•  Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3(current)
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 20
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nikon Z launched
#21
(08-23-2018, 11:40 PM)you2 Wrote: Curiously, both the Z6 and the Z7 use XQD memory cards instead of more common SD cards.
it seems to be political reason behind. Nikon is part of XQD consocium.XQD
It is interesting that they don't use XQD succesor - CfEpress
CFexpress Nor the most common SDCARD. My laptop has CFexpress memory and WIn10 boot time is about 10 sec
#22
If I had to guess I'd say that we are going to see a low-budget-priced Alpha 5 very soon.
Sony has been enjoying a high-margin situation for long and with the slow death of their APS-C lineup they could start the high volume game in the FF segment - hurting all newcomers.

(Note: Sony is not my preferred system at the moment)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#23
(08-24-2018, 11:32 AM)Klaus Wrote: If I had to guess I'd say that we are going to see a low-budget-priced Alpha 5 very soon.
Sony has been enjoying a high-margin situation for long and with the slow death of their APS-C lineup they could start the high volume game in the FF segment - hurting all newcomers.

(Note: Sony is not my preferred system at the moment)

They don't need to make a lower priced body: you can get a Sony A7 for $800 on BHPhoto, $1000 with a lens, or a A7II for $1100 (with IBIS). This is how Sony seems to be working at the moment, with the A7 and the A6000, and I expect the rest of the industry to follow suite eventually: last year's mid-range camera is this year's entry-level camera. It makes sense in the digital camera paradigm (bodies are disposable) and it also helps control the over-production problems.

What would you cut to make an A5 anyway? The viewfinder? The IBIS? It would still cost more and be less interesting than a first generation A7.

That said, I simply have no confidence in Sony's ability to make great lenses, and the size of the FF lenses make no sense on a mirrorless body IMHO. I'll be sticking with Fuji for now.
#24
(08-24-2018, 12:54 PM)WyldRage Wrote:
(08-24-2018, 11:32 AM)Klaus Wrote: If I had to guess I'd say that we are going to see a low-budget-priced Alpha 5 very soon.
Sony has been enjoying a high-margin situation for long and with the slow death of their APS-C lineup they could start the high volume game in the FF segment - hurting all newcomers.

(Note: Sony is not my preferred system at the moment)

They don't need to make a lower priced body: you can get a Sony A7 for $800 on BHPhoto, $1000 with a lens, or a A7II for $1100 (with IBIS). This is how Sony seems to be working at the moment, with the A7 and the A6000, and I expect the rest of the industry to follow suite eventually: last year's mid-range camera is this year's entry-level camera. It makes sense in the digital camera paradigm (bodies are disposable) and it also helps control the over-production problems.

What would you cut to make an A5 anyway? The viewfinder? The IBIS? It would still cost more and be less interesting than a first generation A7.

That said, I simply have no confidence in Sony's ability to make great lenses, and the size of the FF lenses make no sense on a mirrorless body IMHO. I'll be sticking with Fuji for now.

Yeah, I agree.
The A7 II is a great camera for the price. Unbeatable value if one is interested in FF.
Now, Sony could be interesting except that they have major holes in their lineup. For instance if you're looking for a small package overall, the choice is weak:
  • The Sony 50mm f1.8 sucks. The Zeiss 55 f1.8 is too pricey for what it is and the bokeh is not great. The Sony 50mm f1.4 is huge.
  • No 35mm f1.8 or f2 lens. The 35 f2.8 is way overpriced and too slow to start with. The 35 1.4 is huge.
  • No compact prime < 28mm (24? 20?)
  • The Sony 85mm f1.8 is okay.
  • The Sony Zeiss 24-70 f4 sucks.
  • The Sony 70-200 f4 is descent but big.

Fujifilm for instance, is much more interesting system.
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#25
(08-24-2018, 03:48 PM)thxbb12 Wrote:
(08-24-2018, 12:54 PM)WyldRage Wrote:
(08-24-2018, 11:32 AM)Klaus Wrote: If I had to guess I'd say that we are going to see a low-budget-priced Alpha 5 very soon.
Sony has been enjoying a high-margin situation for long and with the slow death of their APS-C lineup they could start the high volume game in the FF segment - hurting all newcomers.

(Note: Sony is not my preferred system at the moment)

They don't need to make a lower priced body: you can get a Sony A7 for $800 on BHPhoto, $1000 with a lens, or a A7II for $1100 (with IBIS). This is how Sony seems to be working at the moment, with the A7 and the A6000, and I expect the rest of the industry to follow suite eventually: last year's mid-range camera is this year's entry-level camera. It makes sense in the digital camera paradigm (bodies are disposable) and it also helps control the over-production problems.

What would you cut to make an A5 anyway? The viewfinder? The IBIS? It would still cost more and be less interesting than a first generation A7.

That said, I simply have no confidence in Sony's ability to make great lenses, and the size of the FF lenses make no sense on a mirrorless body IMHO. I'll be sticking with Fuji for now.

Yeah, I agree.
The A7 II is a great camera for the price. Unbeatable value if one is interested in FF.
Now, Sony could be interesting except that they have major holes in their lineup. For instance if you're looking for a small package overall, the choice is weak:
  • The Sony 50mm f1.8 sucks. The Zeiss 55 f1.8 is too pricey for what it is and the bokeh is not great. The Sony 50mm f1.4 is huge.
  • No 35mm f1.8 or f2 lens. The 35 f2.8 is way overpriced and too slow to start with. The 35 1.4 is huge.
  • No compact prime < 28mm (24? 20?)
  • The Sony 85mm f1.8 is okay.
  • The Sony Zeiss 24-70 f4 sucks.
  • The Sony 70-200 f4 is descent but big.

Fujifilm for instance, is much more interesting system.

The FF nuts will not touch the Fujifilm X system with a ten foot pole because no FF = no deal for them. Smile
I guess it makes sense for Sony to release a "reheated" A7 with some of the updates that appeared later thrown in - similar to how the Canon 6D was a "reheated" 5D Mark II slightly shrunk down and with a few new tricks thrown in.
#26
(08-24-2018, 03:48 PM)thxbb12 Wrote: Fujifilm for instance, is much more interesting system.
.
If I'm forced to buy new camera now I will go most likely for Fujifilm another alternative will be mFT.

I wonder what will be the Interchangeable lens camera sells next two years.  Does the FF ship still sinks :-)

On topic -
First impressions are online - excluding wow reviews. No surprise, great camera but still behind - Sony Fijifilm
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/816783...fic_source

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUii9dTwPkw
the funny part is that athe most youtube FF camera /sony,nikon / reviews are done with Panasonic uFT camera. :-)
#27
There's a much less exuberant video of Tony and Chelsea https://youtu.be/iUii9dTwPkw

They say they don't want to review it, as the pre-production models they tried still has too much shortcomings. And I don't know, which camera was used to record this video but the Panasonic GH5 definitely has less troubles to AF... or Jordan is doing much more manually focusing. Could have been a good advice to the two as well...

Miro, what are you talking again about sinking FF ship? The DSLR ship might be sinking, but a lot of the new cameras coming out are FF. And apparently there's no shortcut: Fuji as well as Sony needed a couple of bodies and even more firmware updates to get where they are. Nikon also is a learner in this class. I wonder which of all the downsides can be fixed with software. Fuji's improvements in AF-C are promising - what they were able to do, other manufacturers also could do. Nonetheless, their bodies fall short in terms of handling.
#28
Tony and Chelsea often get things a bit wrong when trying to explain things. but reviews like this are short and to the point, so good job to them.
One thing we don't know about Canon's FF MILC effort is whether it will have IBIS or not, but at least it will have better AF than this 1st gen. Nikon FF stuff. Oddly enough, the Nikon 1 series ws the most reliable focussing mirrorless system, that can't be all down to the bigger DOF?
#29
If the transfer from series 1 to LiveView FF would be that easy (for Nikon), the question appears "why didn't they do it earlier?". Do you think, the same engineers working on and with the series 1 were also busy with the Zeeeeeeeee, BCeeeeee? (can't help, this way to pronounce Z is awkward - maybe it's a preparation for the clients to get an awkward camera?)

I doubt it. I think most engineers on it were coming from DSLR, the big ones where the money is... And if some 1-engineers were also part of the team, how do you estimate their motivation after Nikon dumped the whole system they spent some of their good years in life on?

Nearly sure I'm wrong, but so far LiveView was no shining light in an otherwise dark Nikonverse. It got better over the years, but I'm not sure if Tony & Chelsea's video wasn't filmed by a Nikon, the way focus went on strange paths to some other time continuums...
#30
Oh dear for the Tony and Chelsea review....................... I hope they had a dodgy copy!
Dave's clichés
  
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3(current)
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 20
  • Next 


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)