they can have more advanced and balanced product for the same or lower price. And unfortunately, the cons of Z7 are apparently not something that only a professional would meet under some extreme conditions. They are more or less a serious limitation in common all-around shooting scenarios unless you shoot static subjects and objects of course. Yes, I do think the Z7 is rather a half-baked, overpriced beta product. That is my opinion and yes, you can disagree, scream, keep offending and fume with rage but that is all you can do about it.

I actually naively expected maybe some Z7 owner would argue with my, Dpreview's and Thom Hogan's conclusions and objectively show some comparison with his/her DSLRs. Or that we would factually discussed the product. But what do I find here... Basically just two loudmouths dominating practically every discussion in this forum. 

Enjoy your camera & have a good light.


Oh, a hobby shrink. How cute and useless blurb go together. Speaking of "keep me cool": By any chance, was there some brain cell involved when you hammered a phrase like " I wonder you brought you, thought."? Don't bother answering...

What do you think to gain with such posts? You think Nikon is reading and make you a 50% offer? You think anybody gives a sh... about why you don't buy a camera? Seriously?
There's a rather good, thoughtful and critical article from Nasim Mansourov about the Z7: https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-z7


Another contribution to the Z7 soup..........

Here he says:

"While we found autofocus performance to be excellent and reliable for still subjects, it is almost unusable for continuous focusing."

I'm getting a never ending range of opinions on it's AF-C performance.......from the above.....to....Snap Chick's almost perfection!

The same with the 24-70 F4..........some say it's softish in the corners........yet here, it's equalling it's big brother......

The Z7 reviews of AF-C seem greatly to do with individual perception more than concrete facts..........

I never saw or handled the D500 or the D750 before buying.........I knew what I was going to get..........this isn't the case here!
You get a D850 sensor with much better livieview, much wider focuspoint coverage, much more silent shutter, and much better quirks. What can you ask more for a first gen. product?

Oh, and if you are into psycedelic-isotropic flares, just buy this generator. D850 is so much worse in producing these kind of flares... Big Grin
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20