«1

Comments

  • CaMeRaQuEsTCaMeRaQuEsT Posts: 317Member
    Exact reason why my next camera is going to be a D5300 and not an Alpha A6000: their RAW compression is even worse than my D3300's. Also, their line-up of lenses are a joke: low sharpness, exorbitant prices. Like the author writes: their bodies are at deep discounts for a reason.
  • ThomasHortonThomasHorton Posts: 323Member
    While it is nice to read nice opinions about Nikon, we do have to keep in mind that this article is just one person's opinion.
    Gear: Camera obscura with an optical device which transmits and refracts light.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,005Member
    It has been noted by several professional reviewers that Sony's RAW files are somewhat inferior due to heavy handed compression, so to say this is just one person's opinion is not true. As to whether the level of compression is enough of a reason to choose one brand over another, to me that is more debatable. I say that because people tend to pick mirrorless cameras due to size, rather than absolute superiority over competing DSLRs.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    Actually Thomas, MaxBerlin has backed up this opinion with a multitude of facts. I'll let him show you where those are, but he was actually criticized for providing too much information and graphs that take a PhD to decipher ;-)
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,000Member
    Actually Thomas, MaxBerlin has backed up this opinion with a multitude of facts. I'll let him show you where those are, but he was actually criticized for providing too much information and graphs that take a PhD to decipher ;-)
    It seems everyone wants something different. I value the contribution, but wonder if rather than the OP reading as a click-link advertisement for his own blog, he could perhaps ask a stimulating question with some of his data here in the forum. A discussion rather than a white paper is more interesting, but that is of course what I prefer and others perhaps just the opposite.
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,084Member
    Max, not to be harsh or anything, your threads tend to link back to your blog and that's generally not okay here.
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited May 2015
    Max, not to be harsh or anything, your threads tend to link back to your blog and that's generally not okay here.
    +1

    I will never understand what is and what is not, allowed.
    Some valid and interesting threads get closed or deleted within seconds

    other, such as this one, which is clearly a plug for SONYVNIKON are allowed
    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    As an active user of both Nikon and Sony, my observations are:

    1- Comments / analysis about the loss of some DR in some conditions due to Sony's 11-7 bit compression are accurate. Leica had a similar scheme.

    2- The conditions under which these would be noticeable are both specific (high contrast boundary conditions / extreme enlargement / very fine tonality gradation) and tend to the extreme end of lighting conditions.

    3- Choice of camera to use is usually dictated by other factors (lens choice, subject movement, size weight etc.).

    The reason I am very critical of Sony on this issue, is that there is no benefit to this trade off. Similar file sizes can be achieved using well known loss less compression techniques without these degradations. Even very slight degradation is a bad idea when nothing positive is achieved on the other side of the trade-off, it is simple incompetence.

    .... H



    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,084Member
    edited May 2015
    Just to expand on my previous short post-

    I've been on a few forums and the general rule for forums is not to promote your own site. Or if you do promote your own site, do it once and that's it.

    Max, you've posted three separate threads that link back to your own site. I'm not sure why mods allowed it, but we get that you run a separate site. If you want to advertise your site do so by contacting Nikon Rumors, but don't use it to broadcast your own site and blog postings.

    You're free to contribute, but I hope you don't just keep posting links to your blog. That's not contributing, that's asking for more clicks to your site.

    Edited- I meant site, not work above.
    Post edited by NSXTypeR on
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • birdmanbirdman Posts: 115Member
    How about a friendly compromise -- think of when Obama served round of beers at the White House with the renowned Harvard Professor (Af. Amer guy - GATES? ) and the white police officer invoived in the fracas.

    So a compromise may be that above NR member include (IN signature line only) a link/reminder to his blog/site using less crayola - friendly colors that Mr Rockwell utilizes to hypnotize his readers into clicking his shameless link before buy their gear. I've used him plenty of times....great knowledge until you catch on to his sells strategies.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,049Member
    As an active user of both Nikon and Sony, my observations are:

    1- Comments / analysis about the loss of some DR in some conditions due to Sony's 11-7 bit compression are accurate. Leica had a similar scheme.

    2- The conditions under which these would be noticeable are both specific (high contrast boundary conditions / extreme enlargement / very fine tonality gradation) and tend to the extreme end of lighting conditions.

    3- Choice of camera to use is usually dictated by other factors (lens choice, subject movement, size weight etc.).

    The reason I am very critical of Sony on this issue, is that there is no benefit to this trade off. Similar file sizes can be achieved using well known loss less compression techniques without these degradations. Even very slight degradation is a bad idea when nothing positive is achieved on the other side of the trade-off, it is simple incompetence.

    .... H



    If I am spending a thousand dollars on a camera, I will accept a tradeoff like that. But I don't accept a trade off like that if I am buying top off the line. I can't imagine that Sony is aspiring to be anything more than a consumer line if they are doing stuff like this.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,005Member
    edited May 2015
    Considering that consumers (mostly in the 40-75 year old bracket) are the number one group of high end camera buyers today (by high end I mean anything with an interchangeable lens, or over $499), I don't think Sony is too concerned about targeting a large segment of tech nerds. Most consumers are not tech nerds, even if they try to come across that way. All Sony needs to do is nab enough non tech centric pros to say, "hey pros use these cameras, and you should too." That's all that Nikon, Canon, Pentax etc have ever done.

    Over time it is well known that the best product available is not always the winner in race to win the hearts and minds of consumers (including pros), so why would it be any different with cameras? I think those of us on a forum like this tend to be at least a little tech savvy, but the general camera buyer doesn't give two bits as long as it uses the lenses they want and it does what they need. 9 times out of 10 you wouldn't notice the difference between a D800 image and a Sony A7r, short of a poster sized print or chimping. As noted in other threads, all cameras are a compromise, it's just a question of what areas of compromise are acceptable to the person who is looking to make the purchase.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    @PB_PM

    Your points are all correct.

    My point is that a trade off is usually give something, get something.

    In this case Sony gives up something (IQ however small), and gets nothing.

    I still use the A7II because it gives me other things like VR for Leica lenses, but it's compression scheme is simply stupid.

    ... H

    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,199Member
    Another side:

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4GTBkCxjcI

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wM_5nROeaw
  • funtagraphfuntagraph Posts: 265Member
    Don't want to fight about words, but I think @PB_BM, your definition about high-end is off target by a quarter mile or so :)

    "(by high end I mean anything with an interchangeable lens, or over $499)" Why not write "bigger than a cellphone, plus a lens to be mount after unboxing and changed never after"? ;)
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,072Moderator
    Considering that consumers (mostly in the 40-75 year old bracket) are the number one group of high end camera buyers today etc. etc.
    I think that explains the sales of retro bodies too.
    Always learning.
  • MaxBerlinMaxBerlin Posts: 86Member
    edited May 2015
    Apologies if I violated forum rules. The blog is non income producing and is only meant to relay the testing results of the A7r vs the D810.

    I've tried to be unbiased but the D810 continues to reveal its greatness in many ways the Sony does not.

    If I posted 'testing results' in the forum without a link would that be acceptable ?

    Spraynpray - I tried to reply directly to your message but got an error that it was unallowed.
    Post edited by MaxBerlin on
    My non-commercial blog:

    https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
  • MaxBerlinMaxBerlin Posts: 86Member
    Like many, I am trying to figure out when the 'compromise' is worth it - meaning when should I use the A7r.

    Because the Nikon doesn't have a reticulating screen there are practical limits on how low of a position one can shoot and critically focus the D810 from.

    The use of alternate glass (old Leica, C/Y) is also in favor of an A7r. But at the core of it one always loses ~20% resolution, a significant amount of distinct color values and the EVF does not serve critical focus as well as a 3x loupe on the D810.

    Additionally, Nikon almost always gets WB correct and if you underexpose (like I did for 100+ images) the massive dynamic range of the D810 makes this a non-issue.
    My non-commercial blog:

    https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,072Moderator
    edited May 2015
    Apologies if I violated forum rules. The blog is non income producing and is only meant to relay the testing results of the A7r vs the D810.

    I've tried to be unbiased but the D810 continues to reveal it's greatness in many ways the Sony does not.

    If I posted 'testing results' in the forum without a link would that be acceptable ?

    Spraynpray - I tried to reply directly to your message but got an error that it was unallowed.
    That's OK max, no worries.
    Post edited by spraynpray on
    Always learning.
  • MaxBerlinMaxBerlin Posts: 86Member
    Spraynpray - to my horror I just noticed that the first post in this thread had a commercial link added a 'shopping link added by skim words' One can notice it be hovering over the words Sony v nikon.

    I did not add that link when I originally posted. Is there a way you can please remove it ?

    My non-commercial blog:

    https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,072Moderator
    No Max, that is not your fault, don't worry about that.

    Always learning.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited May 2015


    I did not add that link when I originally posted. Is there a way you can please remove it ?

    I believe The links are added automatically
    I dont think it is possible to remove them
    some information here http://nikonrumors.com/2012/09/01/privacy-policy.aspx/
    under (vi) Third Party Ad Servers
    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • MaxBerlinMaxBerlin Posts: 86Member
    I thought that might be the reason I was in hot water. :)
    My non-commercial blog:

    https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,072Moderator
    For clarity: If you post a link to your own site and it is relevant to the thread you posted it on, no problem (unless the motivation for posting it is to further your own interests). If you post an irrelevant link (spam), you will get banned.
    Always learning.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,049Member
    Like many, I am trying to figure out when the 'compromise' is worth it - meaning when should I use the A7r.

    Because the Nikon doesn't have a reticulating screen there are practical limits on how low of a position one can shoot and critically focus the D810 from.

    The use of alternate glass (old Leica, C/Y) is also in favor of an A7r. But at the core of it one always loses ~20% resolution, a significant amount of distinct color values and the EVF does not serve critical focus as well as a 3x loupe on the D810.

    Additionally, Nikon almost always gets WB correct and if you underexpose (like I did for 100+ images) the massive dynamic range of the D810 makes this a non-issue.
    Buy the right angle eyepiece. It is a couple of hundred at B&H if I recall. I use it on my D800.

    Perhaps your only reason for owning Sony just disappeared?
Sign In or Register to comment.