Darren, the article you generalized from relates to Nikon D300. This
would be two full generations ago in terms of camera sensors technology.
Have a look here:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikon-d4-digital-slr-sample-photos-18753
Looks usable to me. Of course there is a trick here - if you will look
at shutter speed and aperture it would become clear that the light
wasn't lacking during these tests.
Here for example:
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/galleries/sample-images/nikon/34402/1/13/nikon-d4-review-sample-images-gallery.html
it does not look as spectacular.
I could here quote yourself saying that you'd rather have video and
choose not to use it, and add that you couldn't even set your Pentax to
ISO so high, but that would be totally beside the point.
Finally, I should point out that I will be very curious as to image
quality this new Nikon might offer. It is because:
1. I wonder what kind of improvements (or not) Nikon engineers managed
to get done between introduction of Nikon D4 and Nikon Df.
2. Personally, I prefer bigger sensors with less pixels, and therefore
Df would fit my preferences much better than 36 MP D800. So it will be
interesting to see real life use examples of Nikon Df.
Boris
On 11/5/2013 9:34 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
That's "expanded ISO", which is pretty worthless in reality.
Pentax K-5ii: Manual: 100-12800 (1, 1/2, 1/3 steps), expandable to ISO
80-51200, Bulb mode up to ISO 1600
Pentax K-3: Auto: ISO 100-51200 (1, 1/2, 1/3 steps), Auto ISO range
selectable, Bulb mode: Auto ISO n/a; Manual: 100-51200 (1, 1/2, 1/3
steps)
Nikon DF: ISO 100 to 12800 in steps of 1/3 EV; can also be set to
approx. 0.3, 0.7 or 1 EV (ISO 50 equivalent) below ISO 100 or to
approx. 0.3, 0.7, 1, 2, 3 or 4 EV (ISO 204800 equivalent) above ISO
12800;
Here's what Nikon engineers say about "expanded ISO":
http://joefaraceblogs.com/expanded-iso-settings-why-i-dont-likeem/
And here is Fuji's explanation of their "extended ISO":
http://www.fujirumors.com/how-to-use-extended-iso/
The manual ISO numbers are all that matter.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Boris Liberman <[email protected]> wrote:
Here: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df it says that ISO does go to
204,800, so at least I can read :-).
On 11/5/2013 8:38 PM, Dario Bonazza wrote:
No, that's because Nikon calls H1 the 25600 and H4 the 51200 settings.
Dario
-----Messaggio originale----- From: Dario Bonazza
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:34 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Nikon Df
Likely because engraved dials have no room enough for more.
Dario
-----Messaggio originale----- From: Richard Womer
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:27 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Nikon Df
16 megapixels, "full-frame", and yet (according to specs on DPReview)
maximum ISO is 12,800.
Huh?
Rick
On Nov 5, 2013, at 12:06 , Mark Roberts wrote:
Kenneth Waller <[email protected]> wrote:
No. I expected better from Nikon. looks clunky to me but the
important issue is the images it produces.
16 megapixels in full frame (surely chosen to prevent it taking sales
away from the D610) means sacrificing a little resolution in order to
gain excellent noise levels. (I would hope.)
But if the interface is really clunky none of the above will help with
the shots you miss...
So this is one camera of which I really wouldn't want to be an Early
Adopter. Wait for a good user base to pick out its real strong and
weak points.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
