It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Hey, guys, I am a DX fan...but better than FX is maybe more accurately stated as "having some advantages" over larger format. No question...But all one has to do is examine images from an 80MP back on a Hasselblad...will blow your mind...
Nikon may drop something or at least a hint during CES. They did indeed Nikon 1 J3, S1 mirrorless cameras, two new Nikon 1 lenses, a new underwater camera case and two new Coolpix cameras.
@TaoTejared, I agree that Joseph James is a bit hard to follow, but I would definitely say that his conclusions are based on facts and are more than just opinions. There is real physics behind the reasoning (I'm a physicist myself).
Anyway, I hope the D400 (or what ever it will be called) will be released soon. I'm planning a safari in west Africa next summer and I need an update of my camera gear...
I have just read of FX as having 'cleaner files'? What is the technical measurement for 'cleaner'?
I prefer to think of it as different, not better or worse.
In addition, the older CCD sensors were smoother, till the signal to noise ratio become too high.
But, if we do find out about the D9000...and it has all the pro features including the native 12,800 ISO...Yes...
Regarding a Hasselblad comparison, se this site: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
Even if it's a comparison between a Hasselblad and a camera from "the other company" it's interesting to read what his (her?) findings was.
formats at all. In the old days I was making very large prints and duratrans transparencies for commercial exhibits. I never want to go back there in any way. I sincerely regret the expense and lack of speed that bigger gear imposes. I did specialize in action photos using that gear and obviously had to know my subject and have the access to achieve that. In retrospect it was a hugely expensive. Larger formats did command attention
and was popular with editors etc. I would like to go back and make the decision to never go to the big and supposed to be better formats. Let me know how you make out with all this big and better theme 10 years and thousands of bucks later. For me it now is as simple as FX versus DX. Within the 35 mm DSLR sensors lies enough IQ to do any subject well. I must confess I feel sorry for someone still using say a Nikon D40, but at some point bigger is just serious overkill. I guess I view the D800, D7000 as to me the point of almost beyond question excellence but as soon as a clear technical advantage becomes available I will want to get one. Right now I am wondering if I can hold out for the D7200. Hopefully CES will bring some good news.
Old friends now gone -D200, D300, 80-200 f2.3/D, 18-200, 35 f1.8G, 180 f2.8D, F, FM2, MD-12, 50 f1.4 Ais, 50 f1.8 Ais, 105 f2.5 Ais, 24 f2.8 Ais, 180 f2.8 ED Ais
- 16-20mp sensor with awesome high ISO performance
- killer autofocus that works up to F8 (up to F8 like D600 is key)
- 7-8 FPS
-body size of a D7000 or D600 (I appreciate the small size and light weight for travel...people forget the D7000 still has weather sealing and a fair bit of magnesium alloy)
- dual SD cards
- en-el15 battery